Week 2: Section 2-Themes and Models of Learning and 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 epistemologies or underlying beliefs about ways of knowing?

Epistemology had me looking so confused when I first saw the word. I had no idea what it meant, and never heard of it until this unit. I first Googled the word to get an idea of what it meant before reading the chapters. Googles definition says, “the theory of knowledge, especially with regard to its methods, validity, and scope. Epistemology is the investigation of what distinguishes justified belief from opinion.” So, from that definition, in my words, epistemology means to be able to know what is fact and what is opinion. Epistemology deals with knowledge of what we know and how we came to know something. The instructional methods are what and how the teachers believe the students are best taught, based off of the tools and ideas that they have used. The instructional methods also deal with how the lesson, unit, or information is given to the students/learners. Teachers use different instructional methods and tools/materials to reach their students, and all methods may serve a certain purpose, depending on the type of students that a teacher has, because we know all students learn differently. A theory is a thought or idea that has been proven factual through research and experiments and also proves positive results. There are many learning theories that all have been a way of learning and each theory has been researched, used, corrected to come up with the specific idea of learning. These theories include the behavioral learning theory, cognitive information processing theory, schema theory, situated learning, the Gagne’s Theory of Instruction, and the constructivist theory. The models of learning are the methods, guidelines, or outlines that teachers use as a “map” to make sure they cover every learning area.

• 2.   Reflect on whether your stance is primarily positivist, relativist, or contextualist. Then, identify an instance when your perspective or 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 believe my stance would be more positivist, even though I may have a bit of all stances here and there. Positivism is a philosophical theory stating that positive knowledge is based on natural phenomena and their properties and relations. Thus, information derived from sensory experience, interpreted through reason and logic, forms the exclusive source of all authoritative knowledge. In my opinion, having a stance of positivism means that a person believes what they know from experience, observations, and it is more than just an opinion or one sided. When designing instruction, I tend to try certain guidelines or principles to my instructions so that I can ensure that there is some objective truth to reach the students. I can recall many teachers that I have had who were more of a mixture of relativism and contextualism. I even work with some teachers who are the same way. I never confronted these teachers, but I wish now that I would have. These teachers believe that students should learn the same way and follow the same learning procedure. With my position now, the students that I work with, I have to alter their learning experience in order to help them understand the instruction given from the teacher. I think the teachers may just be stuck in their ways and feel that once before they tried a certain method or idea. When they realized it worked for most students, then they figured it would be alright to keep using the same exact thing. I just think these people don’t like change.

• 3.   Differing epistemic stances lead to differing approaches to learning and instruction, and ultimately to problem-solving. 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?

According to the text, “Skinner’s belief that learning can be understood, explained, and predicted entirely on the basis of observable events, namely, the behavior of the learner along with its environmental antecedents and consequences…the consequences of a behavior determine whether it is repeated and if it is learned” ( (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012). The teachers in a behaviorist approach design instruction that involves immediate feedback. Also these approaches use observations before and after the problem and look for improvement or a different outcome than before. The behaviorist approach objectives are more set up by the teacher and focus more on behavior objectives. In the constructivist approach, the students’ objectives are more high level, complex learning goals. A key point from this approach is that “individuals do not all learn the same things from instruction.” The students are more in control of their own goals in this approach and also reflect on their own learning. Constructivism deals with the real world issues and solving problems that deals with the world, and the learners come to a conclusion on their own. In this approach it is more student-centered because these learning environments can and do differ greatly in the amount and kind of instructional support that is provided for the learner (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012).

In the behaviorist approach, the learner has more feedback to get to a conclusion. Whereas, in the constructivist approach, the learner has little guidance to reach a solution. I think each approach will have an effect on the learner, just depending on who the learner is and how they learn. I think that since the constructivist is more student-centered, it will allow the student to be more open and confident on his/her thoughts and thinking process. With the behaviorist process, the students are looking to solve a problem to reach a certain goal, so their thinking process isn’t as open as in a constructivist approach. However, if the learner’s thinking process is off in the behaviorist approach, the teacher guides their thinking to reach a solution. Both approaches build on the thinking process, though, so they are both effective for the thinking process and solving problems.

References

Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (2012). Defining the Field. In Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (pp. 1-34). Boston: Pearson.