Week 2: Theories & Models of Learning & Instruction

ETEC 561

Wilgus Burton

June 2013

Epistemology (the study of what and how we come to know) is discussed in multiple chapters in this section. Distinguish epistemology from instructional methods or theories. What are the differences between theories, methods, or models of learning and epistemologies or underlying beliefs about ways of knowing?

RESPONSE:

In the text, Reiser/Dempsey, page 36, “learning can be defined as a “persisting change in human performance or performance potential (Driscoll, 2005)”  and further defined as “how it is thought it is thought to occur (Driscoll, 2005)”.

It seems that I can to out on a limb and say that the difference between epistemology and instructional methods or theories is or can be analogous to a file cabinet and the files in that cabinet.  The epistemology aspect would be the file cabinet – an “all-encompassing” concept with the instructional methods or theories would be the files.

The thinking that instructional methods or theories as being etched in stone is not quite realistic.  Psychology has gone through many changes over the years; B.F. Skinner's behavior theory and on to Cognitive Information Processing Theory,  Schema, Cognitive Load, Situational Learning Theory, Gagne's Theories of Instruction to Constructivism. Those "theories" are methods (models) of the overall blanket of Epistemology of Learning.   As technology advances, and newer ways to collect data, these theories may change over time.

2. Chapters in this section discuss three contrasting epistemic stances: positivist, relativist, and contextualist (or hermeneutical). Positivists believe that the only truth or knowledge is objective truth. Relativists don’t believe that objective truth is possible and that all knowledge is subjective to perception or relative to a particular frame of reference. Contextualists believe that truth or knowledge is relative to context rather than individual, subjective understanding. While designers and educators with a positivist stance generally apply behaviorist principles to the design and development of instruction, those with either a contextualist or relativist epistemological framework employ constructivist theories and methods. 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.

Response:

At this point in time, I think of myself as a Contextualist.  As a Teacher in a non-core (elective) science, I think that learning within the classroom is the content  that relates to the subject matter. The four parts of a Constructive theory is that:

"1) we should engage learners in activities related to the subject matter being taught
2) Provide for the collaboration and the opportunity to engage multiple perspectives
3) Support learners in setting their own goals to regulate their own learning and
4) Encourage learners to reflect on what and how they are learning" (Reiser and Dempsey, 2012).

The historical aspect of the Constructive theory is based on the findings/theories of John Dewey and Jean Piaget where inquiry and assimilation are the key factors. Currently there is a movement of combining the aspects of both  positivist and contextualist views.  As we move towards a more technological classroom environment, the learning environment (teachers and  students) are beginning to take on the epistemology of the Constructivism.

Looking back over my childhood, in elementary school, I realize that there was a major shift between positivism and constructivism.  Growing up, we had to learn, through rote memorization math tables, terms (spelling and definitions), history, and science - positivism.  Later, we had to start to put them to use.  My conflict there was one of being used to rote memorization towards constructivism.  We weren't taught how to use the memorized information.  We had to figure it out as we went along.  I still have a problem with that.

However, now, I have that built-in concept of assimilation of information, but, with a new appreciation of "learning the basics".

3. Differing epistemic stances lead to differing approaches to learning and instruction, and ultimately to problem-solving. 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? 

Response:

Problem-solving is a standard of math and science, figuratively and literally. It does go beyond those two general subjects, though.  With the viewpoint of a Science Teacher, I see both perspectives.
From a behaviorist point of view, where we learn from experiences.  We do homework, lab work, classwork, and tests and we get a grade. Whether or not  it is a from a Bloom's category of simple knowledge to a more complex area of evaluation..

Here, the better response to "learning" the content gets a positive response (good grades) and the lesser grades get a less than positive response - Sounds like Pavlov.

From a constructive perspective, it becomes a bit more complicated.
 
Students come from different types of backgrounds; good and bad (my subjectivity). Each student has their own style of learning and each has their environment that may affect there general knowledge and evaluation of the subject. Their previous skills in facilitating their synthesis and evaluation of differing types of problems that exist for them personally will and can be challenging.  Their environment and future job aspects can interfere with the type of situations that they are capable, or willing, to solve.

Whether or not they believe they will ever use "it", will go into the mix. For a high school senior, their future ambitions may determine their willingness to solve one type of problem as opposed to another type.  A student going into welding will determine how they solve a problem related to biology as opposed to the chemistry of welding gases. In my direct experience of teaching Astronomy, students with an interest in something other than Astronomy will, or not, solve the literal-types of problems as opposed to the more abstract problems.