The rhizome in ‘rhizomatic learning’ is a metaphor of learning.
And “rhizome” is part of a theory about knowledge. As a theory of knowledge it is an answer to structuralism. Both theories are synthetical. In both theories a structure or the rhizome connects concepts. They stress the importance of connections and overview. In arts (education is an art) the overview, the connections, and synthesis are important. (This few sentences is the shortest and most unscientific text on epistemologics you ever read)
Is the rhizomatic metaphor for learning and education new? Jan Ligthart, Maria Montessori, Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi and so many others promoted synthesis in Project learning or thematic work. (Mainstream education had/has a very analytical approach). In higher ed nobody seems to practice these (old) pedagogical revivals.
What does rhizomatic learning add to the pedagogical wisdom of these and other pedagogues?
Why did mainstream schools (higher ed) hardly adapt these synthetical practices? If they had adapted we would not discuss rhizomatic learning.
The metaphor of rhizomatic learning does help to enhance teaching, so this is not the end.