Reflections on Learning Theories

As I walk away from my Learning Theories and Instruction course at Walden University (today being the last day), the thing that I find most surprising isn't the insights each theory provides, but rather the fact that so few academic institutions appear to take the time to consider established learning theories as they develop curriculum. Since 1998, I've spent my entire career in education and I can say with a solid memory that it has been a rare occasion that any theory was considered or consulted when making curriculum-related decisions. Now that I have a stronger understanding of the more prominent learning theories (behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism) as well as some of the emerging learning theories (such as connectivism), it makes the absence of a theoretical foundation within these institutions even more surprising. Furthermore, within education, there seems to be a trend these days that's seeing a focus on educational technology. As someone who supports the idea of integrating technology in the classroom, I prefer to see educational technologies be part of the status quo rather than just a trend. However, without overlaying technology onto a theoretical foundation, technology is often used only for its own sake rather than as a teaching tool to enable outcomes.

 Each individual theory studied in this class provides some insight into the learning process. Some (like constructivism) are more current than others (like behaviorism), but all are valid, relevant, and applicable in the classroom. That said, the thing that I most gladly take from this course isn't just one theory or another. Instead, I leave with the understanding that theories can be intertwined and used almost simultaneously. There's no need to subscribe to just one theory... each can potentially play a significant role in the design and development of instruction. To be more specific and relate all of this to my personal learning process, I refer back to my own quote from the first week of this course: "In the end, I think the combination of cognitive-style teaching with constructivist-style learning would ultimately lead to my best possible learning environment." Seven weeks later, even though I'm much more knowledgeable on all of the mainstream learning theories, this statements still holds true. If I were asked this question again, I would likely reply in a similar fashion.

 To design world class curriculum, development cannot occur in a vacuum. Integrating theory into a development philosophy is important, but that alone is not enough. There's so much more to consider. A vast array of considerations must come together to form a comprehensive, integrated design and development philosophy. Designers have to keep in mind:

1. learning theory
2. learning styles
3. technology integration
4. motivation

 Prior to applying thoery and considering learning styles, we must know who our audience is. Who are our students/trainees? Where are they now? Where do we want to take them? What approach is going to get them there? These types of questions must be answered prior to integrating theory, considering styles, and selecting educational technologies. When constructing lesson plans or an online course, each of these have to be part of the overall design and development philosophy of the institution. This ensures a holistic set of standards that can and should be replicated across courses within a program. Perhaps there will be some variance across programs... that is okay as long as there is a clearly defined, understood, and documented understanding between designers, subject matter experts, course writers, and editors.

 As someone who currently manages a team of instructional designers, one of the practices we've integrated into our work is a course framework design (CFD) document. Completion of this document is the first step in the development of any course. This document is where we establish:

1. instructional topics
2. course outcomes
3. instructional objectives
4. course requirements
5. resources to be used
6. technology to be used

When the course framework design process is complete, development cannot begin until all organizational stakeholders agree to and sign the document. If the course is looked at in project management terms, this document becomes the defining scope document for the project. In terms of improving this document for future developments, I'd like to consider adding some language that addresses learning theory considerations, learning style considerations, as well as student motivation. Perhaps the language that's integrated can be standard language that's used as part of all course framework designs; or maybe it's something that varies between courses or programs. Either way, I think I've become convinced that integrating these concepts into the framework of each course can help us maintain focus on what our priorities should be and, in the process, improve the quality of our products.

Fitting the Pieces Together

In the first week of EDUC 6115 Learning Theories and Instruction, I wrote that I learned best when the instructor is (a) passionate and energetic in his/her delivery of content and (b) relies on more than multiple-choice and true-false exams to assess student learning.  I also wrote that I appreciated that, in the cognitive learning domain, an objective truth is "out there."  I don't believe this to be true for all things, but perhaps for most practical things we learn in life.  If that's the case, and if an instructor understands my current state of thinking and learning, then he/she is more likely to create an effective teaching strategy to help me reach the desired outcome. On top of my appreciation for the cognitive approach, I also like that within the constructivist approach, there is an emphasis on learning (as opposed to just teaching). In the end, I think the combination of cognitive-style teaching with constructivist-style learning would ultimately lead to my best possible learning environment.  Again, everything to this point in this post is a summary of my feelings from the first week in EDUC 6115. 

