Theories and Models of Learning and Instruction
Epistemology
Epistemology is defined in our textbook as “a branch of philosophy addressing knowledge-- how we know what we know, what it means to know, etc.” (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012) The ways in which students learn and comprehend has been the subject of educational research for considerable time. Of importance, has been research which studies the relationship between learning and the beliefs that students hold about knowledge and acquisition. Grouped together, these sets of beliefs are referred to as epistemological beliefs. In contrast to epistemology, learning theories and models deal more with the application of learning. Learning theories and models are similar to a blueprint, in how they provide a guide for instruction in the classroom. Through further research of epistemology, I came across an article that states: “Of all the beliefs held by teachers, the beliefs about knowledge and learning, known as epistemological beliefs, appear to be those which may influence teachers' choice and decisions the most in the classroom.” (Elliot & Chan, 1998) I chose to include this quote because, I agree as a teacher knowing how my students acquire knowledge, and what it means to have that knowledge would greatly benefit me when designing lessons using different instructional models and learning theories.
Positivist, Relativist, or Contextualist?
I believe my stance is more of a contextualist. In my classroom, I am always attempting to tap into my student's schema in order for them to reach a level of understanding. Schema is simply what the student already knows about information that is being presented. In other words, I try to relate what I am teaching to prior knowledge that my students might have. This is more along the lines of constructivist theory in which the learner is an information constructor. Constructivist theory or models present new information that is linked to prior knowledge.
The conflict that comes to mind is sort of silly, but was a big deal to me. In my first college level english course, I completed one of many papers that were assigned in the course. In this particular paper, I wrote about my favorite show at the time Grey’s Anatomy. I had a lot of prior knowledge about the show, characters, and events. In the show the name of the hospital was Seattle Grace Hospital, however my instructor counted off points because she thought I should have made Seattle a possessive noun: Seattle’s Grace Hospital. However, I had some prior knowledge about the program that she did not have. I could not convince her that I had it correct to begin with. This conflict never was resolved in my favor. This is an example of prior knowledge that our students may have where they may know more about a topic than we do.
Problem-Solving from Behaviorist and Constructivist Perspectives
Behaviorist theory stands on the belief that we learn new behavior through classical or operant conditioning. Operant conditioning simply means behavior is controlled by positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, positive punishment and negative punishment. For the role of problem solving, behaviorist theory works as a type trial-and-error process. When a student attempts to solve a problem and is successful that gives them the feeling of positive reinforcement. When a student makes an attempt at problem solving and is unsuccessful they feel a sort of negative reinforcement. I see this in the classroom when I have students who struggle greatly with doing something “wrong.” It is very hard for them to overcome that negative feeling of not getting it “right.”
Constructivist theorist believe that problem solving is the heart of learning, thinking, and development. As students go through that trial-and-error process and discover the consequences of their actions, they construct their own understanding. Therefore, learning is an active process that requires change in the learner. Thinking back to the trial-and-error and negative feeling that students feel when they are unsuccessful, brings me to the point that constructivist theory believes that this is the way students learn and build their understanding. Through those “rights” and “wrongs” they are acquiring more knowledge and understanding.
References:
Reiser, R. A. & Dempsey, J. V. (2012).Trends and issues in instructional design and technology, 3rded. Boston: Pearson.
Elliott, B., & Chan, K. (1998, November 09). Epistemological beliefs in learning to teach: Resolving conceptual and empirical issues. Retrieved June 13, 2017, from http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/000000859.htm
I enjoyed reading your blog. I was able to clearly understand your behaviorist and constructivist theories. I too am a Grey’s Anatomy fan. And although I do not know if you should have made Seattle a possessive noun as in Seattle’s Grace Hospital, I would have liked to read about the prior knowledge about the program that you had that she did not have. Either way you did make your point for this assignment in that you described a time when a student has prior knowledge that the instructor may not have had.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading your blog I had a better understanding of the contextualist approach. It would seem troublesome to model our entire instruction on this stance alone. Even though we may not like to admit it, students know more than we do specially due to their prior knowledge on technology. In one of the courses, I had to create a twitter account. I was having a hard time attaching a video link, I was feeling very frustrated because in my mind if my students can navigate this technology effortlessly, why am I having such a difficult time.
ReplyDeleteExcellent, well written post! I love how you point out that our epistemologies are based on the needs of our students, which as we know over time can change as the experiences and contexts of each decade of students changes over time. I think we can generally fall back on proven, reliable learning theories that have survived for decades, but the differences among each era of students are what spur new “sub-theories” to develop under the umbrella of constructivism. However, while I don’t particularly relate to the behaviorist learning theory, I do find that there is a time and place for trial and error. It seems that constructivism negates that there are any absolute truths, and while collaboration and self-discovery are essential to learning, I also feel that failure experienced through trial and error are also necessary and relevant to real world experiences. This is something I hadn’t really thought about or attributed to the behaviorist theory prior to reading your post.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading your post and your experiences you shared. As you mentioned, I think it is extremely important to understand our students and how they learn which is profitable in helping us as educators design instruction. Your experience with your professor concerning Grey's Anatomy definitely is an exceptional example. It definitely allow us to see that sometimes our students do have prior information that we may not have. Your experience challenges me to have an open mind and check the facts. Great job!
