Why does it happen?
Ken Robinson says schools kill creativity Video on TED.com
Saturday, September 10, 2011
Sunday, August 23, 2009
blearning system
bLearning is a learning tool developed by Beyondinno, incorporating ideas and elements in the Instructional Design Performance Support System, a series of learning theories, and cutting-edge e-learning technology.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
8. Relating TL, TI to ID
ID activities should be informed by theories of learning and instruction (TL & TI) closely.
The following two graphs can illustrate the relationships between ID and TI, TL.
The following two graphs can illustrate the relationships between ID and TI, TL.
7. The consilience map--a few learning theories
1. Cognitive Information Processing Theory
2. Active Repection Theory
3. Scheme Theory
4. Situated Cognition Theory
5. Bruner's Theory
6. Vygotsky's Theory
6. The consilience map-synthesis of learning outcome
The same color box represents similiar type of learning outcomes.
5. Learning outcomes and learning conditions
In Driscoll's (2005) textbook, in the comprehensive theory matrix, there are a few dimensions: outcomes, preconditions/inputs, the role of students, the role of teachers, and the process.
I analyze it from a few points:
First, why outcomes come first?
1. Like what Gagne has done: first identify learning outcomes, then determine the learning conditions and instructional events/methods. It is a way that we, as instructional designers or teachers, often use when practice informed by learning theories.
2. Compared to other dimensions in the matrix, outcomes might be the column that is easier to indentify and include all components and categories. In other words, learning outcome might be the least fuzzy component.
3. Through comparing the learning outcomes, what each major group of learning theories emphasize differently becomes more obvious.
Second, can conditions be categorized?
Gagne's classification of internal and external conditions can be borrowed to group the themes of words used to describe learning conditions:
Internal Condition: memory, schemata, well-prepared mind, prior knowledge, maturation, presence and participation in activity, ability of self-directed, orientation toward meaningful learning etc.
External Condition: stimuli, sensory information, material, activities, tools, ill-structured problems, conditions to support becoming self-directed etc.
In-&-Ex Conditions: for some conditions, they really can not be defined simply as internal or external conditions, such as meaningful material and cognitive conflicts. They must be defined and determined by both internal and external conditions: the same material might be meaningful for one learner, might not for others, which is determined by the learner's prior knowledge, goal, or attention brought into the task. Or prior knowledge is a relative concept too, the enough prior knowledge, or the well-prepared mind is relevant to learning tasks.
Internal condition is more about learner, for what learner can bring into the learning situation, and external condition is more about learning environment and task.
Third, Who is in charge of ensuring that the learning inputs and preconditions are there?
It is obvious that teachers/instructional designers can control the external conditions rather than the internal conditions. And the goal of education might be empowering the learner with better internal conditions. In this way, the change of internal conditions should be equal to outcomes. The outcome in previous learning phases should become internal condition for the current learning phase.
The arrangement of equipping of external condition is up to the designer/teacher's evaluation of internal conditions.
To various degrees, the efforts might be embedded in textbook, digital tools, or classroom activities.
Learning material, tools, and tasks pre-designed by designers can empower teachers.
However, often, it is up to the capability and efforts of teachers to ensure the quality of educational practice. The dynamical teacher-student interaction cannot be completely replaced by pre-designed material.
Finally, what are the relationships between five dimensions?
The entrance components are: precondtions/inputs.
The processing dimensions are: teachers, students, and precondtions/inputs interact with each other; therefore, the learning processes happen; or stated in other words, the learning conditions are satisfied.
Then, the learning outcomes happen.
Reference:
Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education Inc.
I analyze it from a few points:
First, why outcomes come first?
1. Like what Gagne has done: first identify learning outcomes, then determine the learning conditions and instructional events/methods. It is a way that we, as instructional designers or teachers, often use when practice informed by learning theories.
2. Compared to other dimensions in the matrix, outcomes might be the column that is easier to indentify and include all components and categories. In other words, learning outcome might be the least fuzzy component.
3. Through comparing the learning outcomes, what each major group of learning theories emphasize differently becomes more obvious.
Second, can conditions be categorized?
