(I) “Creativity” and “Innovation” constitute puzzling notions that have presented current societies with “problematic issues” which growth when analyzed under the light of trends such as the so called Web 2.0 (O’Really, 2002). In this paper I talk about a conceptual implication of this kind identified in the realm of the debates about learning.

(II) The set of theories known as “constructivism” constitute a prevailing paradigm in the explanations of learning in formal education. This has been possible for several reasons: constructivism acknowledges the significance of the context in learning, it gives importance to previous knowledge and cognitive structures, it explains the close relationship between mental structures, social interaction and language, and more (Vygotsky & Cole, 1978; Rovegno, 2006). In some contexts, constructivism has even been used to guide curriculum integration, learning evaluation, instructional design and the development of learning materials (Herrington & Oliver, 2000; Patten, Arnedillo & Tangney, 2005).

(III) As the use of ICT in education became feasible, constructivism remained visible and provided a stable theoretical framework to explain the possibilities of the new technologies in order to improve teaching and learning (Jonassen & Reeves, 1996). But with the intensification of web-based interactions and with the emergence of the new social media resources ―evident in popular services such as Facebook,Twitter, Blogger― new discussions about learning emerged. Classical theories of social networking (Mitchell, 1969) entered into a new stage of development (Freeman, 2004) and have challenged the constructivist approaches and its explanations of learning in context such as those of the Web 2.0.

(IV) In my academic work I have found that constructivism seems limited when it is used to try to explain learning outside a planned or controlled educational environment. Constructivism produces, commonly, interesting explanations in a complex but, in the end, linear notion of the cognitive development and process. This would be constricting when trying to explain how people learn in environments where interactions, communications, contents are presented in non-linear and non-synchronized ways; where information circulates in fragments, with different intensities and codes, and “virtual” and “real” structures are superimposed. Because of this, specialist such as Siemens (2005) suggest that in circumstances of intensive use of technology, in the context of Web 2.0 for instance, learning should be better studied under the lights of theories such as social networking, connectivism or complexity (Christakis & Fowler, 2009; Dabbagh & Kitsantas, 2012).

Christakis, N. and Fowler, J. (2009). Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives. New York: Back Bay Books. Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2012). Personal learning environments, social media, and self-regulated learning: A natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(1), 3-8. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.06.002. Freeman, L. C. (2004), The Development of Social Network Analysis: A Study in the Sociology of Science. Vancouver: Empirical Press. Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2000). An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 23-48. Jonassen, D., & Reeves, T.C. (1996). Learning with technology: Using computers as cognitive tools. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 693-719). New York: Macmillan. Kim, B., & Reeves, T.C. (2007). Reframing research on learning with technology: In search of the meaning of cognitive tools. Instructional Science, 35, 207-256. Mitchell, J. C. (1969). "The Concept and Use of Social Network" en Mitchell, J.C. (ed.), Social Networks in Urban Situations. United Kingdom, Manchester University Press. O'Reilly, T. (2005). What Is Web 2.0. Blog entry, available at: (http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html). Patten, B., Arnedillo Sanchez, I., & Tangney, B. (2005). Designing collaborative, constructionist and contextual applications for handheld devices. Computers & Education, 46, 294-308. Rovegno I. (2006). Constructivist perspectives on learning. In: Kirk D, Macdonald D, O'Sullivan M, eds. Handbook of physical education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications: 242-261. Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for a Digital Age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, Volume 2, Number 1, January, 2005. http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm Vygotsky, L. S., & Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University Press.