Does connectivist learning theory lead to ignorance?

Reading an article on the results of an Australian science survey, reminded me of a conversation I once had with a mother regarding her apparently gifted son. The article, linked below, suggested one of the potential reasons for the falling results was the increasing reliance on technology to provide speedy answers. The mother in the conversation, questioned why there is a need for students to put things in their own words, rather than just cutting and pasting. I did explain that this could be considered a little thing called plagiarism, though she was quick to dismiss this through referencing. It may seem a reasonable argument in this day and age. Why is there a need to be able to recall facts when they are so readably available? By finding the right information, the student is demonstrating knowledge of the task being asked of them and how to go about piecing together. Is any more really necessary?

 The concept of connective learning, the idea that it is more important to know how to access knowledge than to acquire it, seems fairly rational at first. We are told we live in the knowledge era; where all knowledge is freely available and that knowing how to apply that knowledge is the most important thing. This is all very good and, for the curious minded, very exciting. Is knowledge simply a commodity though? A means to an end? I would suggest not.

While certainly able to be treated in this manner, it is not and should not be reduced to this. To me, this treatment answers the how, what and where. Perhaps the most important question of all though is the why. The why is the driver of innovation. The why is what drives new thought and causes sleepless nights as a person lies there, pondering that exact question. Why? Young children know this importance. They ask it constantly. It can be quite wondrous to explore how something works. To explore the intricacies that go into something greater than the sum of its parts. This view, nevertheless, sails straight past the conceptualisation of it all. Whether it is a jet engine, or the concept of flight, without a mind asking the why in the first place, the idea would never get off the ground.

Which brings me back to the question in the heading. Having recently been going over learning theory again, the concepts were fresh in my mind and caused me to ponder. The other three core learning theories, behaviourism, cognitivism and social construction, seem to be obvious in their connectedness. Each builds on the other to create effective learning. Connectivism and those who wittingly or not believe it to be the way of the future, seem to be saying that it can exist in relative isolation. In response to this, I ask what is the point of having all the knowledge in the world if you know not what it means? If the survey, also linked below, truly is a sign of things to come, then rather than an era of knowledge, we are approaching an epoch of committed ignorance.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-17/science-literacy-falling-among-young-adults/4824232

http://www.science.org.au/reports/science-literacy.html