Week 2: Theories & Models of Learning & Instruction

1.) Epistemology(the study of what and how we come to know) is discussed in multiple chapters in this section.











   Distinguish epistemology from instructional methods or theories. What are the differences between theories, methods, or models of learning and epistemology or underlying beliefs about ways of knowing?

    I had a difficult time understanding epistemology. I had no idea what epistemology was and even though I read the chapters in this section, I still needed clarification. I did a little research on the Internet and came to this understanding that epistemology is what we know and how we come to know it. It is a branch of philosophy and we are applying these philosophical principles to instructional methods. As stated in our weekly reflection cues,
    Epistemology can be divided into three stances, positivist, relativist and contextualist: Positivist believe only truth or knowledge is objective truth. Relativists don't believe that objective truth is possible and that all knowledge is subjective to perception or relative to a particular frame of reference. Contextualists believe that truth or knowledge is relative to context rather than individual, subjective understanding.
    In the early 20th century, the behavioral theory developed by Skinner was prominent. In this theory learning happens when either new behavior or changes in behavior are acquired secondary to the students response to stimuli (motivation or correction)
   Cognitive information processing theory developed in the mid. 20th century by George Miller. Learning is a change in knowledge stored in memory. While behavioral theory is external based, cognitive information processing is internally based. The theory is that short term memory can only hold a small amount of meaningful information, and that the brain is like a computer, taking in, processing, storing, and retrieving information.
   In the late 20th century constructivist gained prominence. These theories which include generative learning, discovery learning and situated learning came from cognitive and developmental psychology and anthropology. In this theory learning is achieved primarily by problem solving when students construct new ideas based on their prior knowledge and experiences.

2.) While designers and educators with a positivist stance generally apply behaviorist principles to the design and development of instruction, those with either a contextualist or relativist epistemological framework employ constructivist theories and methods. Reflect on whether your stance is primarily Positivist, Relativist, or Contextualist. Then identify an instance when your perspective stance as a learner conflicted with that of your instructor. Describe the conflict that you experienced and analyze whether opposing epistemic stances may have been at the heart of the conflict.

    I think back to a time when a teacher was pretty much presenting the theory of evolution, as hard fact or objective truth. This goes against my beliefs as a Christian, so I have pondered if perhaps I am a Relativist, that my knowledge is subjective to my particular frame of reference. While, my Christian world view does form my beliefs, I still think there are absolute truths. I have read books about refuting the theory of evolution, that backs their points of view with scientific evidence as well; so, therefore, I probably tend to be a Positivist. I think acquiring knowledge is acquiring power. So objective truth is important to me. As a teacher I find utilizing behavioral principles very effective in teaching my kindergarten students, so this also identifies me as a Positivist.
 
3.) Explain differences in problem-solving when approached from behaviorist and constructivist perspectives. How do the approaches differ in both the nature of the problem to be solved and in facilitating the problem solving process? Finally, what effect might these differences have on learner motivation?

     In the behavioral method, a problem would be solved by stating objectives and breaking it into steps. Hints and consequences could be used to obtain the desired behavior. This is a very concrete approach. As a teacher of the lower elementary grades, I know that the behaviorist approach works very well with young children, because they are very concrete thinkers. They respond better to instant positive and negative reinforcement. I know from personal teaching experiences that I use several different methods for instant positive and negative reinforcement in my teaching style. (example, stickers, candy, proximity)
    In the constructivist method realistic problems are presented to solve. This method works well as a team effort among students.  I think that the constructivist approach works better in the upper grades, who are no longer concrete but abstract thinkers.
While teaching I would also try to make my student independent thinkers that are self-sufficient working the problems out independently. I used a lot of group work and peer tutoring during my lessons last year, to help my students arrive at the desired answers independently.
     I think that perhaps under the constructivist method the student is required to have more self motivation than in the behavioral method, because the motivation is more internal than external as in the behavioral method. In the behavioral method you are constantly on the kids guiding them where you want them to go, offering up rewards along the way.
    At the end of the day you need to examine your teaching style and evaluate what is best for your students, at that point in time. Your students are going to grow and change in their learning and thinking, you may need to throw a lesson plan out right in the middle of teaching, and change it to suit your students needs at that exact moment. As teachers we constantly need to be reflecting on what is effective and what needs to be altered or changed, to better suit our needs as teachers and the needs of our students.


                             Question of the day?
 A dyslexic agnostic stayed awake all night, trying to determine if dog was real?  Do you think he was a Positivist, Relativist, or a Contextualist?