Gagne's classification of internal and external conditions can be borrowed to group the themes of words used to describe learning conditions:
Internal Condition: memory, schemata, well-prepared mind, prior knowledge, maturation, presence and participation in activity, ability of self-directed, orientation toward meaningful learning etc.
External Condition: stimuli, sensory information, material, activities, tools, ill-structured problems, conditions to support becoming self-directed etc.
In-&-Ex Conditions: for some conditions, they really can not be defined simply as internal or external conditions, such as meaningful material and cognitive conflicts. They must be defined and determined by both internal and external conditions: the same material might be meaningful for one learner, might not for others, which is determined by the learner's prior knowledge, goal, or attention brought into the task. Or prior knowledge is a relative concept too, the enough prior knowledge, or the well-prepared mind is relevant to learning tasks.
Internal condition is more about learner, for what learner can bring into the learning situation, and external condition is more about learning environment and task.
Third, Who is in charge of ensuring that the learning inputs and preconditions are there?
It is obvious that teachers/instructional designers can control the external conditions rather than the internal conditions. And the goal of education might be empowering the learner with better internal conditions. In this way, the change of internal conditions should be equal to outcomes. The outcome in previous learning phases should become internal condition for the current learning phase.
The arrangement of equipping of external condition is up to the designer/teacher's evaluation of internal conditions.
To various degrees, the efforts might be embedded in textbook, digital tools, or classroom activities.
Learning material, tools, and tasks pre-designed by designers can empower teachers.
However, often, it is up to the capability and efforts of teachers to ensure the quality of educational practice. The dynamical teacher-student interaction cannot be completely replaced by pre-designed material.
Finally, what are the relationships between five dimensions?
The entrance components are: precondtions/inputs.
The processing dimensions are: teachers, students, and precondtions/inputs interact with each other; therefore, the learning processes happen; or stated in other words, the learning conditions are satisfied.
Then, the learning outcomes happen.
Reference:
Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education Inc.
4. Two versions of consilience tool
A Simplified Version of Consilience
Step1: To list all major learning and instructional theories, Then draw sound implications from each theory by discarding the unreasonable part.
Step 2: To figure out the possibilities and constraints in the given instructional context, from the perspectives such as: teacher’s capability, students’ prior knowledge, the nature of learning task, the time constraint, the available technology etc.
Step 3: To relate and tailor each theory implication to the specific context, and then add them up together.
A More Sophisticated Version
1. Each learning theory illuminates some aspects of learning while obscuring others.
2. By taking the illuminated aspects as a set for each theory, various sets might overlap or not.
3. For those aspects covered by more than a set, theories represented by these sets might explain learning in three ways: consensus, contradicting, or paralleling.
4. In the case of consensus, there might be only one choice. In the cases of contradicting and paralleling, the choice could be context-dependent.
However, the difficult part is to define and identify aspects of learning: an aspect might be a status, a process, a combination of two, or something else. In order to figure this out, I analyze the comprehensive theory matrix (Driscoll, 2005) from a few perspectives.
Reference
Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education Inc.
Step1: To list all major learning and instructional theories, Then draw sound implications from each theory by discarding the unreasonable part.
Step 2: To figure out the possibilities and constraints in the given instructional context, from the perspectives such as: teacher’s capability, students’ prior knowledge, the nature of learning task, the time constraint, the available technology etc.
Step 3: To relate and tailor each theory implication to the specific context, and then add them up together.
A More Sophisticated Version
1. Each learning theory illuminates some aspects of learning while obscuring others.
2. By taking the illuminated aspects as a set for each theory, various sets might overlap or not.
3. For those aspects covered by more than a set, theories represented by these sets might explain learning in three ways: consensus, contradicting, or paralleling.
4. In the case of consensus, there might be only one choice. In the cases of contradicting and paralleling, the choice could be context-dependent.
However, the difficult part is to define and identify aspects of learning: an aspect might be a status, a process, a combination of two, or something else. In order to figure this out, I analyze the comprehensive theory matrix (Driscoll, 2005) from a few perspectives.
Reference
Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education Inc.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)