Post-humanist principles to research the networked learning

Alexandro Escudero-Nahón


«Networked learning» is a concept whose purpose is to define an emerging research field characterized by the transversal and ubiquitous presence of technology in education. However, it lacks explanatory force because it is pinned to the anthropocentric principles of modern humanism. Such principles consider technology and «the human» as ontologically different areas and they place the human being at a central and ruling position. In this text, I present an ontological and epistemological post-humanist restatements of the actor-network theory (ANT) that allow an original definition of networked learning. This network works because different human and non-human agencies associate and continue performing their functions. As soon as they stop operating, the network disappears. There could be knowledge but not learning before and after the network. The purpose of educational research is to track down how learning networks originate, how they strengthen, how they associate to other networks and how they disappear.

Texto completo:



Arbea, A. (2002). El concepto de humanitas en el Pro Archia de Cicerón. Onomázein, 7, 339-400.

Braidotti, R. (2013). The Posthuman. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Polity Press.

Carlson, D. (2015). Foreword. In N. Snaza and W. Weaver (Eds.), Posthumanism and Educational Research. New York, USA: Routledge.

Christensen, C., Johnson, C. and Horn, M. (2008). Disrupting Class: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the World Learns. Washington DC, USA: McGraw Hill.

Clarke, A. (2009). From grounded theory to situational analysis: What’s new? Why? How? Developing Grounded Theory: The Second Generation (pp. 194-233). Oxon, New York, USA: Routledge.

DeLanda, M. (2006). A New Philosophy of Society: Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity. London, England, United Kingdom: Continuum.

Devenin, V. and Henríquez, G. (2011). Narrativas tecnológicas: un ejemplo de aplicación de la sociología de las asociaciones. Cinta de Moebio: Revista de Epistemología de Ciencias Sociales, 41, 167-181. doi:

Dolphijn, R. and Tuin, I. van der. (2011). Pushing dualism to an extreme: on the philosophical impetus of a new materialism. Continental Philosophy Review, 44(4), 383-400. doi:

Dunne, D. and Dougherty, D. (2015). Abductive reasoning: how innovators navigate in the labyrinth of complex product innovation. Organization Studies, 37(2), 131-159. doi: 04501.

Echeverría, B. (2006). El humanismo del existencialismo. Diánoia, 51(57), 189-199. doi:

Echeverría, J. and González, M. (2009). La teoría del actor-red y la tesis de la tecnociencia. ARBOR. Ciencia, Pensamiento y Cultura, 185(738), 705-720. doi:

Escudero-Nahón A. (2016). Aprendizaje en red: fundamentos ontoepistemológicos para su investigación. In R. Roig-Vila (Ed.), Tecnología, innovación e investigación en los procesos de enseñanza-aprendizaje (pp. 1.609-1.615). Barcelona, España: Octaedro. Retrieved from pace/handle/10045/61787 (on March 22, 2019).

Espinosa, L. (2016). Movimientos sociales. X taller internacional primero de mayo. In A. Rodríguez and J. Castellanos (Eds.), Esbozo para una categoría de humanismo en las epistemologías del sur (pp. 29-44). La Habana, Cuba: Instituto de Historia de Cuba-Universidad Autónoma de Chapingo.

Fenwick, T. and Edwards, R. (2010). ActorNetwork Theory in Education. New York, USA: Routledge.

Fenwick, T. and Edwards, R. (2011). Introduction: reclaiming and renewing actor network theory for educational research. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(S1), 1-13.

Fenwick, T., Edwards, R. and Sawchuk, P. (2011). Emerging Approaches to Educational Research. Tracing the Sociomaterial. New York, USA: Routledge.

Gibson, B. and Hartman, J. (2014). Rediscovering Grounded Theory. Beverly Hills, California, USA: Sage.

González, S. (2015). Antropología y el estudio de las ontologías a principios del siglo XXI: sus problemáticas y desafíos para el análisis de la cultura. Estudios sobre las culturas contemporáneas, XXI(42), 39-64.

Gros, B. (2012). Retos y tendencias sobre el futuro de la investigación acerca del aprendizaje con tecnologías digitales. RED: Revista de Educación a Distancia, 32, 3-13.

Harman, G. (2009). Prince of Networks: Bruno Latour and Metaphysics. Melbourne, Australia: Re-Press.

Hernández, R., Fernández-Collado, C. and Baptista, P. (2010). Metodología de la investigación (5.ª ed.). Mexico: McGraw Hill.

Hsu, Y.-C., Ho, H. N. J., Tsai, C.-C., Hwang, G. J., Chu, H.-C., Wang, C.-Y. and Chen, N. S. (2012). Research Trends in Technology-based Learning from 2000 to 2009: A content Analysis of Publications in Selected Journals. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 15(2), 354-370. Retrieved from〈=es&site=ehost-live (on January 14, 2019).

Hung, J.-L. (2012). Trends of e-learning research from 2000 to 2008: use of text mining and bibliometrics. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(1), 5-16. doi: -8535.2010.01144.x.

