My WM (working memory) has been working overtime lately, and occasionally experienced periods of serious cognitive overload! The experience however has been well worth it considering all the knowledge I have gained thus far on learning theory, instruction and technology. Prior to this course, I considered myself a visual/kinesthetic learner. After the course introduction, I applied the constructivist view to my learning. However, I’ve come to the understanding that learning style and the constructivist view represent only a small fraction of how learning occurs. I’ve also come to realize that each theory contains principles influencing the way I learn.
Behaviorism uses reinforcement, feedback, and task analysis to increase desired behavior (Standridge, 2001). Walden’s Gradebook lets me know what I’m doing well and what I can improve on in the future. Task Analysis uses incremental goals and has been extremely instrumental in keeping me motivated (Ormrod, n.d.). Elaboration is a strategy used in cognitive theory and relies on the learner taking new information and adding to it (Ormrod, n.d.). Weekly discussions facilitate elaboration allowing me to build on my prior knowledge, ask questions, and draw upon my experiences-which also has application to Knowles’ theory on adult learning. I’m able to recall information much easier from the discussions I participated in versus the discussions I missed. Lesson learned! Organization, another cognitive strategy, was employed by “The Mind Map” and “Matrix” assignments. Both influenced the way I understood and made sense of the big ideas.
In constructivism, “multiple interpretations of reality exist in any given instructional setting” (Jenkins, 2006). The meaning I have constructed from this class has altered my existing “reality” of the classroom. I’m excited to incorporate new practices, and technology. Most importantly, I look forward to sharing this new knowledge with my colleagues whether it is through Elluminate, email, blogs, or weekly meetings-social learning, and connectivism! “It seems to me that each _ism is offering something useful without any of them being complete or stand alone in their own right” (Kerr, 2007). Although I’d like to say I have a learning theory preference, I agree with Kerr in that each theory has useful applications. I believe context plays a major role in determining what theory to apply. What I have noticed about this course as a whole is that it reflects aspects of each theory. Kerr (2007) states that “the essence of good educational design may be in taking a little bit from each school of thought.”
Technology affects how I interact with information. Instead of going to a classroom, I can login to my online class from my phone, laptop or even the TV. Prior to this class, information from the internet was primarily accessed through Google, and YouTube. I’ve accumulated other tools for learning such as Webquest, Twitter, Google Reader, Glogster, Text2mindmap, Symboloo, Delicious and more. More importantly, I have found a way to share and hear ideas from others through blogging. I’m anticipating the changes that my personal learning network undergoes in coming years.
Standridge, M. (2001). Behaviorism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Behaviorism
Ormrod, J. (nd.). “Learning Styles and Strategies” video Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com December 20, 2010.
Jenkins, J. (2006). Constructivism. In Encyclopedia of educational leadership and administration. SAGE Publications. Retrieved from: http://www.sage-ereference.com/edleadership/Article_n121.html December 20, 2010.
Kerr, B (2007). _isms as filter, not blinker . Retrieved from http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html December 20, 2010.
