We are living in a quantum world where virtuality allows us to transcend time and space. Boundaries, which were considered to be predetermined, are no longer absolute. This has important implications for the field of education as educators advance e-learning. However, education theory has been outpaced by practice. In this paper the authors propose a new learning perspective— the quantum perspective of learning which moves beyond current popular educational theories of constructivism (Siemens, 2005) and connectivism (Vygotsky, 1978). The five assumptions of the quantum perspective of learning are explored. Specifically, learning is multi-dimensional, occurs in various planes simultaneously, consists of potentialities which exist infinitely, is holistic/holographic in nature and is patterned within holographic realities, and learning environments are living systems. Implications that arise from this perspective are discussed.
KeywordsQuantum Perspective of LearningPedagogyHolismHolographicPotentialitiesLiving SystemsQuantum StatesQuantum DimensionsE-Learning
Andone, D., Dron, J., Boyne, C., & Pemberton, L. (2006). Are our students digital students? ALT-C 2006: The Next Generation. Conference Proceedings from the 13th International Conference ALT-C, Edinburgh, 5-7 September 2006, 82-96. http://www.alt.ac.uk/altc2006/
Arntz, W., Chasse, B., & Vincente, M. (2006). What the bleep? Down the rabbit hole. Los Angeles, CA: Lord of the Wind Films.
Bohm, D. (1971). Quantum theory as an indication of a new order in physics. Part A: The development of new orders as shown through the history of physics. Foundations of Physics, 1, 359-384. doi:10.1007/BF00708585
Bohm, D. (1973). Quantum theory as an indication of a new order in physics. B. Implicate and explicate order in physical law. Foundations of Physics, 3, 139-168. doi:10.1007/BF00708436
Cafiero, M., & Adamowicz, W. (2001). Simultaneous optimalzation of molecular geometry and the wave function in a basis of Singer’s n-electron explicitly correlated Gaussians. Chemical Physics Letters, 3355, 404-408. doi:10.1016/S0009-2614(01)00086-0
Calvani, A. (2008). Connectivism: New paradigm or fascinating pot-pourri? Journal of E-learning and Knowledge Society, 4, 247- 252.
Clark, A. (1997). Being there: Putting brain, body and world together again. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Dar, Y. L., Yuan-Hoffman, W., Xio, A., Shah, S., Huang, D., & Hartman, E. et al. (2008). Heat activated pressure sensitive adhesives. http://www.pstc.org/files/ public/Dar08.pdf
Davis, C., Edmunds, E., & Kelly-Bateman, V. (2010). Connectivism— Emerging perspectives on teaching and technology, Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/ epltt/index.php?title=Connectivism
Gallego, M.B. (2008). Physics, consciousness and transcendence: The physics of Roger Penrose and David Bohm as regards for explanation of the human mind open to reality. Pensamiento, 64, 715-739.
Glassman, M. (2001). Dewey & vygotsky: Society, experience and inquiry. Educational Researcher, 30, 3-14. doi:10.3102/0013189X030004003
Haberkern, T., & Deepak, N. (2002). Grains of mystique: Quantum physics for the layman. http://www.opencontent.org/openpub/
Harokpos, E. (2005). Power as the cause of motion and a newfoundation of classical mechanics. Progress in Physics, 2, 80-91.
Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time. New York, NY: Harper San Francisco.
Hunter, M., & Smith, K. H. (2007). Inviting school success: Invitational education and the art class. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice, 13, 8-15.
Janzen, K. J. (2010). Alice through the looking glass: The influence of self and student understanding on role actualization in novice clinical nurse educators. Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 41, 517-523. doi:10.3928/00220124-20100701-07
Jammer, M. (1988). David Bohm and his work—on the occasion of his seventieth birthday. Foundations of Physics, 18, 691-699. doi:10.1007/BF00734150
Kerr, B. (2007). Msg. 18, Re: What connectivism is. Online Connectivism Conference. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba. URL (last checked 5 February 2007). http:/ltc.umanitoba.ca/moodle/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=12
Kibble, T. W. B., & Berkshire, F. H. (2005). Classical mechanics. London: Imperial College Press.
Kop, R., & Hill, A. (2008). Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the past? International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9, 1-13.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential leaning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (2002). Legitimate peripheral participation in communities of practice. In R. Harrison (Ed.), Supporting lifelong learning: Volume I: Perspectives on learning (pp. 111-126). London: Routledge Falmer.
Longuenesse, B. (2001). Kant’s deconstruction of the principle of sufficient reason. The Harvard Review of Philosophy, 9, 67-87.
Marquez, I. (2006). Knowledge of being v. practice of becoming in higher education: Overcoming the dichotomy in the humanities. Arts & Humanities in Higher Education, 5, 142-161. doi:10.1177/1474022206063651
Mattar, J. A. (2010). Constructivism and connectivism in education technology: Active, situated, authentic, experiential, and anchored learning. http://www.joaomatar.com/Constructivism%20and%20Connectivism %20in%20Education%20Technology.pdf
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Papert, S., & Idit, H. (1991). Constructionism. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Paxton, P. (2003). Inviting e-learning: How hard can it be? Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice, 9, 23-40. http://www.invitationaleducation .net/JITP %20Vol%208-1.pdf
Pert, C. B. (1997). Molecules of emotion: Why you feel the way you feel. New York, NY: Simon & Shuster.
Pribram, K. (2006). Holism vs wholism. World Futures, 62, 42-46. doi:10.1080/02604020500406255
Princeton University (2011). Quantum. http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn ?s=quantum
Purkey, W. W. (1992a). An introduction to invitational theory. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice, 1, 5-15. http://www.invitationaleducation.net/journal/JITP%20Vol%208-1.pdf
Purkey, W. W. (1992b). Conflict resolution: An invitational approach. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice, 1, 43-49. http://invitational education .net /jour nal/v12/p111.htm
Rakovi?, D. (2007). Scientific bases of the quantum holo-graphic paradigm. Proceedings of the International Conference on Measuring Energy Fields, Kamnik, 13-14 October 2007. http:// www.dejanrakovicfund.org/papers/2007-SLOVENIA. pdf
Schmidt, M. (2010). Learning from teaching experience: Dewey’s theory and preservice teacher’s learning. Journal of Research in Music Education, 58, 131-146. doi:10.1177/0022429410368723
Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. http://www.elearnspace. org/Articles/connectivism.htm
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: Learning as network creation. http://www.astd.oeg/LC/2005/1105 _siemens.htm
Siemens, G. (2006a). Connectivism: Learning and knowledge today. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9, 1-13. http://admin.edna.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/2150/34771/1/gs2006_siemens.pdf
Siemens, G. (2006b). Connectivism: Learning theory or pastime of the self-amused? http://www.Elearnspace.org/Articles/Connectivism_self-amused.htm
Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2006). Inviting confidence in school: Invitations as a critical source of the academic self-efficacy beliefs of entering middle school students. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice, 12, 7-16.
Van Manen (2002). Writing in the dark: Phenomenological studies in interpretive inquiry. Winnipeg: The Althouse Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Zaman, L. F. (2001). Postmodern deconstruction of Newtonian science: A physical-to-social transposition of causality. Theory and Science, 2, 1-18.