Reflections on My Personal Learning Theory in Light of Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology

At the beginning of the Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology course, I characterized my personal theory of learning as “a synthesis of theories supported by research and my own experience both as a teacher and as a learner.” Throughout this course, my understanding of learning theory, pedagogy, and the technologies available for their implementation has grown, and this growth is reflected in my approach to facilitating student learning in the classroom.

This course has reinforced my belief in the wisdom of learner-centered pedagogy. Behaviorist, cognitivist, constructivist, constructionist, and social constructionist learning theory remain foundations of my own teaching philosophy, and these theories support my understanding that lasting and relevant learning occurs when the student is actively involved in building meaning (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009; Lever-Duffy & McDonald, 2008). This course has added to my understanding of this principle by developing my knowledge of how technology can support pedagogical approaches that reflect modern, student-centered, learning theories.

Our second week in this course focused on behaviorism. Like many thinkers in education, I had begun to consider behaviorism less relevant in modern education than more cognition-centered learning theories. But revisiting behaviorist learning theory through our course readings reminded me of its lasting significance and applicability in concert with other learning theories in modern schooling (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007; Smith, 1999). Like all worthy theories of learning, behaviorism addresses the importance of relevance in learner motivation.

Our third week focused on cognitive learning theory which, unlike behaviorism, attempts to explain the processes through which new information is incorporated by learners into their existing understanding of the world (Novak & Cañas, 2008). Through our readings, I gained a greater understanding of how cognitive learning theory can be applied in the classroom, adding to my repertoire of technologies that support strategies such as cues, questions, advance organizers, summary, and note taking. Although I have employed these strategies throughout my teaching career, I gained a greater understanding of why they work and what resources have recently become available for their application. We learned how several technology tools can support cognitive learning in practice. Some—like concept mapping, Word features, presentation tools, and online communication and collaboration tools—I immediately applied and will continue to use in student-centered learning contexts.

In week four we explored constructivist and constructionist learning theory, which suggests that meaningful learning occurs when learners construct meaning for themselves through active experience (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009). For me, this is the most exciting of the learning theories we have investigated, and offers the most promise for changing the way I teach. As an English teacher, I have always engaged my students in constructivist and constructionist learning experiences. Traditional reading and writing assignments reflect these principles, as learners must construct meaning for themselves in transactions with the text and other readers, and writers must develop understanding of their topics as they construct written artifacts of their thinking. New media, however, offer me the opportunity to employ constructivist and constructionist learning theory in exciting new ways. Students can use computer and Internet technologies to engage in authentic problem-based and project-based learning experiences that make new learning relevant and immediately applicable in authentic contexts to aid in motivation and retention (Pitler et al., 2007). Already, I am applying these ideas in class projects where students are building their own understanding, not only of new content, but of how to learn and apply new knowledge independently and collaboratively to solve real-world problems and create valuable resources. My AP Language and Composition students are currently building a wiki-based study guide for the AP test and SAT vocabulary presentations they will use to prepare their peers for college entrance examinations and coursework. Their study guide and its development incorporate many skills, technologies and tools besides the host wiki, including summary, organizers, concept maps, tables, illustrative images, and rubrics. The skills my students develop for learning and applying content knowledge will be at least as important to them as the content knowledge itself.

Week five of this course introduced connectivism and social learning, examining how people learn with and from others. From the connectivist perspective, students in social learning situations apply their diverse perspectives, experience, and prior knowledge to actively construct meaning, creating connections to interpret seemingly unrelated events and ideas (Davis, Edmunds, & Kelly-Bateman, 2001). Cooperative learning, in particular, is an effective instructional strategy that reflects social learning theories by enabling students to work together to actively construct knowledge and transform it in ways that aid comprehension for group members (Palmer, Peters, & Streetman, 2007; Pitler et al., 2007). I am particularly excited by the potential of Web 2.0 collaboration and social networking tools to aid and enhance cooperative learning by helping groups of students work collaboratively with individual accountability to construct and share group products. My greater understanding of how to structure and manage cooperative learning experiences for my students, and technologies to serve that effort, will certainly be reflected in my classroom practice.

