Cognitivism as a Learning Theory: isms-as-filter-not-blinker

Beall-Davis_S

EDUC-8845_WK3-4_Mod2

As I think about learning theories and the analogy of where each play a role in the learning arena, Bill Kerr (2007) and Karl Kapps (2006) blog discussions really sparked some interesting points in terms of learning theories (e.g., ism’s). Behaviourism focuses on conditioning – classical conditioning or operant responses. Depending on the environment or scenario, behavior is modified. It’s an automatic type of learning in which a stimulus evokes a response that was originally evoked by another stimulus. There is also a reward system or some form of penalty associated with the stimulus. So what if the selected stimulus doesn’t work or changes the behavior? What next?

Weight loss programs are great examples of behaviorism, but what do I know? I’m not only a "Jenny Craig" dropout, but "Weight Watchers" too! There were lots of reinforcements along with the perceived notion that at the end of the program I would lose pounds or never again wear a “little” black dress. Should there have been other elements in the program that focused more on what would make me a success? Perhaps one which focused on cognitivism, connectivism or constructivism?

When referencing cognitivism, the argument is that the mind itself should be opened and understood (e.g., black box). The learner is viewed as an information processor, similar to the central processing unit (CPU) of a computer, yet vulnerable to human error (e.g., garbage in garbage out). Unlike behaviorism, cognitivism advocates that there is an intervening variable between environment and behavior. Could there indeed be an element of this theory that could have been applied in conjunction with behaviorism that could have possibly led to my quest to lose weight? In fact, many of Jean Piaget’s stages of cognitive development (e.g., sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete operation and formal operational) proved to have flaws and were challenged. One example was his proclaiming “the sequence of stages is culturally invariant, with formal operations inevitably reached”. It was later discovered that not all cultures showed evidence of formal operations (Driscoll, M., 2005). Would this approach better serve the learning community if it were integrated with other approaches when needed? Is it justifiable to declared one as being superior to the other? The “cream of the crop” ? Perhaps “one size fits all” ?

Constructivism supports the views that people actively construct or create their own subjective representations of objective reality. New information is linked to prior knowledge, thus mental representations are subjective. In my opinion, this too could have been incorporated in my quest for weight loss. Although connectivism was not addressed, at this point it doesn’t seem necessary to continue on. I guess what I’m trying to say is that all of the theories have pros and cons, therefore each must be applied where necessary rather as standalone's or in conjunction!

References

Driscoll, M. (2005). Psychology of Learning for Instruction. Pearson Education, Inc

Kapp, K. (2006). Design: Behaviorism Has Its Place. Retrieved on September 19^th, 2010 from http://karlkapp.blogspot.com/2006/12/design-behaviorism-has-its-place.html

Kerr, B. (2007). Isms as a filter, not a blinker. Retrieved on September 19^th, 2010 from http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html

Behavioral and Cognitive Theories:

Beall-Davis_S

EDUC-8845_WK3 (Discussion): Cognitive and Behaviorist Learning:

Question: As you reflect on the differences between cognitive and behaviorist learning theories, which theory do you consider as a more realistic view of how people learn?

Response: As advances in technology create new opportunities for education, it is important to use a range of theoretical perspectives to optimize the use of new technology in teaching and learning. Behaviorism and cognitive theories are the two dominant theoretical positions in the field of learning with interactive courseware (Jonassen, 1991; Atkins, 1993; Hannafin, Hannafin, Hooper, Rieber, & Kini, 1996). Early computer-based materials are seen to be influenced by behaviorist concepts while discovery learning materials are felt to be founded on later cognitive models of information processing and constructivism. Both behavioral and cognitive views have pros and cons, yet somehow complement one another. Most commonly, designers adopt mixed approaches to design because it offers flexibility (Atkins, 1993). Cognitive and behavioral theories both focus on “What is learned” when learning takes place. The Behaviorists focus on “Specifications”, whereas those who support cognition theories focus more on “Mental Representations”.

Although instructional systems technology began rejecting many behaviorist assumptions in the 1980's in favor of the cognitivist view (Jonassen, 1991), the theory is the basis for innovations such as computer assisted instruction, mastery learning, minimal competency testing, educational accountability, situated cognition, and even social constructivism. Many designers assume that an instructional strategy that has had a certain effect in the past will do so again (Burton, Moore, & Magliano, 1996). Learners learn by doing, experiencing, and engaging in trial and error. A second assumption of behaviorism is that learning is a change in behavior due to stimulus or response events (e.g., experience). When my youngest son received less than acceptable grades in elementary school, I offered to pay him $10.00 for very “A” he received. His approach in terms of accomplishment changed (e.g., behavior) from “C” grades to “A” and “B” grades. Did he learn or did he simply comply with the obvious rewards?

In behaviorism, learning involves the formation of associations between stimuli in the environment. These stimuli may either precede or follow the action (e.g., antecedents vs. consequences). Behaviorists use habit and drive variables to explain behavior but may omit references to mental states. Cognition theories on the other hand, references learning that takes place in the mind, versus that of behaviorism. It involves the formation of mental representations of the elements of a task and the relationships between those elements. Latent learning is a prime example of the cognitive theory. It is learning that occurs, but you don't really see it until there is some reinforcement or incentive to demonstrate it. For example, for years I watched my mom fry chicken and when I turned 15 she told me it was time for me to go in the kitchen because she had taken on a second job, she was unavailable to help me the first time, I simply had to regurgitate what I’d seen since I was 2 or 3yrs old. I fried the chicken (perhaps not as good as she, but I fried it). The key to successful learning using the cognitive model is the quality of processing that occurs while actively engaging with subject matter (Atkins, 1993). In terms of which theory is better, it depends on what cues are available.

