How Do We Learn? Theories and Methods

Reflection 1:

Epistemology, unlike methods, models and theories, is concerned with the “what” of learning. Its goal is to discover what in fact we know and how we came about acquiring the particular area of knowledge in observation.  The primary concerns of theories are how we derive at the outcomes from a psychological approach. A theory takes into consideration how the brain (i.e. mind) processes newly discovered knowledge.  Methods are simply best practices for obtaining and reaching goals once information has been established.  Methods simply provide the system or process.  Finally, models of learning are primarily used for instructional purposes in order to access and formulate knowledge. It combines each of these practices in order to assess how individuals and or groups learn. What’s interesting is the simple fact that traditional ways of learning in 2012 is now categorized into a theory, a model or a method.  The “what” of learning is somewhat overlooked as to the “how” of learning.  The study of something appears to not be as important as to how it is studied. 

Reflection 2:

My disclaimer:  Let me be the first to say this was very confusing to me due to the addition of "ist" at the end of several of the words. I had to really think about what I wanted to say. After reading the chapters, I went to school to see if there was a direct connection to what I interpreted.  I was amazed at the hands-on examples I received just by using some of my lunch break to observe the different theories in action within classrooms. In some cases it was a comedy of errors and in others an episode of Gladiators!

In order to approach the subject, it’s important to understand the basis for how they are interpreted.  Contextualist are primarily concerned with the thinking patterns and behaviors of learners as information is given and or acquired.  In this theory, the road at which a learner arrives on, may or may not have been his or her initial starting point.  They believe it takes a myriad of contributors to assist and influence the learner in their learning. An example of this would be many different academic levels placed within a particular classroom.  Although students may be initially placed based on the same levels, once learning starts it becomes obvious the criteria at one point could have been somewhat more or less challenging to some within the classroom. The teacher has the opportunity to address this either in assignments that require individual responses to assess their prior knowledge thereby placing them. Contextualists differ from relativist in that, relativist place a high value on one’s physical experiences as influencers of learning and thinking. An example of this would be understanding the difference between hot and cold.  Once this is learned, it dictates how individuals approach each one. Heat demands a respect because of the sense of pain and discomfort associated with it.  While cold solicits a more subtle and adaptable response. Positivists remain chained to the idea that human intuition and perception is the primary source for learning. They believe that there is an innate sense that guides and instructs all learners.  Contextualists differ from these in that it approaches learning as a process that requires the individual to take accountability for his or her learning as information and tools are provided to them.  Unlike the others it is not a futuristic or projectile learning. It is learning that is first processed in the mind and the made applicable to whatever area of study one is involved in at that moment.  Social constructivism deals with learning from the aspect of society and its norms or modes for learning. It differs from behaviorist or radical constructivist approach to learning in that it accepts the fact that learners will be influenced in their learning, however, at the end of the day the individual must be viewed as simply that; an individual.  Regardless of what the group or society is doing, although a part of the group, individuals will process and apply learned knowledge differently and at different stages and in some cases at different places in their lives. Behaviorists, in the case of group learning, always measure the behavior of the group as opposed to the individual. And finally, the radicals simply want to develop a new approach to learning in that they believe traditional methods, theories and models for learning are no longer adaptable to a changing world. In every day terms, contextualist want to fully understand what individuals warrant or measure as important enough learn as opposed to things that are not.

Reflection 3:

Problem solving in itself only occurs when in fact an obstacle is presented. So from a behaviorist perspective, how one responds or reacts to the situation once a problem has been identified, is vastly different than the constructivist perspective.   Behaviorist go about immediately trying to solve and or fix the problem and are less concerned with the subsequent behaviors once the problem itself has been identified and solved.  They constantly refer back to learner behavior post problem and then warn of these behaviors.  While constructivist want the learner to take into account how his or her learning is helping them. They acknowledge and prepare the learner for problems before, during and after.  Learner motivation is affected in the behaviorist view in that it has the potential to label the learner in a negative light.  As a result of this the learner may not have the motivation to or the tools necessary for learning because of the label.  This is occurring on campuses around the world. Because of one negative attribute of a students learning, he or she is misplaced and labeled. And from that moment on, the label proceeds the needs of the learner.  Constructivist helps learners understand and face learning head-on. Learners are motivated to continue learning as problems are presented not as obstacles to learning, but stepping and foundational stones to learning.