Six weeks later, the aforementioned feelings I described have not changed.  However, I do see additional layers of other theories that have altered how I view how I learn.  Specifically, and most significantly, I have become a major proponent of George Siemens' theory of connectivism.  Central to the theory of connectivism is the idea of the half-life of knowledge, which has been defined as "the time span from when knowledge is gained until it becomes obsolete."  In a world where the half-life of knowledge continues to decrease, we increasingly need access to networks that provide us with rapidly evolving information we seek and/or need.  As someone who can't imagine being away from the Internet and a Blackberry for more than a few consecutive waking hours, I'm very drawn to this idea, not only because I believe it to be true, but also because it's something that I live on a regular basis... I just never thought about it the way George Siemens has presented it.  In my introductory stages of understanding this theory, I especially appreciated the video titled Networked Student as it effectively showed a fictional example of how the theory can be applied.  

Given how I felt at the beginning of this course and how I feel as we near the end of the course, my ideal instructor would have the following three viewpoints.  He/she would (1) view teaching from a cognitive perspective, (2) view learning from a constructivist perspective, and (3) facilitate network-building and web 2.0 technology from a connectivist perspective.  As much as I enjoy all (or, at least most) educational technologies, I personally get the most out of easily accessible web 2.0 tools such as blogs and wikis and networking sites like Facebook and LinkedIn.  Not only are these tools easy to access, easy to use, and often free, they also give us access to subject matter experts and others that otherwise would be very difficult to communicate and interact with.  For me, integrating these types of technologies make for a very exciting learning environment.  And, perhaps most importantly, it's an environment that can be sustained beyond the start and end dates of any given course. 

Connected Learning Reflections

My network has not only changed what I learn on a daily basis; it has totally revolutionized the process by which I learn as well as who I learn from. It wasn’t all that long ago that I relied on a daily newspaper subscription to inform me of what’s going on in the world around me. However, these days, I no longer bother paying for a newspaper subscription. In this sense, I am definitely not unique. The print newspaper industry has taken a major hit over the last few years with the continued mainstream acceptance of information technology. In a sense, this is unfortunate. Reading online is not the same as reading print. A print newspaper or journal provides more of a realistic chance to gain a deeper knowledge of a given subject. Conversely, modern networks make it easy to become informed on a wider range of topics. This is great in that technology provides us access and connections to on an infinite number of topics whenever we need it. However, the fact that we have access to so much information may cause some of us to skim past the details, which prevents us from becoming deeply informed on any given topic.

The tool I most commonly refer to when seeking new information is Wikipedia. As someone who has spent the last 12 years working in education, I am keenly aware of how controversial Wikipedia has become. To most academicians, Wikipedia is not a legitimate source of information. When it comes to citing sources to support claims, it's hard to argue with the point they are making. For better or worse, it is an encyclopedia built on a daily basis by anyone who wishes to contribute. That being the case, the tool has to be used wisely. If I were writing a paper for a class or even posting to a discussion board, I would never directly cite Wikipedia to support an argument I was making. However, there are ways (both academically and personally) to credibly use Wikipedia. Generally speaking, those are:

• to quickly find foundational information about a topic, person, theory, etc.
• to look for credible articles and web sites to support and build upon that foundational information that are linked directly from the topic's entry

This is especially useful to someone who doesn't have access to a rich online library like students at Walden University do. The benefits of Walden's online library are immense. The writers, publications, and research that I have access to as a result of my being enrolled at Walden surpasses what Wikipedia can provide. However, a couple of years from now, I imagine I'll no longer have access to this library, which will cause my Wikipedia usage to up.

Assuming the sources I have mentioned will never be able to provide all of the answers I'm looking for, there will, by default, be times when I am left with questions. In those situations, the nature of my question will dictate how I go about gaining the knowledge I seek. If it's an academic issue, I'll likely exhaust all of the online resources I have access to before I ask an instructor for guidance. At that point, I wouldn't necessarily expect my instructor to provide "the answer" (if a simple answer exists). Instead, I would expect them to guide me in the right direction to find the answer I am looking for. For matters of a more personal nature (namely sports and politics), there are a few key sites I access on a regular basis as well as a few key blogs that I access. Blogs generally provide a good opportunity to interact with others who have interests in similar topics, whether it be the blog author or knowledgeable visitors of the blog. There have been a few times where I've posted questions to blogs and received meaningful feedback from individuals I have never seen or met.

My personal learning network generally supports the central tenets of connectivism. The very first thing I do after waking up on a daily basis is sit down at my computer and log on to the core web sites that I access and read on a regular basis. This includes blogs, social networks, e-mail, and IM tools. Each of these provide me with a chance to acquire information from others, share information with others, ask questions, answer questions, let people know how I'm doing, etc. Again, this is generally the first thing I do every single day of the week. In that sense, I think it's pretty clear how the connectivist world has had an impact on me. All of these tools/sites that I now access on a daily basis were not available even as little as a few years ago. To that end, it's pretty amazing how technology has totally changed the way people like me interact with the world around us.

Connectivism: Mind Map of Personal & Professional Networks

What follows is the mind map I created using the free web-based software at bubbl.us: