This week's reflection questions were challenging and it took time for me to sit with all of the information and let it sink in. Epistemology is the study of learning. It is discovering how we come to know what we know. It is a more philosophical look at learning, whereas learning theories, models, methods, and models are the more scientific approach. The learning theorists utilize what we have come to understand through the study of epistemology, and apply the philosophies scientifically to come up with theories, models and methods as a means of effectively creating these learning experiences. If the definition of metacognition is 'thinking about thinking;' then the definition of epistemology could be 'thinking about learning.' Epistemology seems to extend much further than the field of education, while Learning theories focus more on scholastic problems and solutions.
I felt that this week's reading laid out the learning theories in the most clear and connected me. I felt that for the first time I could see exactly how the theories have come to be over time, and exactly how they relate to each other. It make sense that it would all begin with the most easily observed learning theory of Behaviorism, where all learning can be entirely understood by observable behavior. This is the most primal of learning theories, as it could be related to the natural learning that takes place by observing consequences of our behavior. Touching a hot stove always comes to mind when discussing Behaviorism, because it gives a clear and immediate consequence one quickly and easily learns from.
From Behaviorism comes Cognitive Information Processing Theory which also credits a learner's environment as the most important role in learning, but recognizes internal processes within the learner that explain learning including memory systems, attention level, encoding, and retrieval. This increases emphasis on prior knowledge and observes that feedback but be corrective so that the learner can modify performance effectively. The Schema Theory and Cognitive Load further develops memory storage with the discovery that knowledge is categorized when it is stored in memory which makes prior knowledge even more important and leads us to the model of teaching where tasks are broken down into manageable, increasingly complex pieces that scaffold the learning process.
In Situated Learning Theory context begins to take center stage stating that learning occurs as the learner participates in the community. Peer teaching falls into this category with the Community of Learners Approach. Gagne's Theory of Instruction is primarily concerned with instruction and how what we know about learning can be applied to instruction design. He organized instruction into nine steps.
Constructivism takes us into an entirely different direction. Instead of the environment defining the learner, the learner is know assigning meaning to the environment while constructing knowledge. Learners construct knowledge independently, but rely on others to test their own understandings. This is the most modern of learning theories and is popular because it focuses on high level, complex learning goal. However, it is the most difficult learning environment for teachers to create and maintain.
2. Reflect on whether your stance is primarily positivist, relativist, or contextualist. Then, identify an instance when your perspective or stance as a learner conflicted with that of your instructor. Describe the conflict that you experienced and analyze whether opposing epistemic stances may have been at the heart of the conflict.
Upon reflection, I had a hard time deciding between relativist or contexualist, as I believe I am both in one way or another. Though I think I may learn more toward relativism, especially in my personal life. I believe that everyone has their own personal truth because everyone is on their own path with a history of their own experiences and their perceptions of those experiences. Every individual's perception makes up their own reality. In teaching, however, I do recognize the importance of context and try to keep that in mind when I am teaching my students to master particular concepts that I would like for them to be able to employ in a variety of contexts.
The only example of a conflict I experienced with a teacher, was in algebra. The teacher wanted me to just accept the formulas as formulas and use them to solve the equations. I struggled with this. I had just taken geometry which was much more hands-on. I could see how it related to our natural world, but I wanted to know how the algebraic equations came to be. What did a mathematical theorist need to know about our world when he or she decided to explore algebraic hypotheses. Even with word problems, I had a hard time making algebra make sense for me in my world, which made me resistant to the learning process, I think. Clearly, my teacher wanted me to accept the algebraic equations as a positivist when I needed to understand it relative to my own perception in order for effective learning to take place.
3. Explain differences in problem-solving when approached from behaviorist and constructivist perspectives. How do the approaches differ in both the nature of the problem to be solved and in facilitating the problem solving process? Finally, what effect might these differences have on learner motivation?
Behaviorism Problem Solving:
- Behaviorism relies on trial and error.
- Students learn to perform new behaviors through the consequences of the things they do.
- Reinforcement strengthens a particular behavior by receiving something desired (positive reinforcement) or avoiding something undesirable (negative reinforcement).
- Punishment decreasing the likelihood of a repeated undesirable behavior.