ReplyDeleteHeather shame on that instructor, one should never argue with a student about something that they are in to. They will win every time because unlike your instructor; Grey’s Anatomy was not her show. She should have bowed to your knowledge on the matter. But you have touched upon one point that I have found so many teachers fall prey too. They want to be the authority on everything, which is impossible. I have taught students that have some very usual hobbies individually and as families and they know so much more about the subject than I did. I had to give them credit for their knowledge and not argue the point.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, society has given children the idea that they must do everything perfect. I teach an adult computer literacy class with an IT professional and you would be surprised how many adults still have those feelings and get upset when they can’t get it right the first time. The problem with adults they want to throw their hands up and just quit. Trail-and-error be damned. They learned from childhood negative feelings that they cannot shake even as an adult. So, it is very important for us to help children through this part of their development by applying the Constructivist theorist perspectives to help them learn to build on past mistakes not beat themselves up with the “right” and “wrongs” of learning. I would always say that we all listen to a different drummer. Some are beating a fast cadence or a beating a slow beat. But whatever drum we are hearing should not be the basis of our success but what we learn and able to apply along the way.
I appreciate how the authors Reiner & Dempsey (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012) arranged the information in this book because it got us thinking real early about learning and how individuals learn. It will help to make us better teachers and one that will understand the children we are trying to teach. As with everything I read I do some additional research and found a cites on Constructivism that you might want to check out by B. G. Wilson (Wilson, 2012). I found it to be a good read and added to the knowledge that the authors shared.
References
Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (2012). Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology. Boston: Pearson.
Wilson, B. G. (2012). Constructivism in Practical and Historical Context. In R. A. Reiser, & J. V. Dempsey, Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (pp. 45-52). Boston: Pearson.
Isn't it interesting that so many of our classmates are lean toward being contextualists who like constructivism? I like this quote you included: “'Of all the beliefs held by teachers, the beliefs about knowledge and learning, known as epistemological beliefs, appear to be those which may influence teachers' choice and decisions the most in the classroom.' (Elliot & Chan, 1998)" What's interesting to me is the idea of influence here. We are influenced by epistemological beliefs in planning, but how much of those beliefs did we originally hold for ourselves prior to becoming teachers?
ReplyDeleteFor most of us, before we started taking classes dealing with educational theory, we accepted how we learned in the classroom to be the way that people teach. Then we go to college and we are influenced by the views of our textbooks, instructors, and our peers. Most of my instructors have been very inclined toward constructivism. When learning about the different theories, they've put it in a positive light. The more I hear about it, the more I like it. They have directly influenced my epistemological beliefs. Then when we begin teaching, we attend professional development sessions that seem to be a mix of constructivism and then the large dollop of testing skills. Many of the training sessions I attended at my school were often in conflict with what I had learned were ideal teaching practices in college.
I would guess that someone going to school for teaching or teaching when behaviorism was the most widely admired theory, would have teacher, textbooks, and peers who were also very gung-ho about using it in the classroom. I would hazard a guess that at one point constructivism was seen as some new-fangled idea that wouldn't work in the classroom. Fast forward to today and it's all the rage. I think 50 to 100 years from now (or possibly less), yet another new epistemological theory will appear as we learn even more about the best way to learn.
Your example with Grey's Anatomy is interesting. I'd think if you could prove to the teacher that Seattle was part of the show's proper name, you shouldn't have gotten marked off for it. It's an interesting example of context and prior knowledge based on pop culture. What I used to tell my students, when I was certain I was correct, was basically "I think this is correct, but you may know something I don't. If you can bring or show me something to prove your point, I'll give you extra credit." :) It used to drive me crazy when I was in K-12 if a teacher was incorrect and would not believe it when they were corrected. If we operate under the principle that all humans can make mistakes, then we need to be open to the idea that our students may have different knowledge or context from a situation.
Heather, I enjoyed reading your post this week. You mentioned using prior knowledge in teaching... What's funny about that to me is that most of my official "training" didn't mentioned that, but my ESL training did. Why would prior knowledge be helpful for students acquiring the English language, but not for ALL students? The answer is, I believe that my training neglected to mention it, but you are quite right... it has a place for all students. I will say that I've had to correct some inaccurate "prior knowledge", but overall it is a useful tool.
ReplyDeleteI am sorry to hear about your experience with Seattle Grace Hospital. Grey's has been my go-to show this summer since I stopped watching years ago. I would be upset about a conflict as you described also. I love it when my students correct me or have more information than I do. It actually helps to build our classroom environment as a safe place for people to learn, grow, and (YES!) make mistakes. Sometimes I even make mistakes on purpose just to see who is paying attention!