Recent Work in Connectivism

Open access


Since the introduction of connectivism as a learning theory in 2004 a body of literature has developed both offering criticisms and expanding on applications and empirical validation. This article surveys recent literature on the topic, grouping it into themes, and developing an understanding of current perspectives in connectivism. It surveys current perspectives and criticisms of connectivism, views of connectivism as a pedagogy and as a theory of learning, recent evidence supporting connectivism, and a wider understanding of connectivism as it is developing today.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Al Dahdouh A. A. (2017). Does Artificial Neural Network support Connectivism’s assumptions? International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning 14(3).

  • 2. Al Dahdouh A. A. (2018). Jumping from one resource to another: how do students navigate learning networks? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 15(45). Retrieved from

  • 3. Ament V. & Edwards R. (2018). Better Teaching and More Learning in Mobile Learning Courses: Towards a Model of Personable Learning. In I. A. Sánchez & P. Isaias (Eds.) Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Mobile Learning (pp. 214-220). IADIS Press 2018.

  • 4. Anderson T. & Dron J. (2011). Three generations of distance education pedagogy. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 12(3) 80-97. Retrieved from

  • 5. Anderson T. & Dron J. (2012). Learning technology through three generations of technology enhanced distance education pedagogy. European Journal of Open Distance and e-learning 15(2). Retrieved from

  • 6. Angelini G. & Gasbarri C. (2018). Learning organic chemistry day by day: The best choice of the best pharmacy students. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 10(6) 795-802.

  • 7. Ankel F. & Swaminathan A. (2018). Creating a robust personal learning network by nurturing weak ties. In F. Ankel & A. Swaminathan (Eds.) Adaptive Leadership for the New #MedEd: The One Hour Read. Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada Retrieved from

  • 8. Attar M. (2018). Connectivism theory a noteworthy necessity in the process of making schools smart. Proceedings: International Conference on Psychology Educational and Behavioral Sciences. Volume 3. Retrieved from

  • 9. Bell F. (2011). Connectivism: Its place in theory-informed research and innovation in technology-enabled learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 12(3) 98-118. Retrieved from

  • 10. Bolstad R. Gilbert J. McDowall S. Bull A. Boyd S. & Hipkins R. (2012). Supporting future-oriented learning & teaching — a New Zealand perspective Report to the Ministry of Education. New Zealand Council for Educational Research. Retrieved from

  • 11. Borna M. & Fouladchang M. (2018a). The Motivational Outcomes of Connectivism Theory in EFL. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods 8(2) 101-112. Retrieved from

  • 12. Borna M. & Fouladchang M. (2018b). The Comparison Of effectiveness Connectivism Instructional Method with Grammar-Translation Method on Students’ Academic Engagement in EFL. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods 8(4) 88-98. Retrieved from

  • 13. Bowes M. & Swanwick C. (2018). Using connectivism to theorise developments in digital technology in physical education in Aotearoa/New Zealand. In J. Koekoek & I. van Hilvoorde (Eds.) Digital Technology in Physical Education: Global Perspectives (pp. 204-222). Routledge.

  • 14. Bruner J. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

  • 15. Cabrero R. S. & Román O. C. (2018). Psychopedagogical Predecessors of Connectivism as a New Paradigm of Learning. International Journal of Educational Excellence 4(2) 29-45.

  • 16. Cao L. (2018). Study on College English Teaching Interaction and Teaching Practice Based on Connectivism from the Neurocognitive Perspective. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice 18(5) 2338-2346.

  • 17. Chomsky N. (1986). Knowledge of Language. Praeger.

  • 18. Chung E. (2019 March 27). Canadian researchers who taught AI to learn like humans win $1M Turing Award. CBC News [blog post]. Retrieved from

  • 19. Clarà M. & Barberà E. (2013a). Three problems with the connectivist conception of learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 30(3) 197-206. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12040. Retrieved from

  • 20. Clará M. & Barberá E. (2013b). Learning online: Massive open online courses (MOOCs) connectivism and cultural psychology. Distance Education 34(1). Retrieved from

  • 21. De Gagne J. C. Woodward A. Park H. K. Sun H. Yamane S. S. (2018). Microlearning in health professions education: a scoping review protocol. JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports: June 2019 17(6) 1018-1025.

  • 22. Díaz J. A. & de Frutos T. H. (2018). Connectivism in the Network Society. The Coming of Social Capital Knowledge. Tendencias Sociales. Revista de Sociología 1(2018) 21-37. Retrieved from

  • 23. Dieterle E. & Clarke J. (2008). Multi-User Virtual Environments for Teaching and Learning. In M. Pagani (Ed.) Encyclopedia of multimedia technology and networking (2nd ed. pp. 1033-1041). Hershey PA: Idea Group Inc. Retrieved from

  • 24. Duke B. Harper G. & Johnston M. (2013). Connectivism as a Digital Age Learning Theory. The International HETL Review Special Issue 2013 4-13. Retrieved from

  • 25. Emerson L. C. & Berge Z. L. (2018). Microlearning: Knowledge management applications and competency-based training in the workplace. Knowledge Management & E-Learning 10(2) 125–132. retrieved from

  • 26. Fianu E. Blewett C. Oppong G. Ampong A. & Ofori K. S. (2018). Factors Affecting MOOC Usage by Students in Selected Ghanaian Universities. Education Sciences 8(2). Retrieved from

  • 27. Fondo M. & Konstantinidis A. (2018) Design of a MOOC on personal language learning environments for digital language skills development. In P. Taalas J. Jalkanen L. Bradley & S. Thouësny (Eds.) Future-proof CALL: language learning as exploration and encounters – short papers from EUROCALL 2018. Dec. 8 2018. Retrieved from

  • 28. Gonçalves B. M. F. & Osório A. J. (2018). Massive Open Online Courses (MOOC) to improve teachers’ professional development. RE@D – Revista de Educação a Distância e Elearning 1(1) 52-63. Retrieved from

  • 29. Harasim L. M. (1995). Learning networks: A field guide to teaching and learning online. MIT press.

  • 30. Hazeldine L. Yardley F. & Shearman J. (2018). Flexible autonomy: an online approach to developing mathematics subject knowledge for teachers. In J. Golding N. Bretscher C. Crisan E. Geraniou J. Hodgen & C. Morgan (Eds.) Research Proceedings of the 9th British Congress on Mathematics Education (3-6 April 2018 University of Warwick UK). Retrieved from

  • 31. Homanova Z. Prextova T. & Klubal L. (2018). Connectivism in Elementary School Instruction. In K. Ntalianis A. Andreatos & C. Sgouropoulou. (Eds.) ECEL 2018 17th European Conference on e-Learning. Retrieved from

  • 32. Hug T. & Friesen N. (2007). Outline of a Microlearning Agenda. In T. Hug (Ed.) Didactics of Microlearning.

  • 33. Jirasatjanukul K. & Jeerungsuwan N. (2018). The Design of an Instructional Model Based on Connectivism and Constructivism to Create Innovation in Real World Experience. International Education Studies 11(3) 12-17. Retrieved from

  • 34. Johansson J. Contero M. Company P. & Elgh F. (2018). Supporting connectivism in knowledge based engineering with graph theory filtering techniques and model quality assurance. Advanced Engineering Informatics 38 October 2018 252-263.

  • 35. Kerr B. (2006. December 26). A Challenge to Connectivism. Transcript of Keynote Speech Online Connectivism Conference. BILL KERR wandering wandering … [blog post]. Retrieved from

  • 36. Kim B. Reif E. Wattenberg M. & Bengio S. (2019). Do Neural Networks Show Gestalt Phenomena? An Exploration of the Law of Closure. arXiv Mar 15 2019.

  • 37. Kop R. (2011). The challenges to connectivist learning on open online networks: Learning experiences during a massive open online course. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 12(3) 19-38. Retrieved from

  • 38. Kop R. & Hill A. (2008). Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the past? The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 9(3). Retrieved from

  • 39. Kultawanich K. Koraneekij P. & Na-Songkhl J. (2015). A Proposed Model of Connectivism Learning Using Cloud-based Virtual Classroom to Enhance Information Literacy and Information Literacy Self-efficacy for Undergraduate Students. Social and Behavioral Sciences 191 87–92.

  • 40. Kuznetcova I. Glassman M. & Lin T-J. (2018). Multi-user virtual environments as a pathway to distributed social networks in the classroom. Computers & Education 130 November 2018. Retrieved from

  • 41. Latour B. (1987). Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society. Open University Press.

  • 42. Laurillard D. (1993). Rethinking University Teaching: A Framework for the Effective Use of Educational Technology. Routledge.

  • 43. Laurillard D. (2002). Rethinking University Teaching. A conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies. Routledge.

  • 44. Law J. (1999). After ANT: Complexity Naming and Topology. In J. Hassard & J. Law (Eds.) The Sociological Review (Volume 47 Issue 1 pp. 1-14). Blackwell Publishers.

