From chaos to complexity -.theories influencing education

My engagement with connectivism moved my mindset to the realisation that knowledge, the acquisition thereof, as well as the development of new knowledge structures lies in connectivity. The strength, functionality and dimension of people’s connections determine the nature of their knowledge base. Instructional designers and lecturers therefore has to ensure that they apply the abovementioned assumption in the design of learning experiences. The knowledge that students acquire in a course is no longer dependant on the knowledge of the lecturer – it evolves around the connections they build with other people and information sources, and the latter includes not only physical connections, but also relies on transactional connections.

How does this relate to my world of work? Siemens (2009) very appropriately stated that no individual is able to master a single discipline. Gaps in our knowledge is a given. In my context as instructional designer I have to empower lecturers who I assist in designing the online components of their modules, as instructional designers, lecturers and teachers have to realise that a human cannot master an entire discipline. As a lecturer I have to provide students with growth or developmental opportunities in which they build connections and consequently obtain or share information.

As a lecturer, I am often confronted with the “chaos theory" as the process of learning is rather unpredictable although occurring within a certain structure. Lorenz (1993) defined chaos as follows; "The property that characterizes a dynamical system in which most orbits exhibit sensitive dependence". How does chaos relate to learning or instructional design? As mentioned previously in this paper, learning takes place via physical and transactional connections – I therefore assume that learning takes place within dynamic systems are all around us. The learning process may therefore have recurrent behavior, but are very difficult to pin down and predict apart from the very short term. I might plan for my students to acquire a specific set of knowledge and skills attached to a learning module; I can however not ensure that all of the outcomes are achieved, because learning takes place in a very complex system of connections. I can therefore say that what I initially intent to achieve in this course relates to sensitive dependence as referred to in the butterfly effect. Small differences in initial conditions (such as my learning outcomes) yield widely diverging outcomes for chaotic systems. This happens even though these “learning systems” are deterministic, meaning that their future dynamics are fully determined by their initial conditions.

Complexity theory builds on chaos as it implies that learning and change takes place within the “complexity zone” (Lewis, 1994). Simply stated, complexity arises in situations where “an increasing number of independent variables begin interacting in interdependent and unpredictable ways” (Sanders, 2003). The value and depth of information obtained and created whilst learning is dependent on the strength and dimensions of connections that students formed due to engaging in a course. Knowledge obtained were not only provided by the lecturer, but rather accessed via complex connections with relevant sources. Learning is therefore no longer a linear and predictable process. Students are required to develop skills that enable them to cope in a world confronted with constant challenges and change. Complexity theory provides useful insights into the important functions played by network-type linkages in helping complex systems to manage themselves within turbulent environments (Sanders, 2003). Complex systems that are sufficiently well connected demonstrate a tendency to ‘self-organise’ over time, with clusters and groups emerging from the pattern of interactions among the participating ‘members’.

Education sciences usually examined the world (or subject disciplines) by breaking it into smaller and smaller pieces until the pieces can be understood. Too often, using this approach, results in lecturers and students missing the bigger picture. Lecturers and instructional designers need to shift their paradigms underpinning their teaching philosophy. Education providers need to engage in complex systems thinking that would enable students to confront the complex world they live in.
 

References

Lewis, R. (1994). From Chaos to Complexity: implications for organizations. Executive Development, Vol 7(4): pp. 16 – 17.
Lorenz, E. (1993). The essence of chaos. [Online] Available URL: http://www1.dragonet.es/users/markbcki/lorenz.htm.
Sanders, T.I. (2003). What is Complexity? [Online] Available URL: http://www.complexsys.org/pdf/what_is_complexity.pdf.
Siemens, G. (2009). Complexity, Chaos and Emergence. [online] Available URL: http://docs.google.com/View?id=anw8wkk6fjc_15cfmrctf8.