Prompt, Week 2: Write a description of your personal theory of learning and connect it to one of the theories listed in the reading for Activity 2.

Is it fair to say I am a hodge-podge, accepting and rejecting willy-nilly parts of all the different learning theories as they serve my current mood and needs? I learned some time ago not to let cognitive dissonance distress me too much; otherwise I would probably be a basket case by now….

But let me make my case.

Objective Model of Learning.
I like it. While I don’t think Skinner should have experimented on his daughter to the extent he did, behaviorism is the way to go in many cases. I worked for quite awhile at a wilderness camp for emotionally disturbed and delinquent teenage girls. The girls lived at the wilderness camp all but 4 days of every month, and their stay in the program was about a year and a half. While there were many components to our work with the girls, the essential therapy strategy was based on William Glasser’s Reality Therapy theories. When applied consistently on a daily basis, it seemed to work to consistently bring the discussion back to “What was your behavior?”, “What was the result?”, and “Is that really working for you? Is it getting you where you want to be?” I know that behaviorism or objectivism isn’t the answer to every educational setting, but I think that it does have advantages in certain situations:

Every teacher must manage her classroom and the behaviors of the students in it. Often, Skinners ideas are very workable for this basic element of classroom success. In addition, there are some parts of classroom instruction, I think, that work best when given to the students. Lecture-style teaching has a bad reputation, but some of education is giving students some basic information that will provide a foundation for their work and learning. For example, I am teaching a robotics class. I give the students the information on how to write a basic program, how to access and direct the motors, how to connect the robot to the computer to download the program. I think lecture or demonstration style teaching is effective for this part of teaching.

Constructivist Model of Learning.
I like it. I do believe that we each construct knowledge. A presentation by a teacher is going to be received by students in different ways, based on their knowledge, experiences, and how they perceive the world. If we do not acknowledge that fact in our teaching, we are not effectively reaching all our students. Constructivism makes us consider how people learn- different stages of learning. I am a great believer in using manipulative materials for learning. I think they help build a foundation for more abstract knowledge and learning. Back to personal experience: I was terrible at algebra in high school. My engineer dad sat down with me almost every night trying to help me learn it. But his knowledge of algebra, and his teaching style was pretty much identical to my classroom teacher. I know that he and I both experienced frustration with my inability to understand an learn it. One of the primary factors in choosing a college major was that it could not require me to take any more math than necessary. I ended up as an English major. I had to take 12 hours of math and science, with only one of them required to be math. Guess what science I took? Geology, because it seemed non-mathy. I have, more or less, overcome my math learning disability, and now have a theory of how it occurred. I was good at math up through 8th grade. Most of it required simple computation, which I could do. When math became more abstract- algebra- I couldn’t step up because my foundation was a basis. I had simply memorized and applied the rules without really understanding them. Exponents are a good example. I am clear on the idea the three squared means you multiply three times three. The answer is nine. But I was an adult before I realized that calculating the area of an actual square was a model for three squared. How could I not realize that there was a reason we called it the square of a number? I don’t know. I just knew that squares were some of the easiest to memorize on the multiplication tables!

This experience tells me that if I had had more experiences with math through an exploration of objects in the real world, I might have been more prepared for algebra. I needed a different teaching methodology in the lower grades in order to be successful at later, more abstract stages.

Enough on that topic. Let’s move on…

Cooperative Model of Learning.
I like it. Sort of. I don’t really like it, and in most learning situations would prefer to learn on my own and work on my own. But, I understand the importance of students learning to work with others. Most of us cannot be successful in the world without learning effective teamwork and communication. I think cooperative learning is a good approach for some students. It helps them to learn from and to work with others. But even if cooperative learning is not the most effective methodology for the construction of knowledge, there are essential skills which are learned through working with others. Students learn to effectively communicate their ideas, they learn planning and organizational skills, they learn to be responsible to the others in their group. And, since they are responsible to their peers, they have a somewhat more authentic audience for whom they are producing their product. Last, I do believe that sharing and discussing acquired knowledge improves the learning. Communicating knowledge refines your understanding. Listening to others’ points of view extends and enriches understanding. And the social interactions around a learning topic seem to aid not only in retention of knowledge, but in the ability to apply it. We all know that one of the secrets of teaching is that we develop a better understanding of the material we teach. The process of teaching, explaining, elaborating lead to a deeper understanding.

Cognitive Information Processing Model of Learning.
I like it. Really, how can you argue with this? It is clear to any teacher that not all students learn the same way. Some learn better visually. Some are auditory learners. Some tactile-kinesthetic. Some are artistic, creative. Some right-brained, logical, orderly. Some want the big picture first. Some build knowledge through the details or outline. Some like light. Some like dark. Some need a comfy environment. Some like a more formal setting. Some this. Some that. In our classrooms, we may not be able to perfectly meet the learning styles and needs of all students, but we can build variety into our lessons. We can offer different ways of entering instruction and different activities. We can build in flexibility to better meet the needs of more students.

Cognitive information processing is not just about learning styles. This model also involves an understanding of how learners process information. It considers input into cognitive processing channels; how much information can be held in short term memory to be applied to a task, and how information moves from short term to long term memory. Naturally these are important issues to consider when designing effective instruction.

Sociocultural Model of Learning.
Hmmmm. I must confess I don’t like it. I don’t think everything is relative. I think there are judgments you can make about good and bad. I think there are values that are important to convey to students. Do I think that I am always right or that my values are the best ones- that there are no valuable insights that can be offered by others? No. Of course not. But I also think these two things:

1. Anyone who thinks you can teach, convey knowledge and information absolutely devoid of value judgments is probably wrong. In the same way that we recognize that learners construct knowledge based on their own experiences, we also must accept that we do the same. Everything we learn, think, and do is colored by our background, education, and experiences. We cannot divorce ourselves from that fact. Even the act of making the case for instruction devoid of interpretation, or saying that this learning model is better, is an act of judgment. I think we honor our students more by acknowledging that we make judgments, but trying to examine and discuss them, and trying to welcome other points of view.

2. I think that honoring the experiences and perceptions of minority students is covered in the theories of constructivists: the idea that learners construct their own knowledge. That does not imply that we are all the same. That honors the idea the different people perceive things differently.

Last, on this issue, I think the sociocultural model rejects the idea of any objective reality. While reality can be colored by our perceptions, I think it would be very difficult to teach, even to operate, in a world where we deny the existence of objective reality. Further, if we believe everything is subjective, how do we work to have dialogue, to construct a reality in which we can all participate- living and working together? Surely it is necessary to have at least some basic elements that we all can agree on.

The end (aren’t you glad? I am!)
In conclusion, I seem to subscribe to the Blended Model of Learning. I think each model (except sociocultural) have ideas that can contribute to improved teaching and learning. I think if I were to observe a master teacher, I would be able to find elements from each of these models present in their instruction. I think the instruction might start with a global overview and a good essential question. There might follow some instruction, the conveying of basic information. Next I might see a variety of activities, allowing the learners to interact with the ideas in various forms. It would most likely include some opportunities for students to work together and discuss ideas. While there might be a test at the end, there would also be some authentic performance or product, through which students demonstrate their ability to apply the learning in creative ways.