Thursday, September 27, 2012
Cognitivism
Decade after decade we seem to always ask the same question which learning theory more accurately portrays how we as humans learn. Education course after education course always focuses on the major learning theories behaviorist, cognitive, and constructivist to name a few. It never fails that an instructor asks, Which learning theory best represents how we learn? What I have found in teaching in my own classroom and reading about the experiences of others there is no one theory fits all.
Bill Kerr in his blog makes note that these theories "do not stand still. They evolve; they listen to criticism and move on." Making a valid point that these theories are forever changing, to me this means that they can continue to grow as education changes. When these theories were constructed education was much different than today. These same theories can be applied to learning that occurs with the aid of technology that certainly didn't exist when Skinner and Piaget among other elaborated on these theories. Bill Kerr also pointed out that even though it is easy to make criticisms of these theories they are hard to ignore because they all hold some truth. Learning is a process that takes all forms. Karl Kapp makes it clear that we should take the best attributes from the learning theories and put them into practice in our teaching, I couldn't agree more. More importantly he was able to quote Bill Kerr when he said that each theory offers "something useful without any of them being complete or stand alone in their own right." I also couldn't agree more with Kapp that the theory become more applicable depending on the situation in which learning occurs.
I couldn't agree with these two blogs more. We have to be open minded as educators and understand that learning occurs on different levels. No matter how we get to the end result, the most important thing is be able to prove that learning occurs. As I have looked at different learning theories over time and analyzed them for different reasons, I have to say I always believe that all learning theories have useful ideas. We have to admit as educators if the all the theories didn't hold some sort of merit they wouldn't still be argued.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
We have a saying in Antigua "the proof of the pudding is in the eating". How do we prove the validity of each theory? We do so through practicing the methodologies that have evolved out of it. If children learn and are excited about learning then the method is valid. We might later find a better method of teaching a particular concept or process, or find another method that reaches a formerly unreachable child so we extend our toolkit, our armory of methods. I also agree with you that you can find aspects of older theories in newer ones. For example, how do we get the student to retain a concept in memory? Surely one of those methods would be through repetition.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your insights.
Comment from Michael Hiett
ReplyDeleteI agree that we have to open minded. I think that as scholars it is our responsibility to become as in-depth as we can so that we can apply each theory in the right context.
I wanted to add to your discussion regarding the use of repetition to help student retain a concept in memory. My action research project involved an inclusion class in which the teacher was using repetition to help them remember. Aside of various ways she had to expose them to the definition she also had them stand up and think of a movement that they believed portrayed the word. They performed the movements daily. The students could recite the definitions and used the movements to help them remember the definitions. However, this didn't translate to the vocab quizzes. The class quiz grade average was low 60’s and the mode was a failing score. Had the quizzes been something along the lines of matching the word with the right definition they probably would have done well, but the quizzes instead were fill in the blank and although there were context clues and a word bank they could not translate the rote memorization from the repetition. What I see is that memorization and comprehension are not necessarily mutually inclusive. Rote memorization (ABC’s and 123’s) are conducive to the behaviorist approach of repetition but what about comprehension of concepts? I found some research a couple of years ago that concluded struggling readers have a tough time picturing the words because they could not conceptualize them. They see words instead of mental imagery. So after Christmas break that school year I implemented an intervention in which we scrapped the repetition and took a more cognitivist approach. Before introducing a new work I first provided context and visualization by playing for them a short clip (usually from the Big Bang Theory) or a picture. We discussed what they saw. Only after that did I give them the word to describe the concepts we just discussed. The class quiz grade average shot up to 88% and the mode was 100. There were 3-4 outliers where the grade was 0% to 20% which I attribute to the fact that those students were in ISS or skipping during my vocab lessons.
I think repetition is great when comprehension is not necessary. However, currently, I think a cognitive approach is most effective when considering skills higher on Bloom’s Taxonomy.
Dorothea, I love that saying! How true it is to education. It looks like we are all thinking alike. We have to apply these theories as needed to help our students. They then become part of our bag of tricks to help the students learn and gain a clear understanding over what we are trying to teach. The more types of isms we learn about the more we can help our students.
ReplyDeleteYou make some great points. I too have taken plenty of education course that discuss the same points regarding which learning theory is most effective. In all due respect to Skinner, Dewy, and Piaget, I feel there will never be a "one size fits all" when it comes to determining how people learn. The learning process is complex and can't be defined with one theory. We inherit some knowledge while we acquire and develop other knowledge. As teachers, we should continue seek out how we can most effectively teach our students using all resources available and necessary.
ReplyDeleteRenee,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your blog this week. I also agree with you when you stated that we must be open-minded educators and realize that learning occurs at different stages and levels. We must always consider each child according to their individual needs and adapt our lessons and activities to their needs which will aid them in being successful academically. Using the 'isms" according to a child's needs will provide a better academic experience for that child and also aid them in being productive learners.
It seems as though we all agree that no one theory is a perfect fit. My teaching philosophy, as I can imagine is true for many od you, incorporates many different ideas gleaned from multiple learning theories. It just makes sense to use what works and discard what doesn't. This is true for every school year, every class and every student and is constantly evolving to meet the needs of the students.
ReplyDelete