Collaborative learning is a newly advocated ideal in the history of education and interrelated to principles societal structure is founded upon: only that this link works on the reverse. Modern societies, built upon antagonistic capitalistic ideals as they are, function in a competitively rather than a synergistically. Reflections of social values that are at the root of shaping relationships for the most of the 20^th century period can be traced in the educational system: students attend lectures, perform self-study tasks and activities for the success of which address the authority of the teacher. This one-to-one relationship also adheres to the orthodox cognitivist paradigm of body-mind separation; also supported by a norm-referenced assessment system of the studying-learning progress evaluation. This compares a student to her fellow’s/s’ progress rather than sees her achievement as part of a her own learner’s profile.

In his discussion on networks as communicative structures that process flows of information through nodes, Castells (2009: p. 20) argues that communities are social formations based on antagonistic values. Although history and politico-economical theory confirm Castell’s thoughts, there are other historical moments that support the collaborative aspect of human nature: the unification towards the achievement of a shared purpose. Eventually, is there such a thing as collaborativeness? Is it a matter of human nature? And if it is, do we accept a pre-programmed view? Or it is just a matter of an individual’s decision as a political being (as well)? And as decisions enter the arena, is it not also a matter of education?

(photo source: http://www.stanford.edu/dept/HPS/Haraway/CyborgManifesto.html