Learning is a process, an interconnected series of
steps. Learners may follow some of the steps,
all of the steps, or none of the steps. This
illustrates a necessity for learning theories, as they provide a “source of
verified instructional strategies, tactics, and techniques” (Ertmer and Newby,
1993, p. 51). Going into EDUC 6115, I
had a basic understanding of the fundamental concept of learning theories; what
I did not realize is how intricate the learning process is or how there is no
standard example of what and how learning looks like.
In
undergraduate study, I was taught the basics of multiple intelligences and that
differentiation should use these intelligences as a focal point. I thought that the more intelligences I could
incorporate into a lesson to afford students who did not necessarily develop
one certain intelligence or other, the better.
The truth though, as Gardner (2003) emphasizes, is that “multiple
intelligences should not be in and of itself an educational goal” (“Multiple
Intelligences after 20 Years”, p. 9).
Well developed instruction focuses on the learners’ values.
A
misconception that I had was that when it comes to learning theories,
behaviorism is not a positive theory to incorporate into instruction because of
the idea of rote memorization and performance of specific actions based on
stimuli. Instead, it is admirable to
strive towards constructivist activities which require higher levels of
cognition that allow a student to “monitor, direct, and regulate actions toward
goals” (Ormrod, Schunk, & Gredler, 2009, p. 130). In reality, “no one theory of learning or of facilitating
learning trumps the others” (Foley, 2004, p. 55) because different learning
tasks require different approaches to learning.
Gaining new
nodes of schemata is easier when the material is presented in a way that
appeals to one of the intelligences which I have more fully developed, and is
presented in a way where I can make personal connection and meaning from
it. I tend to buy in to learning new
information if I “can direct (my) own learning,” and have an “immediate
application of knowledge” (Conlan, Grabowski, & Smith, 2003, “Adult
Learning”). In my own learning process,
if I feel that motivation is lacking, these are things to consider when
self-monitoring my personal learning progress.
Specific
learning theories dictate which learning styles to incorporate due to their
effectiveness, and how to use educational technology. When faced with the task of designing
instruction for a diverse group, it is helpful to understand that based on the
needs of the group, one particular learning theory and its subsequent learning
style dynamics will be more useful than another. Whatever learning styles will be implemented,
educational technology can be a valuable tool in the process. Whether as a visual stimulus to assist in
rehearsal as part of behaviorist conditioning, or as a connection tool for
learning networks in connectivism, educational technology has its place in the
instructional environment. All of this
is for the purpose of eliciting the highest levels of motivation in the
learning environment.
The material
and discussions presented through this course will be beneficial to me as I
move forward in the field of instructional design. When presenting a new collection of knowledge
to a group of learners, I will need to be intentional about providing clear
moments of extrinsic motivation that do not eclipse the draw of intrinsic
motivation. Looking at new knowledge
with which I will be asking learners to synthesize and make new connections, I
will use the principles behind specific learning theories to design instruction
that best meets the needs of the multiple intelligences and learning styles of
the learners. Learners will be able to
see how to immediately apply gained knowledge; relevance is crucial. In designing instruction, I will also work to
allow for many instances of self-regulation.
There are
many factors involved in learning and designing effective instruction. It all revolves around learning theories,
styles, and how to keep learners motivated.
While being knowledgeable in learning theory may not be the ultimate
trick to being a successful instructional designer or facilitator, it surely is
a good place to start.
References
Conlan, J., Grabowski, S., & Smith, K. (2003). Adult
learning. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging
perspectives on learning, teaching,
and technology. Retrieved
from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Adult_Learning.
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism,
cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing
critical features from an
instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement
Quarterly, 6(4), 50–71.
Foley, G. (Ed.). (2004). Dimensions of adult learning: Adult
education and training in a global
era.
McGraw-Hill Education.
Gardner, H. (2003, April 21). Multiple intelligences after 20
years. Paper presented to the
American Educational Research
Association, Chicago, IL. Retrieved from http://ocw.metu.edu.tr/pluginfile.php/9274/mod_resource/content/1/Gardner_multiple_intelligent.pdf.
Ormrod, J., Schunk, D., & Gredler, M. (2009). Learning
theories and instruction (Laureate
custom edition). New York: Pearson.
No comments:
Post a Comment