The principles we have explored in Learning Theories and Instruction will provide an important foundation in my work and as I continue my study of instructional design. I fell into the field of instructional design somewhat by accident. My background is in nursing and several years ago I began working as a clinical educator, training physicians in the use of electronic medical records. Within my work, I provide classroom training, develop curricula and materials, and design eLearning modules. I have not, until now, had any formal education in the field. Most of what I have learned within my work has been through observation and trial and error. This class has allowed me to achieve a broader understanding of how people learn, the different ways instruction can be applied, and the role motivation plays in learning. I am already applying the knowledge I have gained in this class to the work I do everyday.
Prior to this course, I did have some understanding of brain function, information processing, and behaviorism, but mostly in relation to human development rather than learning. Within my work and through my own exploration I had studied some principles of adult learning and motivation. The ideas behind cognitive learning, constructivism, social learning, and connectivism were completely new to me. I was not surprised that there were many different learning theories, but did find it interesting that some theories seem to be polar opposite (i.e. behaviorism and constructivism) while some seem to overlap in many areas (i.e. constructivism and social learning). I was surprised by the way many in the instructional design community seem to identify only with one theory and dismiss the others. I personally found value in all of them and think principles of each have a place in educational technology.
Throughout this course, I have become more aware of my own learning process, specifically how it has changed over time, and how I apply different methods depending on the task at hand. When we began, I considered myself a kinesthetic learner, because I felt I learned best by doing. As the course went on, I realized that this was more of a preference than a learning style. Perhaps because I enjoy doing or exploring to learn I am more motivated to do so. That does not mean, however, that I cannot learn as well through other methods. For instance, I really enjoyed creating a mind map in week 5. I liked “playing around with” with the Text2Mindmap application; the process helped me to understand my learning connections. Before creating the mind map though, I was able to understand the principles of connectivism because I had read about them. While not as enjoyable for me, I am able to learn just as well by reading as I am by doing. Recognizing this about my own learning process will be applicable as I design instruction for others. Although I must account for learners’ preferences, and certainly take advantage of what motivates them, I realize that people are capable of learning in a variety of ways. Using a blend of methods may be best for appealing to a large audience.
Through this course, I have come to understand that there is no one-size-fits-all methodology to designing effective instruction. Learners are diverse and therefore the methods I employ must be diverse. Going forward as an instructional designer, I will draw upon the theoretical principles learned in this course to develop quality educational programs that are relevant to learners’ needs.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Fitting the Pieces Together
In week one of class, I identified myself as a kinesthetic or tactile learner because I felt I learned best by doing. My view on this has changed somewhat over the past several weeks. Primarily, I consider the idea of being a kinesthetic learner more of a preference than a style that I am predisposed to. It is not that I am unable to learn visually or auditorily, but that I prefer to touch, explore, and immerse myself as a way to learn. I have also been forced to consider that the concept of learning styles may be based on research that is questionable.
In Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence (2008) the authors argue that although learning styles are popular; there is a lack of credible evidence for their use in instructional settings.
Additionally,
My preference for learning by doing may be better explained by theories other than those concerning learning styles. Gardner's Multiple Intelligences Theory, for example, concludes that all humans possess eight distinct intelligences and that none of us possess the same profile of intelligences (Gardner, 2003). Perhaps I prefer to learn by touching and exploring because I possess more bodily-kinesthetic intelligence than spatial or linguistic intelligence. Or, it is possible that Adult Learning Theory best explains my preference because it emphasizes experiential and self-directed learning, and recognizes that experience provides the basis for learning (Conlan, Grabowski, & Smith, 2003). The take-away is that there are concepts within all of the theories we have discussed that may better explain our personal learning preferences than simply assuming that we are each rooted with a specific learning style from birth.
Technology is essential to my learning and helps me to learn according to my preference. As I discussed in my previous blog post on Connectivism, some of my learning connections are personal, but most are within the digital realm. For me, learning by doing includes exploration. Someone may give me the answer to a problem, but I am more likely to remember it if I explore it on my own. Much of my exploration occurs on the Internet through websites, articles, or connections with others on blogs or in forums. I often find that through Internet searches, I get the answers I am looking for and gain additional knowledge in the process.
Thanks,
Brandey
References:
Conlan, J., Grabowski, S., & Smith, K. (2003). Adult learning. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Adult_Learning
Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9 (3), 103-119. Retrieved October 11, 2010 from http://psychologicalscience.org/journals/pspi/PSPI_9_3.pdf
In Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence (2008) the authors argue that although learning styles are popular; there is a lack of credible evidence for their use in instructional settings.
Our review of the literature disclosed ample evidence that children and adults will, if asked, express preferences about how they prefer information to be presented to them. There is also plentiful evidence arguing that people differ in the degree to which they have some fairly specific aptitudes for different kinds of thinking and for processing different types of information.
Additionally,
Although the literature on learning styles is enormous, very few studies have even used an experimental methodology capable of testing the validity of learning styles applied to education. Moreover, of those that did use an appropriate method, several found results that flatly contradict the popular meshing hypothesis. We conclude therefore, that at present, there is no adequate evidence base to justify incorporating learning styles assessments into general educational practice (Pashler, McDaniel, Rohrer, & Bjork, 2008, p. 105).
