Theories and Models of Learning and Instruction

 

     As soon as I looked at the instruction for the week I knew I was going to learn some new things. First off look up the word epistemology and find out that it has been here since the Greek and Roman times. Even in my long-term memory never can I recall hearing of seeing the word. To keep it simple for me the definition I will use is this; the study or a theory of the nature and grounds of knowledge especially with its limits and validity. Some important issues are; is knowledge possible, can knowledge be present at birth, or is it acquired through experience.

Reference: Merriam-Webster online dictionary:

 

    Basically epistemology is a philosophy whereby the focus is on the mind and how it functions in the pursuit of knowledge.  Instructional methods or theories are the methods which make use of the learners behavior from external conditioning. External conditioning can take in a large amount of information; such as hearing, listening, feeling, making use of the five senses. Any information that comes from outside ones own mind is considered external as far as I can understand. My understanding of the instructional method is someone actually teaching someone else something. for a better analysis of this we can use Gagne's Theory of  Instruction (p39) as he proposes an integrated and comprehensive theory of instruction that is based on two foundations: cognitive information processing theory and Gagne's own observations of effective teachers in the classroom.

 

Three components of Gagne's theory are:

• a taxonomy of learning outcomes that defined the types of capabilities humans can learn:
• internal and external learning conditions associated with the acquisition of each category of learning outcome; and
• nine elements of instruction that each facilitates a specific cognitive process during learning.

    Contradiction is the key here between the "positivist" the "relativist" and the "contextualist." Each have their own place and methods and can interact with the other. My method is "hands-on" and has been since I was a child. So I think I learn best by way of the contextualist method. That may be one reason I spent more than four decades as an auto technician. I do know that when I had the opportunity to teach classes the students learned as well if they were doing something with their hands. So, maybe I teach better that way, although I am sure the ability to learn from the other methods is fruitful as well.

    One teacher I recall, and still get upset, who must have been an extreme relativist. Here is what she done wrong. At the end of the first six weeks she had the nerve to write on my report card "student needs more homework" well that just about destroyed my self esteem because I studied daily and was doing well. To say the least we never got along after that, never spoke and truly could not stand each other. I passed the class and went to another teacher as soon as the semester was complete. I never knew what the reason was until today as I was studying this lesson. I wonder if she knew or knows what a blunder she made. I bet I never do anything like that. Yes we had a real conflict.

 

    How do the problem solving methods differ from the behaviorist and constructivist? For the behaviorist methods I turn to B. F. Skinner, his belief is that learning can be understood, explained, and predicted entirely on the basis of observable events, namely, the behavior of the learner along with the environment that signal the appropriateness of a given behavior. Explaining the constructivism is a little more complex and complicated, but I'll give it a shot. Learning in this method is mostly learning from the outside in. An example would be like this, the learner receives information from the environment, transforms it in various ways, and acquires knowledge that is subsequently stored in memory.

   

    Where does motivation come in? Some can be self motivated to learn and do, others sometimes have to be motivated  With the behaviorist method these students may feel less motivated if the do not receive sufficient feed back, or perhaps verbal rewards of some sort. The constructivist mostly use  a method to have the students direct their own learning and go after their own knowledge. Finally; each method has its own merits, values, and uses This leaves me with the question. Will I be able to recognize and use the correct method with each individual? What if I do it wrong? We are all human, so it is okay to make a mistake as long as it is recognized and taken care of.

Thanks to all of you from Stanley Smith