On constructivism and rhizomatic learning

It often happens that, by some inexplicable coincidence, at a certain point of time (usually within a couple of days) I read several unrelated posts or articles on a specific topic without making any conscious effort to search for them. They just come to me (via my PLN or by mere chance). When I read something really intriguing, I can be sure that the next day I'll come across a blog post or just an image which will expand on the previous piece of information. I find this amazing - even magical; ideas float around and we, inadvertently, stumble upon them if we are ready and tuned in. What is more, one idea seems to attract another idea of similar nature. I believe this magic trick helps me learn and grow professionally in a very natural way; it helps me create a broader picture of the subject I'm delving into. A metaphor that first springs to mind is that somebody is randomly passing me pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. But there's always one part missing in the end; my own view which I construct while engaging in the process of discovering. It's not really MY opinion; it's a result of all the knowledge other people have shared, plus my own interpretation on top.

Like the other day; I read a couple of unrelated articles about cheating -  Cath Ellis's post Cheating is Learning and Debbie Tebovich's Rhizomatic Learning - Cheating as Learning. Only later did I realize that these two posts had one thing in common - Dave Cormier and his ideas on Rhizomatic learning. What is obvious is that the learning process I went through was gradual - I didn't get the whole image at once. What is interesting is that I actually went backwards in time (I read the latest of the posts first). No matter what the sequence of events was, I finally got a better picture of the topic and I got pushed further to the core of the problem. And here's my interpretation (which may well be wrong or inaccurate): as a matter of fact, rhizomatic learning reminds me very much of constructivism - people integrate new knowledge with existing knowledge. In other words, they change and grow as new learning becomes part of the things they know. What I find attractive about constructivism (and rhizomatic learning) is the unpredictability of the learning process - we never know in which way our learning will spread (for some people this may be bad news). The good news is that there's no truth valid forever; we can change ideas as we explore new contexts, and my contention is that this provides us with an immense feeling of freedom.

To conclude the post, I'm astonished to realize that without knowing what rhizomatic learning meant I had actually always followed the principles of rhizomatic learning. This post is a result of rhizomatic learning after all. It's even more: it's an example of socially constructed knowledge. I possess none of the ideas I present here. I haven't invented them either. I'm just a medium - an intermediary. We all are ...