Constructivist Porblem Solving
- Shifts focus from teaching to learning and knowledge construction.
- Relevant tasks engage learners in meaningful processes that help solve a problem.
- Allows students to extend learning beyond the content and apply the knowledge in other contexts.
I like your example of touching a hot stove. I’m more kinesthetic; As a kid I had to learn by touching it, and it hurt!! I have since been less primal (LOL).
ReplyDeleteI agree with your view regarding the difficulty in creating and maintaining a constructivist learning environment. These lessons need to be thought out well. Another difficulty that comes up is the relativity of measuring outcome.
Your example of your negative experience in algebra brought to mind the importance of flexibility with regards to learning styles. I think that the idea behind algebraic formulas is kind of saying “here is the wheel, don’t question how we came upon it, just use it!” I think that this is the result of a large portion of our pragmatic educational system.
I think that your ideas were expressed well in this post. Great job!
I felt the same way you did about our reflection questions. They were challenging and I ended up having to do a lot of research to try and sort through vocabulary like instructional theory, instructional method, instructional model, and epistemology. I like your definition of epistemology. It is well thought out and complete. Your use of the phrase for epistemology as ‘thinking about learning,’ was nice. I also thought it was interesting how you said that when you “apply the philosophies scientifically to come up with theories, models and methods as a means of effectively creating these learning experiences.” I had not thought of the scientifically part. I felt the same way that you did about how each theory now makes sense to me. I did not realize how interrelated the theories were, as well. In the second question, I identified with your struggle over which you were, relativist or contextualist. Since I’m a geometry teacher, I do have some positivist in me, two plus two equals four. However, I'm more a relativist and contextualist than anything else. I know it sounds strange when I say that I have parts of all three positions. I have always fallen into the middle of several positions when categorizing who I am. It sounds like your Algebra teacher was not able, or not willing to, give you a feel for how Algebra is used in everyday life. Algebra, to me, is the language of all other math. You have to know how to speak it before you can go on to higher math and science subjects. Algebra is like breaking down the English language into subject, verb, predicate, participles, and tense. Before you can write, you have to know, the bits and pieces. I have many students that love Algebra because it's a set of rules and it makes sense. However, I also have students like you that love Geometry because it's more visual and applicable to authentic situations. However, I feel that your teacher should have given you a better picture of how Algebra is used in many facets of life, like economics and technology. OK, I’m sorry to go on and on, like some math teachers do. I do understand the conflict you felt when your teacher didn’t give you a big picture. Many math teachers think parts to the whole and many students need to understand the whole to work the parts. I thought your answers to these questions were insightful and well-developed.
ReplyDeleteI totally related to the conflict of epistemic stances with your algebra teacher. I wrote about a similar conflict when I started my first accounting course. I sometimes believe that positivists cannot understand why relativists feel the need for an explanation of something that has been accepted by experts in the field, therefore, they do not provide one making us feel confused and well...upset. I have kept this conflict in mind as a teacher and try to the best of my ability to find ways to explain accepted theories and concepts to the relativists in my classroom. It's interesting how all of these labels exist as part of instructional design yet they are not addressed in any workshop or teachers' guide I have used in the classroom.
ReplyDeleteOne of the ways I cater to the relativists in 4th grade math is by presenting a formula and having them go through the process of trials to see if they truly get the results that we have generated without the formula. I then explain to them that mathematicians are "lazy" therefore they want to find shortcuts for everything. Once mathematicians think they have come up with a shortcut they work hard to find "proofs" that their formula is ironclad. This seems to satisfy all children in the classroom and as the year progresses and we explore other math concepts and formulas we always work the problem the long way and then try the formula to find "proofs" that the results are the same.
When as a facilitator of learning I look at all the different theories you summarized I can find something useful in all of them. I create my own "quilt" of different theories and use them as learning situations come my way. In another course I took recently, many students felt that B.F. Skinner was outdated and did not develop intrinsic motivation in the learner. When I cited examples of ways I give students "reinforcements" many of my fellow students agreed that they had a little behaviorism going on in their classroom as well. We are in the classroom to nurture the future decision-making citizens of our nation and we are willing to use whatever works to make that happen, don't you think?