  • 45. Mackness J. & Bell F. (2015). Rhizo14: A rhizomatic learning cMOOC in sunlight and in shade. Open Praxis 7(1) 25-38. Retrieved from

  • 46. Madhok R. Frank E. & Heller R. F. (2018). Building public health capacity through online global learning. Open Praxis 10(1) 91–97. retrieved from

  • 47. Mahmod M. A. Ali A. B. Md. & Shah A. (2018). Massive Open Online Courses as an Augmentation of E-Learning: A Review. International Journal on Perceptive and Cognitive Computing 4(2). Retrieved from

  • 48. Mattar J. (2018). Constructivism and connectivism in education technology: Active situated authentic experiential and anchored learning. RIED: Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia 21(2) 201-217. Retrieved from

  • 49. Mlasi S. M. & Naidoo R. (2018). An Exploratory Study of the ODL Course in Structural Engineering. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2018) – Volume 2 246-251. Retrieved from

  • 50. Montebello M. (2018). Contextual Dimensions of an Ambient Intelligent Classroom. In J. Kay & R. Luckin (Eds.) Rethinking Learning in the Digital Age: Making the Learning Sciences Count 13th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) 2018 Volume 3. London UK: International Society of the Learning Sciences. Retrieved from

  • 51. Pallas J. Eidenfalk J. & Engel S. N. (2019). Social networking sites and learning in international relations: The impact of platforms. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 35(1) 16-27. Retrieved from

  • 52. Pando V. F. (2018). Teaching Trends in Virtual Education: An Interpretative Approach. Propósitos y Representaciones Ene.-Jun. 2018 6(1) 463-505.

  • 53. Pask G. (1975). Conversation cognition and learning. New York: Elsevier.

  • 54. Piao Y. & Ma J. (2018). Teaching Design Strategy of Innovation and Entrepreneurship Course of College Students. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Arts Design and Contemporary Education (ICADCE 2018). Retrieved from

  • 55. Profit J. E. (2019). Student Perception of Digital Technology Usage in Higher Education Classrooms at Seattle Pacific University. Education Dissertations. 37. Retrieved from

  • 56. Rice R. (2018). Implementing Connectivist Teaching Strategies in Traditional K-12 Classrooms. In F. H. Nah & B. Xiao (Eds.) HCI in Business Government and Organizations. HCIBGO 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (vol. 10923 pp. 645-655). Springer. Retrieved from

  • 57. Sarnok K. & Wannapiroon P. (2018). Connectivism Learning Activity in Ubiquitous Learning Environment by Using IoE for Digital Native. Veridian E-Journal Silpakorn University (Humanities Social Sciences and arts) 11(4) 405-418.

  • 58. Shrivastava A. (2018). Using connectivism theory and technology for knowledge creation in cross-cultural communication. Research in Learning Technology 26.

  • 59. Siemens G. (2004). Connectivism: A theory for the digital age. Retrieved from

  • 60. Siemens G. (2019). I was wrong about networks. LinkedIn March 26 2019. Retrieved from

  • 61. Tabacchi M. E. Portmann E. Seising R. & Habenstein A. (2018). Designing Cognitive Cities. In E. Portmann M. E. Tabacchi R. Seising & A. Habenstein (Eds.) Designing Cognitive Cities. Springer.

  • 62. Tucker C. R. Wycoff T. & Green J. T. (2017). Blended Learning in Action: A Practical Guide toward Sustainable Change. Corwin Press.

  • 63. Vas R. Weber C. & Gkoumas D. (2018). Implementing connectivism by semantic technologies for self-directed learning. International Journal of Manpower 39(8) 1032-1046. Retrieved from

  • 64. Wang H. (2018). A Study on Deep Learning and Its Enlightenment on China’s Foreign Language Learning. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Education Science and Economic Management (ICESEM 2018). Advances in Social Science Education and Humanities Research (ASSEHR) volume 184 157-166. Retrieved from

  • 65. Wang Z. Anderson T. & Chen L. (2018). How Learners Participate in Connectivist Learning: An Analysis of the Interaction Traces From a cMOOC. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 19(1).

  • 66. Wei Y. & Hu J. (2018). A Cross-Sectional Evaluation of EFL Students’ Critical Thinking Dispositions in Digital Learning. In T. Hauer & W. K. Mujani (Eds.) Proceedings of the 2018 International Seminar on Education Research and Social Science (ISERSS 2018) (pp. 27-30).

  • 67. Zaduski J. C. D. Lopes R. B. & Jr. Schlünzen K. (2018). Initial considerations about a rhizomatic learning environment. Revista Ibero-Americana de Estudos em Educação 138(Extra 1) 489-499. Retrieved from

  • 68. Zheng Q. Chen L. & Burgos D. (2018). The Development of MOOCs in China. Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. Retrieved from

  • 69. Zulkifley M. Nor U. & Siti Y. (2018). An Evaluation of Structural Model for Independent Learning Through Connectivism Theory and Web 2.0 towards Students’ Achievement. Proceedings of the International Conference on Applied Science and Engineering (ICASE 2018). Atlantis Press. Retrieved from

Journal information
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 1169 1169 1169
PDF Downloads 10 10 10