In week six, we focused on synergizing learning theories, strategies, and technologies (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009; Muniandy, Mohammad, & Fong, 2007). We examined nine proven categories of learning strategy (identifying similarities and differences, summarizing, providing recognition and reinforcement of effort, assigning meaningful homework and practice, using nonlinguistic representation, facilitating cooperative learning, setting clear objectives and providing feedback, generating and testing hypotheses, and providing cues and advance organizers) and found ways to apply them to realize learning theory in our classroom practice (Laureate Education, Inc., 2001). I found that I already apply many of these strategies in my teaching, but also found that I can improve my exploitation of those strategies I already use while developing my repertoire of pedagogical techniques in other areas.

In the long term, I hope to more consciously connect learning theory to pedagogical practice, and to use technology more as a learning tool rather than for instruction. The lesson I developed in week seven reflects a synthesis of much of what I learned throughout this course. This lesson reflects both the immediate adjustments I have made to my instructional practice, like the use of Web 2.0 collaboration tools to facilitate cooperative learning, and long-term changes I will make regarding the integration of technology into my practice. I have already incorporated new learning technologies, like wikis, Google Docs, and concept mapping software, into my daily instruction. I have also developed new ways of using technologies I once used mainly for instruction (such as PowerPoint) as learning tools, by putting them in the hands of students. As my students build their animated PowerPoint “movie” versions of William Shakespeare’s Hamlet, I will step away from the front of the classroom to take on a more powerful role as facilitator for a social constructionist learning experience. This lesson is just one example of many to come that will combine cognitivist, constructivist, constructionist, and social learning theories with classroom strategies and supportive technologies to provide my students with meaningful, learner-centered, active learning experiences through which they will develop the skills they will need to adapt to the constant technological change that will define their careers.

In the future, I intend to continue to adapt new technologies to facilitate the application of learning theory and best pedagogical practices to student learning. There are many technologies I hope to employ in applying best pedagogical practices and learning theory, but I am particularly interested in making the most of new presentation tools, such as interactive whiteboards, and Web 2.0 collaboration and publication tools for social constructivist and constructionist learning. Our school has recently received four interactive whiteboards. Already, teachers are preparing lessons to use them for instruction. I am thinking of ways they can be used in a more learner-centered context. As a result of pressure and persuasion on the part of teachers in my system who have been frustrated with impediments to using Web 2.0 technologies in the classroom, our technology department has announced a plan to certify teachers, through an online course, to override the school’s prohibitive Internet filter at their own discretion. I intend to take this course and make the most of the long overdue privileges this certification will confer. With access to image search engines, wikis, weblogs, and the endless variety of Web-based learning tools this will make available, my students will enjoy much greater opportunities to take control of their own education through authentic, meaningful learning experiences. It will be wonderful to have more of these tools at my disposal, but I must remember to always employ them in the execution of proven pedagogical strategies based on sound learning theory.

References

Davis, C., Edmunds, E., & Kelly-Bateman, V. (2001). Connectivism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved November 27, 2009, from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author.

Lever-Duffy, J. and McDonald, J. (2008). Theoretical Foundations. In Teaching and Learning with Technology (3rd ed. pp. 2–35 ). Boston: Pearson.

Muniandy, B., Mohammad, R., & Fong, S. (2007, September). Synergizing pedagogy, learning theory and technology in instruction: How can it be done?. US-China Education Review, 4(9), 46–53. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database. Document ID: 31626898

Novak, J. D. & Cañas, A. J. (2008). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them, Technical Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01 Rev 01-2008. Retrieved from the Institute for Human and Machine Cognition Web site: http://cmap.ihmc.us/Publications/ResearchPapers/TheoryUnderlyingConceptMaps.pdf

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Smith, M. K. (1999) The behaviourist orientation to learning. The Encyclopedia of Informal Education, Retrieved November 11, 2009, from www.infed.org/biblio/learning-behavourist.htm

A VoiceThread on Impediments to Using Digital Learning Technology in Our School

Follow this link:  http://voicethread.com/share/777235/

This is a VoiceThread about impediments to using Web based and computer learning tools in my school.  It talks about the Bess "SMARTFILTER" Internet filter, the lack of access to computers, our inability to install learning software on the computers without administrative privileges (which nobody in the building has), and the general lack of faith in teachers' ability to make pedagogical decisions regarding the Internet.  This is a work in progress, as is our school system's technology policy.  No doubt, both will evolve over time.

