From Debbie Stripling
We have been asked to read two blog discussions concerning various schools of thought. Specifically we have been discussing cognitivist theory and how it relates to learning. The cognitivist looks deeper into the brain and how it relates to learning than a behaviorist would. The cognitive theory looks at how learner’s process information and how they are themselves related to that process. Their emotions and their environment can play a role in how they learn but more importantly the knowledge they have already gained helps them process new information as they receive it (Driscoll,2005).
Bill Kerr (2007)and Kapp (2007) discussed learning theory and their thoughts on how it to relates to effective learning in blog posts from 2007. Kerr described the learning theories as -------isms. He does not feel any one theory is the “right” one and that each has an important part to play in the effective classroom. In my science classes I mention the idea of a unified theory that could possibly explain how all energy and matter can be explained by one unified formula. This does not exist today but it could in the future and I wonder if the same thing may happen in the future for education. We have gravity, electromagnetic radiation, and strong and weak force of the nucleus which may someday be explained simply by one form of energy. It would seem to me if we could take all the different types of educational theory, constructivism, behaviorism, connectivism, constructionism, and look at them together we might find that they are all actually part of a whole, the schema of learning. Kapp in his discussion felt that each theory had its own important use for different types of learning. I think in the end we will need to stop thinking about them as separate entities and this will come as we begin to understand more about the human brain and how we learn. We make great strides all the time in learning theory and as each new theory is added it brings about a greater understanding of the WHOLE learning process.
Debbie Stripling
I posted comments on the following blogs under the name amoalf:
Kevin Steele
marion Bush
Aimee Cothran
Sandra Johnson
References
Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Kerr, B. (2007, January 1). _isms as filter, not blinker [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html
Kapp, K. (2007, January 2). Out and about: Discussion on educational schools of thought [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.kaplaneduneering.com/kappnotes/index.php/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational/
Great post, I know these different theories have been researched for years but do you buy-in to all these different types of theories and do you think they will make a significant difference in the way you teach? Are most of these theories just plain common sense?
ReplyDelete