My preference for learning by doing may be better explained by theories other than those concerning learning styles. Gardner's Multiple Intelligences Theory, for example, concludes that all humans possess eight distinct intelligences and that none of us possess the same profile of intelligences (Gardner, 2003). Perhaps I prefer to learn by touching and exploring because I possess more bodily-kinesthetic intelligence than spatial or linguistic intelligence. Or, it is possible that Adult Learning Theory best explains my preference because it emphasizes experiential and self-directed learning, and recognizes that experience provides the basis for learning (Conlan, Grabowski, & Smith, 2003). The take-away is that there are concepts within all of the theories we have discussed that may better explain our personal learning preferences than simply assuming that we are each rooted with a specific learning style from birth.
Technology is essential to my learning and helps me to learn according to my preference. As I discussed in my previous blog post on Connectivism, some of my learning connections are personal, but most are within the digital realm. For me, learning by doing includes exploration. Someone may give me the answer to a problem, but I am more likely to remember it if I explore it on my own. Much of my exploration occurs on the Internet through websites, articles, or connections with others on blogs or in forums. I often find that through Internet searches, I get the answers I am looking for and gain additional knowledge in the process.
Thanks,
Brandey
References:
Conlan, J., Grabowski, S., & Smith, K. (2003). Adult learning. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Adult_Learning
Gardner, H. (2003, April 21). Multiple intelligences after 20 years. Paper presented to the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL. Retrieved from http://www.pz.harvard.edu/PIs/HG_MI_after_20_years.pdf
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Connectivisim
In Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age (2004), George Siemens identifies the following important principles of connectivism:
My Connections:
Click here to view a larger version of My Connections.
In the mind map above, I have identified my most significant learning connections. Although the basis of connectivism lies within the digital realm, I have established some very important non-digital learning connections. These personal connections include my friends and family members, and contacts I have made in my career. I look to others who have more life experience, and career experience within my field as important resources to learn from.
Digitally speaking, the Internet, obviously, is the doorway to numerous learning connections. It provides the ability to learn through browser searches such as Google and Google Scholar, and connect to others I may learn from through social networking. My RSS reader, although not necessary for establishing connection, allows me to zero in on content important to my learning such as news and blogs.
The connections I have established through Walden University are central to my learning in the field of instructional design. The digital format allows me to connect and learn from course resources, library resources, and experiences and resources shared by my classmates.
Digital technology provides so many ways to connect that many of my connections have begun to overlap. For example, I use my RSS reader to keep track of Instructional Design blogs including those written by my fellow students. Within these blogs, my classmates share resources and their experiences, just as they do within the course discussion threads. I now have two ways to connect to classmates who are a valuable part of my learning.
I am not certain that my personal learning network has increased my ability to learn, but it definitely has provided more opportunity for me to learn. As a child, when I would ask my parents a question, they would tell me to look up the answer in the dictionary or encyclopedia. Today, I search for answers to my questions on the Internet; instead of receiving one explanation, I instantly receive hundreds. My personal learning network supports the tenets of connectivism because my connections, made possible by the advance of digital technology, have increased my capacity to learn.
Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Retrieved October 10, 2010 from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm .
- Learning and knowledge rests in diversity of opinions.
- Learning is a process of connecting specialized nodes or information sources.
- Learning may reside in non-human appliances.
- Capacity to know more is more critical than what is currently known
- Nurturing and maintaining connections is needed to facilitate continual learning.
- Ability to see connections between fields, ideas, and concepts is a core skill.
- Currency (accurate, up-to-date knowledge) is the intent of all connectivist learning activities.
- Decision-making is itself a learning process. Choosing what to learn and the meaning of incoming information is seen through the lens of a shifting reality. While there is a right answer now, it may be wrong tomorrow due to alterations in the information climate affecting the decision.
My Connections:
Click here to view a larger version of My Connections.
Digitally speaking, the Internet, obviously, is the doorway to numerous learning connections. It provides the ability to learn through browser searches such as Google and Google Scholar, and connect to others I may learn from through social networking. My RSS reader, although not necessary for establishing connection, allows me to zero in on content important to my learning such as news and blogs.
The connections I have established through Walden University are central to my learning in the field of instructional design. The digital format allows me to connect and learn from course resources, library resources, and experiences and resources shared by my classmates.
Digital technology provides so many ways to connect that many of my connections have begun to overlap. For example, I use my RSS reader to keep track of Instructional Design blogs including those written by my fellow students. Within these blogs, my classmates share resources and their experiences, just as they do within the course discussion threads. I now have two ways to connect to classmates who are a valuable part of my learning.
I am not certain that my personal learning network has increased my ability to learn, but it definitely has provided more opportunity for me to learn. As a child, when I would ask my parents a question, they would tell me to look up the answer in the dictionary or encyclopedia. Today, I search for answers to my questions on the Internet; instead of receiving one explanation, I instantly receive hundreds. My personal learning network supports the tenets of connectivism because my connections, made possible by the advance of digital technology, have increased my capacity to learn.
Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Retrieved October 10, 2010 from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)