By Stephen Downes - Half an Hour. I think it is worth looking at the end of Jon Dron's long post to get to the heart of what he finds so wrong about my work. I reserve the right to look at the rest of his work in reverse order as well.
Let's move carefully, one sentence at a time. He writes:
My worry is that if, instead of seeing connectivism as a family of ideas, theories and approaches that offer value in helping us to see outside the box of traditional educational methods, we see it as a single cohesive theory of learning, then that theory had better be fairly unassailable or someone coming to it afresh will likely observe its flaws and move on to the next. So we are presented with two choices: either connectivism is a "broad family of ideas" or it is a "single cohesive theory of learning."
If it is a single theory, then it had better be "fairly unassailable," otherwise, it will simply be replaced by the next theory that comes along. More...