In the secondary classroom, there is a shift toward implementing ever-increasing amounts of educational technology into curricula. In order to do so meaningfully and to ensure successful learning, it is necessary to reflect upon learning theories. Behaviorist and Constructivist theories provide a base for much of what happens in the technological secondary classroom. These broad theories have many implications for the technological secondary classroom. It is necessary to question these implications so that those involved in the educational (and more specifically, educational technology) fields can work toward bettering education. Are there shifts happening in the secondary classroom today between these two theories? If so, what are they? Which is the more predominant in current educational practices? Is one better for use with educational technologies?
(by Andrea K. Ebert )
I've found that there is an increase in engagement in technology related methods in the classroom, however, the impact of technology on learning, retention, achievement is still mixed. I tend to think that technological methods of teaching, like many other aspects of teaching, are better when included into a variety of teaching strategies, including paper-and-pencil, visual, kinesthetic, groupwork, artistic/creative, role-playing.
From my perspective, the theory that seems to work better as a conceptual framework in this new technological era is the Constructivist theory. It seems that one of the major challenges in an era of information overload, and rapid technological advancement is knowledge acquisition and management whether it be at the individual, group or organizational levels.
Hello,
I am currently conducting my PhD research involving students' use of technology (digital tools), transition, and problem-solving appraisal in first year higher education (university). I am endeavouring to use Actor-Network Theory (ANT). It seems there is some opposition, or perhaps confusion as to whether or not this is a good fit. As I am a novice, and just in my second year of my doctorate, I am going to persevere with it. I didn't start out with ANT, it just kinda shone out of the literature. What are your thoughts in regard to ANT, technology, and learning.
Whole ANT theory was discussed largely in the ninety.
Including what means "A": actor or actant?
I am sure you got Callon 96 and also Latour, 1992
As you are going in a PhD. These works were going to shone out.
They Were already done!
I am glad Heather that you asked about my thoughts. But in 2th year of PhD, thoughts are merely: opinions! Your thesis value mor then this!
Philosophers of technology Like Michel Serres or Hervee Fisher, can give you clues Also many authors from constructivism.
The original introduction, in a fist edition of
The science of the artificial, will give you more than a clue!!
Sorry I am that old! I got this first edition Translated into spanish!!!
I've found that there is an increase in engagement in technology related methods in the classroom, however, the impact of technology on learning, retention, achievement is still mixed. I tend to think that technological methods of teaching, like many other aspects of teaching, are better when included into a variety of teaching strategies, including paper-and-pencil, visual, kinesthetic, groupwork, artistic/creative, role-playing.
In language learning, I am currently working with the interactionist theory which differs from socioconstructivism but works both in learning technology and face-to-face interactions.
Please Robert, give my regards to Luis Guillermo Bejarano who is working with me in this area.
Behaviorist and Constructivist theories are a good base to explain how humans learn. But no one explains all the human learning: that is too much complex to be understood only from one or other perspective.
Skinner theory not only explains low-level acquisitions but it includes references to some emotional aspects that currently are object of great interest from neuroscience contributions.
It is not necessary to explain the importance of Constructivism and other related approaches.
Driscoll defines learning as «a persisting change in human performance or performance potential…[which] must come about as a result of the learner’s experience and interaction with the world» This definition makes an interesting distinction between performance and performance potential. Behaviourism focuses in performance while Constructivist theories focus on performance potential.
But there is a recent theory, from Downes and Siemens: Connectivism, that describes learning –that takes place in a community of individuals- as the process of construction of learning networks. This is a very interesting approach that leads to Network Learning. I suggest these two texts:
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism. A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. ElearnSpace. http://goo.gl/1yV7WT
Siemens, G. (2006). Knowing Knowledge http://goo.gl/3s2m8d
Some authors as Verhagen consider that Connectivism is more of a pedagogical view than a learning theory. Any way it is a suggestive approach and with varied and rich consequences in teaching with IT.
http://goo.gl/1yV7WT
http://goo.gl/3s2m8d
The hardware and software available to teachers has no doubt moved on since my retirement, but I share Robert Spires' experience that students might engage enthusiastically but show no consistency in superior outcomes to other methods. Also, once the novelty passes, engagement diminishes. I, therefore, agree with Robert on the need to blending a number of approaches in line with your learning goals.
Also, as many of the above answers imply, we not only have to consider if behavioural or constructive theories are most useful, but also whether social or individualised learning is best supported and best suited to our needs.
Hi Research Fellows, heutagogy is another approach that you could bring into the classroom even though it is designed for reflective accounts, or self-learning, you can use Social Media as a way of bringing the theories and technology together. Allowing students to use there Mobile Tablets, Phones to interact with the lesson enables ICT to be embedded into the lesson structures/curriculum. Questions can be asked via phones/tablets either through a Twitter, or a social media web-site that can support SEN, or NEETS to further engage in the learning experience.. It has worked at Postgraduate Level; however, there is literature supporting for level of academia.
Rob..
I agree with Antonio about connectivism, which seems to be a "theory in the making" or a theory currently being developed. It is related to constructivism but seems to take specifically into account the current technological landscape.
Our current ubiquitous learning R&D efforts are based on connectivism. Ubiquitous learning uses the unique affordances of mobile devices to provide opportunities for learning anywhere, anytime, "just for me". U-learning can take place in the classroom too.
Saleh, I think that reading about mobile learning and ubiquitous learning might be of help. If you choose to do this, please take into account "Continuous Partial Attention" (CPA) which basically refers to (but is not limited to) the cognitive multitasking that people engage in when they are doing something and also at the same time trying to pay attention to their mobile devices (social networks, email, etc.). CPA is a stressing condition which basically decreases "effective" cognitive capacity- including the capacity for reflection.
And CPA increases with technology use- so the more someone uses these connective technologies, the more CPA they will likely have.
I believe that mobiles are part of people's lives and that they cannot be left out of school. Instead, school must introduce these technologies into learning assignments by using the opportunities that their unique affordances can provide. And I also believe that school also has to provide students the means to cope with the side effects of these technologies (for example, CPA).
Off course technology helps. However according to Roxana Moreno (one of the authors of the Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning ) manny studies have shown that it is the quality of the methods used with a particular technology that affects student learning not the novelty of the technology used.
Since the limitations of our working memory affect the way we learn, it should
also, obviously, condition the way we teach. Cognitive Load Theory in view of these
limitations provides several guidelines on how to design an instruction that reduces
unproductive cognitive load and at the same time maximizes the productive cognitive
load to make the learning more efficient. All these guidelines are based on scientific
experiments and therefore are not mere theoretical constructs
Because the working memory limitations are the bottleneck of learning I recommend, when teaching with technology, to cope with these limitations by using the guidelines from the following 3 theories: Cognitive Load Theory, Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning and Meaningful Learning theory (Ausubel).
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology
- Mental Processes
- Learning