An argument against connectivism is that instead of being a new theory, it is merely constructivsm with a different label. I think this is a good argument. While connectivism seeks to incorporate all of the technologies which exist today into a comprehensive learning theory, the technologies can also be easily woven into the theory of constructivism.
Piaget wrote that people either assimilate or accommodate new information. When they assimilate, they take in new information without changing the framework of their brains. When they accommodate, they have to change their existing framework to fit the new information. Similarly, Siemens describes learning as an “open door process.” People need to have the capacity to take in new information. If it “links” well with existing information, it is quickly integrated (or Piaget would say assimilated). If it does not, it takes more time to become established (or Piaget would say accommodated). In addition, Siemens talks about flow inhibitors (biases, preconceived notions, bureaucracy, etc.) and flow accelerators (receptivity, culture of openness, etc.) in Connectivism. These factors can also be used to explain why someone assimilates or accommodates information.
Thus, while connectivism may seem to be a more relevant theory as it pertains to many of the changes occurring in our world today, constructivism can be applied equally well and has withstood the test of time.
