Theories and Models of Learning and Instruction

Part One:

Epistemology, theories, methods, and models of learning

The foundation of instructional design has evolved over time. Along with the design of instructional practices, the beliefs behind those practices have also evolved, grown, morphed and split countless times. From the surface, learning looks like a fairly simple practice but underneath seemingly simple interactions are countless beliefs, theories and methods.

Epistemology is “a branch of philosophy that investigates the origin, nature, methods, and limits of human knowledge.” (Merriam Webster, 2017) Basically it is the study what knowledge is and its validity. In my mind, I see a hierarchal structure with Epistemology at the top. My hierarchal system is based on the amount mindpower it takes to understand the different elements of instructional design.   Under Epistemology, or the knowledge of knowledge, I see theory. To me theory is the next step down. Theories try to explain how something works. In this case, we have many different theories of how learning takes place. The different theories take into mind the learner and the internal and external elements that affect their learning.  Just below theory on my scale are methods. Methods are procedures on how to accomplish something, in our case the methods tell how to teach someone so that they will learn the objectives in an effective manner. Lastly on my hierarchal scale of difficulty is model of learning. A model is an example that is used to show instructors and pupils how to effectively put the methods into practice.

Part Two:

Epistemic Stances and Conflict in the Classroom

Am I a Positivist, Relativist or Contextualist? Is it possible to be a bit of each? When it comes to math and science I believe that there is one correct answer that can be proven, but when it comes to more artistic endeavors truth is more objective and related to the perspective of the individual learner.

I’m reminded of a time in high school when my English teacher assigned a poem for us to read. I don’t remember the poem at all, but I do recall that we were supposed to interpret the poem and write a response on what the poem was about. In hind sight my teacher was a positivist and I was a Contextualist. She believed that there was only one correct answer to the interpretation of the poem. The only correct response was to tell what the author intended the poem to be about. In my limited experience as a sheltered 14-year-old, I had no way of knowing what the poem was about from the poet’s perspective, until it was taught to me. I received a poor grade on the assignment even though I followed the directions and gave a well stated interpretation of the poem’s meaning. I didn’t understand why I received a poor grade when I had completed the assignment. I understood what the poem meant to me, from my perspective and I expressed myself clearly. I still believe to this day that when you ask someone to interpret or find meaning in a written piece of work that there is not one correct answer. That is the beauty of art and language; it evokes feelings, emotions, memories and experiences and becomes new with every new reading.

Part Three:

Problem Solving: Behaviorist vs. Constructivist

Section II, Chapter Four of Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology states, “In information processing theory, learning is mostly a matter of going from the outside in. The learner receives information from the environment, transforms it in various ways and acquires knowledge that is subsequently stored in memory. In constructivist approaches, on the other hand, learning is more a matter of going from the inside out. The learner actively imposed organization and meaning on the surrounding environment and constructs knowledge in the process.” (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012) In solving a problem the behaviorist would give the students outside clues to inspire the correct, predetermined response. There is generally only one way to solve the problem and students are rewarded for following instructions and reaching the goal. A constructivist approach to problem solving is quite different. While the problem might be similar, the students are not given clues or a method to solve the problem. They are to think about many possible solutions and figure out the best way of solving the problem, then construct the answer to prove its validity.  Motivation is an internal construct. Outside influences can help students find their motivation, but ultimately it is within a person. As the quote above mentions, constructivist approaches learning from the inside out. The whole idea of constructivist theory is to tap into the motivation inside of a person and for them to take ownership over their own learning. Behaviorist approaches are more stress filled with outside motivations and ques trying to inspire students to learn.

References

Epistemology. (n.d.). Retrieved June 14, 2017, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/epistemology?utm_campaign=sd&utm_medium=serp&utm_source=jsonld

Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (2012). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology. Boston: Pearson.

(n.d.). Retrieved June 14, 2017, from http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_epistemology.html