Jackson, S. (2015). Toward an analytical and methodological understanding of actor network theory. Journal of Arts & Humanities, 4(2), 29-44.

Jiménez, J., Bustamante, M. and Albornoz, M.ª (2015). El problema del determinismo en las políticas de educación y TIC. In H. Thomas, M. Albornoz and F. Picabea (Eds.), Políticas tecnológicas y tecnologías políticas. Dinámicas de inclusión, desarrollo e innovación en América Latina (pp. 207240). Buenos Aires, Argentina: FLACSO Ecuador/Universidad Nacional de Quilmes.

Johnson, L., Becker, S., Cummins, M., Estrada, V., Freeman, A. and Hall, C. (2016). NMC Horizon Report: 2016 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas, USA: The New Media Consortium.

Kakkori, L. and Huttunen, R. (2012). The Sartre-Heidegger controversy on humanism and the concept of man in education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44(4), 351-365. doi: 11/j.1469-5812.2010.00680.x.

Knox, J. (2016). Posthumanism and the Massive Open Online Course: Contaminating the Subject of Global Education. New York, USA: Routledge.

Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford, United Kingdom; New York, USA: Oxford University Press.

Latour, B. (2007). Nunca fuimos modernos: ensayo de antropología simétrica. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Siglo XXI.

Latour, B. (2008). Reensamblar lo social: una introducción a la teoría del actor-red. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Manantial.

Latour, B. (2009). On Recalling ANT. In J. Law and J. Hassard (Eds.), Actor Network and After (pp. 15-25). Oxford, United Kingdom: Blackwell.

Latour, B. (2013). An Inquiry into Modes of Existence. An Anthropology of the Moderns. Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA: Harvard University Press.

Law, J. (2004). After Method. New York, USA: Routledge.

Locke, K., Golden-Biddle, K. and Feldman, M. (2008). Making doubt generative: rethinking the role of doubt in the research process. Organization Science, 19, 907-918.

Minerva, R., Biru, A. and Rotondi, D. (2015). Towards a Definition of the Internet of Things. Torino, Italy.

Morton, T. (2013). Hyperobjects: Philosophy and Ecology after the End of the World. University of Minnesota Press.

Pape, H. (1999). Abduction and the topology of human cognition. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 453, 199-221. Retrieved from 10.2307/40320760 (on July 23, 2019).

Pedersen, H. (2010). Is «the posthuman» educable? On the convergence of educational philosophy, animal studies, and posthumanist theory. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 31(2), 237-250.

Pignuoli-Ocampo, S. (2014). La posición epistemológica del constructivismo simétrico de Bruno Latour. Cinta de Moebio. Revista de Epistemología de Ciencias Sociales, 52, 91-103.

Reichertz, J. (2007). Abduction: the logic of discovery of grounded theory. In A. Bryant and K. Charmaz (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Grounded Theory (pp. 214-228). London, England, United Kingdom: Sage Publications.

Rivas, A. and Delgado, L. (2016). 50 innovaciones educativas en América Latina. Graduate XXI, un mapa del futuro. Washington DC, USA. Retrieved from https://publi (on April 30, 2019).

Scopeo. (2013). Informe No. 2. MOOC: estado de la situación actual, posibilidades, retos y futuro. Retrieved from http://scopeo.usal. es/informes/scopeo-informe-no-2-mooc-estado-de-la-situacion-actual-posibilidades-retos-y-futuro/ (on March 21, 2019).

Skågeby, J., Mattias, A. and Rahm, L. (2016). Editorial: Transhumanist Politics, Education, and Design. Confero, 4(2), 5-9. doi:

Snaza, N. and Weaver, J. (Eds.). (2015). Posthumanism and Educational Research. New York, USA: Routledge.

St. Pierre, E. (2013). The posts continue: becoming. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 646-657. doi:

TedTalk. (2016). TedTalk: Ideas Worth Spreading. Retrieved from (on October 22, 2019).

Thomas, H. and Buch, A. (2013). Actos, actores y artefactos: sociología de la tecnología (1.ª reprint). Bernal, Buenos Aires, Argentina: Universidad Nacional de Quilmes. Retrieved from tos/520933c153e48.pdf (on March 12, 2019).

Usher, R. and Edwards, R. (2005). Subjects, networks and positions: thinking educational guidance differently. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 33(3), 397-410. doi: 0179640.

Weaver, J. (2010). The posthuman condition: a complicated conversation. In E. Malewski (Ed.), Curriculum Studies Handbook: The Next Moment (pp. 190-200). New York, USA: Routledge.

Wesley, D. and Barczak, G. (2010). Innovation and Marketing in the Video Game Industry: Avoiding the Trap. Surrey, England, United Kingdom: GOWER.

Wolfe, C. (2010). What is Posthumanism? Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA: University of Minnesota Press.

Enlaces refback

  • No hay ningún enlace refback.