I began this week with Reeves and Reeves' (2015) chapter dissecting every learning theory, which to be honest, included a couple I had only heard of, but did not have a true understanding of. Not only did they go through the history and background of learning theories, they did so using an instructional design lens. Reeves and Reeves (2015) bring up a great point about scholars and practitioners who "hold different mental models of learning are also likely to disagree" (p. 476) on which learning theory is best due to their backgrounds, experiences, and styles being vastly different. I think that was a great tie-in to a fairly older article by Ertmer and Newby (1993) and how they discussed there was no perfect theory, but rather "depending on where the learners 'sit' on the continuum in terms of the development of their professional knowledge...the most appropriate instructional approach for advancing learners' knowledge at that particular level would be the one advocated by the theory that corresponds to that point on the continuum" (p. 68). So really, the relationship between each theory and between the educator and learner need to be the center from which to base instructional design, and then our deep understanding of learning theories can help us navigate.
As we move to a more technology driven era, I sometimes feel we are reverting back to old thoughts about best practice and learning theories. Similar to the pondering from Reeves (2015) and "whether communications and technology researchers focused on learning are ultimately leading humanity toward dystopia, utopia, or some form of society between the two extremes" (p. 479). Who knows where we are really headed, but it's important for us to use our knowledge and experiences to enhance technology's role in our lives, not the other way around!
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50-72.
Reeves, T. C., & Reeves, P. M. (2015). Learning. In L. Cantoni & J. A. Danowski (Eds.), Communication and Technology:Handbook of Communication Science (pp. 467-483). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Hi Rebecca,
I'm playing a bit of catch-up here - apologies!
I really enjoyed reading your thoughts about the intersections of student, teacher, and theories. I also wrote along those lines, in that I haven't found myself using the elements of one singular theory all the time, but rather turning to the variety of theories and understandings of how we learn depending on the situation and the students. You also touched on one really important component - knowledge. I agree that designers and educators need to have a strong understanding of the array of learning theories in order to be able to shift between and among theories to support students. This is an area of professional growth that many teache…
Hey Rebecca,
I also enjoyed the article by Reeves and Reeves as they elucidated the plethora of learning philosophies and more importantly, how they have impacted instructional design. I feel that my philosophies are in between constructivist and socio-constructivists theories of learning. Do you have any preferences? Also I totally agree that there is no perfect theory that covers all learning but rather, it depends on where the learner is on the continuum of knowledge transfer and choose from there. I feel that I used to cling to these theories very seriously but now I am a lot more flexible in terms of choosing different theories that I may not have always agreed on, to create meaningful instruction.
Keep up…
Rebecca,
I also really enjoyed reading the article by Ertmer and Newby. It was great to see them break down the learning theories and discuss their application within instructional design. I can easily see a designer losing sight of the learners if they are removed from the learners. There may not be as high of a level of care when creating instruction as if the designer was close to the learners. Maybe not, but I can easily see some companies losing sight of the learners when producing instruction.
I am curious to see where technology takes us with learning in the future. Technology is advancing so quickly that it is difficult to fathom what things will look like in ten-20…