I was convinced by rhizomatic learning – but selectively.  It is highly appropriate for those at the boundaries of understanding or expression – so university researchers, company strategists, experimental artists.  However, in the practical world, rhizomatic learning, and the behaviours resulting from it would be chaotic.  Imagine a company without processes (including ethical processes), a family without ‘house rules’, a country without laws.  Interactive chaos as a means of intellectual evolution is not a practical way of life – it would be rather like Lord of the Flies.  The most powerful forces tend to drive the agenda and they are rarely motivated by what is right for the majority.

As in software, I think most people in practical society need some version control.  It is difficult to organise if everyone has a slightly different version of what is normal.  So let the researchers enjoy rhizomatic learning (including user input as some of the ‘nutrients’ or ‘walls’ for development) but, for the rest of us, let us learn through one curriculum at a time.  Connectivism means that the period between versions will be increasingly short but the plateaus of stability are as important for operational value as  the regular spurts of progress.