References

Atkins, M.J. (1993). Theories of learning and multimedia applications: An overview. Research Papers in Education, 8(2), 251-271.

Burton, J.K., Moore, D.M., & Magliano, S.G. (1996). Behaviorism and instructional technology. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook for research for educational communications and technology (pp. 46-73). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan. ISBN: 0028646630.

Driscoll, M., (2005). Psychology of Learning For Instruction. Pearson Education, Inc.

Green, C., ( 2010). Classics in the History of Psychology. York University, Toronto, Ontario. Retrieved on September 19th, 2010 from http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Skinner/Theories/

Hannafin, M., Hannafin, K., Hooper, S., Rieber, L., & Kini, A. (1996). Research and research with emerging technologies. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook for research for educational communications and technology (pp. 378-402). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

Jonassen, D.H. (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3), 5-14.

Note: Also posted in Walden discussion room.

EDUC-8845_WK2

EDUC-8845_MOD1_WK2:
Module 1 Blog Topics (Select One):

1). What are your beliefs about how people learn best? What is the purpose of learning theory in educational technology?

2). What are the critical elements of a learning theory? Did Driscoll and Siemens miss any key questions or criteria? Provide a thoughtful critique of their discussion of learning theory.

3).Critique Siemens’s “metaphors of educators.” Which of these metaphors best describes the role you believe an instructor should take in a digital classroom or workplace? Is there a better metaphor to reflect your view of the role of instructors?
For the first assignment due WK2, I have chosen to post my opinion for question #3. Please review my response below:

Learning and Instruction in a Digital World

“Learning and Knowing in Networks” written by Siemens in 2008 presents metaphors of the evolving roles of teachers. He provides a roadmap which suggests the need to reconfigure, revamp and reconstruct our thoughts in terms of the roles that teacher will play as they align themselves with the digital age.

Ironically, most teachers’ live and breathe metaphors. It’s as natural as rain! As I think back to high school years, recollections of consistently being told that “Learning was a journey” ring through my head. It didn’t mean much at the time, but as I put it into perspective (i.e., retrospect) my teacher’s navigated me through varying paths towards knowledge. At times they allowed me to venture off into uncharted territories, things that were beyond the scope of the lectures, topics that interested me, followed by querying my findings and clarifying my understanding. They preached of fulfillments when they knew a student benefitted from their efforts. Although sometimes burdensome, they each played a significant role in the process of my getting a formalized education.

According to Lakeoff and Johnson (1980), the essence of a metaphor focuses on understanding and experiencing one thin g in terms of another. Could and alternative name for the role of the educator be that of a tour guide or agent for knowledge? One who maps out a predefined territory, and insures the student stops and pay attention to important landmarks? With aspiration of someday being recognized as a renowned scholar, my metaphor (e.g., tour guide) seems reasonably fair.
Siemens (2008), discusses four metaphors to describe models of the evolving educator and learner roles based on John Seely Brown’s impression of future educators being more effective in the roles of studio or atelier (2006), Clarence Fisher portraying them as network administrators (n.d.), Curtis Bonks perception of them filling the role of concierge (2007) and his own impression of them evolving as curator’s. All notions prompted by a now technologically enabled era.

Systematically approaching learning, being viewed as the master, yet encouraging creativity and collaboration is representative of the model of studio or atelier. Blogs are very good examples of this particular model. Secondly, the Network Administrator encourages the students to freely construct networks of learning. They are self-directed conceptual learners who are encouraged to reflect on the learning experience in its entirety. Students are better positioned to elevate their competency levels, meet objectives and outcomes based on specific courses. Educators address gaps in the learning network along with learner evaluations. The concierge model insinuates that the role of the educator is simply to provide resources or learning opportunities that the learner may not be aware of (Siemens, 2008).

Although my metaphor in terms of how the future role of the educator could evolve, Siemens himself provides a well-rounded solution where the educator is a curatorial teacher. This role describes the future educator as an expert who allows the freedom of discovery and opportunity, yet structure when needed whilst learners are pursuing disciplines of choice. According to Siemens (2008),” instead of dispensing knowledge, the curator creates spaces in which knowledge can be created, explored, and connected”. This indeed appears to be a better choice to insure that our educators effectively meet the demands mandate by the digital age and its learners!



References
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980) Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago.

Siemens, G. (2008). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers. Paper presented to ITFORUM. Retrieved on September 12th, 2010 from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Paper105/Siemens.pdf

Siemens, G., (2008). New structures and spaces of learning: The systemic impact of connective knowledge, connectivism, and networked learning. University of Manitoba Braga, Portugal. Retrieved on September 15th, 2010 from http://elearnspace.org/Articles/systemic_impact.htm

Walden, J. (2010). Metaphors of Education. Retrieved on September 12th, 2010 from http://jeffwaldenblog.wordpress.com/2010/09/14/metaphors-of-educators/