Personal Theory of Learning

Learning is the cognitive process of inputing, rehearsing, and retaining various bits of information to be stored in our long term memory. It is built upon by use of tools, techniques, theories, and prior experiences, throughout our lives. As we go through each day of our life, we are inundated with information about various “things”, but intimate knowledge about a topic requires a different level of investment and rehearsal, than merely knowledge of the “thing” itself. Learning occurs at the intersection of investment of time, and proper tools to reinforce that learning outcome. I believe that this learning model is most akin to the Constructivism model, where learning is a process of constructing knowledge by an individual, in an active learner-centered environment (Leidner, D. E., & Jarvenpaa, S. L. 1995).

In corporate settings, “learning and development processes provide a way of developing those in the organization to be ready to meet challenges” (Page-Tickell, R., 2014). Value is placed upon the person who applies themselves to meet the goal of learning new tasks. Cultural and societal paradigms play a role in influencing others, and how far they may push themselves to learn new information. American author, John Holt said “Learning is not the product of teaching. Learning is the product of the activity of learners.”

In today’s technology driven environment, where more students are enrolled in online classes, and less frequently engaged face to face with a classroom, what does this mean for the role of teachers? Students’ become empowered by their own learning outcomes, and the teacher takes the role of mentor and guide, to help the student navigate through learning objectives. Teachers develop engaging curriculum, which is central to the work of teacher educators” (Seiki, S., 2016). Many traditional K-12 classrooms incorporate a Pedagogical Learning model, which transfers knowledge incrementally, while noting individual achievements for high performing students. This model is effective at this level of education, because it’s more interested in ensuring that students are meeting particular learning goals. Inonline learning platforms, an adaptive cognitive-based learning model may be more conducive, because there may be numerous backgrounds that joined those students together in that environment, and they may all have different learning goals. A teacher who understands the needs of her students, and has a broad range of teaching tools to draw from, is ultimately the best teacher. As seen in Gibson’s affordances, different theories must be applied in different situations, due to perceptual differences (Greeno, J. G., 1994).

“No paradigm for research ever solves all of the problems that it defines.(Driscoll, M., 1995).” There are no two students that have the exact same needs in a classroom. The role of educators is to be equipped with understanding about cognitive theories, and tools that can provide methods to help bring understanding and improve learning outcomes for all students.Evaluative methods on the output of Instructional Design is still in its infancy, and scientists are conducting research to gain valuable insight on the most effective methodologies. If we widen our views to the vastness of the technology that is developing around us, we can see that there are limitless possibilities before us.

I originally took LTEC 5030 this past Fall, and wrote my personal theory of learning in November 2019. In this weeks’ reading (Leidner, D.E, & Jarvenpaa, S.L. (1995), I’ve gained understanding and appreciation for the five Learning Models: Objectivism, Constructivism, Collaborativism, Cognitive Information Processing, and Socioculturism. As a designer, I believe that Instructional Design (ID) must evaluate curriculum and make decisions about how to incorporate each of the models into the appropriate instructional setting. Just as each trade has its tools that it must utilize in order to perform the functions of that job, I believe that these Learning Models are the tools of the Instructional Designer. ID’s must know their client and learners needs, and create instruction which encompasses the proper strategies that helps ensure those learning outcomes.

REFERENCES

Driscoll, M. (1995). Paradigms for research in instructional systems. Libraries Unlimited, Inc.

Greeno, J. G. (1994). Gibson’s affordances. Psychological Review,101(2), 336–342. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2147/10.1037/0033-295X.101.2.336

Leidner, D. E., & Jarvenpaa, S. L. (1995). The use of information technology to enhance management school education: A theoretical view. MIS quarterly, 265-291.

Page-Tickell, R. (2014).Learning and Development (Vol. 1st edition). London: Kogan Page. http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2066/login.aspxdirect=true&db=nlebk&AN=801724&scope=site

Seiki, S. (2016). Chapter 2: Transformative Curriculum Making. Curriculum & Teaching Dialogue, 18(1/2), 11–24.