Connectivism and Social Learning in Practice

Social learning can take many forms, but the essence of social learning theory is the idea that people learn with and from others (Laureate, 2001). From the connectivist perspective of Davis, Edmunds, and Kelly-Bateman (2001), students in social learning situations bring the flexibility enabled by their diverse experience to bear in social learning situations where they combine and share prior knowledge, experience, perceptions, and comprehension to actively construct meaning by creating connections and interpreting seemingly unrelated events and ideas. Cooperative learning is an instructional strategy that reflects social learning theories by enabling students to work together to actively construct knowledge and transform it in ways that aid comprehension for group members (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007; Palmer, Peters, & Streetman, 2007). The ability to work collaboratively with peers to build knowledge needed to accomplish a shared task will be the essential career skill of this century (Davis, Edmunds, & Kelly-Bateman, 2001; Leavy & Murnane, 2006). Web 2.0 social networking and collaboration tools can facilitate and enhance the effectiveness of cooperative learning by providing media in which groups of students can work collaboratively and with individual accountability to create and share group products.

Collaborative learning can be used to apply social learning theory by aiding students in constructing their own understanding of the world. According to Kim Beaumie’s (2001) interpretation of social constructivist learning theory, reality is “constructed through human activity” in a process through which people “invent the properties of the world” together (p. 1). In this model of learning, human knowledge is actively socially constructed and reflects the shared understandings, interests, and assumptions of groups. Beaumie (2001) recommends that formal learning experiences include reciprocal teaching, peer collaboration, cognitive apprenticeship, problem-based instruction, webquests, anchored instruction, and other activities designed to support the shared construction of knowledge.

These strategies can be supported by Web 2.0 and other digital communication and presentation tools. Students can construct presentations using PowerPoint, concept mapping, VoiceThread, or other computer and Internet applications to support reciprocal teaching. Collaboration tools such as wikis and Google Docs can aid student groups in collaboratively developing meaningful artifacts of their learning. One particularly helpful feature of these applications is that they keep records of the history of site or document development and contributors’ asynchronous discussions in order to ensure the individual accountability required by cooperative learning strategy (Palmer, Peters, & Streetman, 2007). Social networking tools like MySpace and Facebook also provide a medium for both social interaction and artifact construction, as does the rich virtual environment of Second Life. These digital collaboration and communication tools can also help to convert what Jean Lave described as inert knowledge, knowledge that is not immediately applied by the learner and is unlikely to be applied in future experience, into active knowledge that is, and can be, put to use (Laureate, 2009). Students can consult with experts and community members in fields they are studying through weblogs, email, and chat applications to support a cognitive apprenticeship model or to help answer questions in a problem-based instruction task. Problem-based and collaborative instruction can also be supported through the ready availability of online research tools such as search engines, online libraries, and databases.

As the Web closes the distance that once separated individuals and communities, it offers greater potential for the realization of meaningful and diverse application of social learning theory. But the shrinking or “flattening” of the world through digital information and communication technology also increases the importance of developing in our students the skill of self-directed learning (Davis, et al., 2001; Laureate, 2009; Pitler, et al., 2007). These tools help students collaboratively convert the unprecedented abundance of information now available into useful knowledge that can be practically applied to make sense of the present and make predictions and prescriptions for the future (Davis, et al., 2001; Laureate, 2009). In an increasingly competitive, and cooperative, world, these are more than just classroom strategies; they are long-term survival skills.

References

Beaumie, K. (2001). Social constructivism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved November 27, 2009, from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

Davis, C., Edmunds, E., & Kelly-Bateman, V. (2001). Connectivism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved November 27, 2009, from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author.

Levy, F., & Murnane, R. (2006). Why the changing American economy calls for twenty-first century learning: Answers to educators' questions. New Directions for Youth Development, 2006(110), 53–62.

Palmer, G. Peters, R., & Streetman, R. Cooperative learning. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved November 27, 2009, from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.