Week 2: Theories and Models of Learning and Instruction

I must admit that the readings for this week were a challenge for me. I feel that the content this week was a bit more complex than the week before, and I often found myself reading words without fully understanding their meaning. Hopefully, my week two reflections make some sort of sense. I’m looking forward to feedback to help me reflect on anything that I may not have fully understood. I’m also looking forward to reading the blogs of my fellow classmates for insights and observations that I may have overlooked.

What are the differences between theories, methods or models of learning and epistemologies or underlying beliefs about ways of knowing?

Distinguishing the difference between epistemology and models of learning escaped me at first. However, I soon began to realize that the difference between the two relates to knowledge and how we apply that knowledge in an instructional setting. Epistemology is the study of knowledge, and models of learning build upon epistemology in order to create instructional design plans suitable for the appropriate audience.

Reflect on whether your stance is primarily positivist, relativist, or contextualist. Then, identify an instance when your perspective or stance as a learner conflicted with that of your instructor. Describe the conflict that you experienced and analyze whether opposing epistemic stances may have been at the heart of the conflict.

My stance is primarily relativist. The relativist stance conveys that there is no objective truth and that knowledge is subjective to perception or relative to a particular frame of reference. This stance appeals to me greatly because we live in such a diverse world. Everyone comes from different cultures, everyone has different back stories, and everyone views the world differently. Students bring all of their experiences and background with them into the learning environment. Although we all have our own perceptions of what the truth is, there is no one absolute truth. Each viewpoint provides some level of truth. With the relativist framework in mind, I often try to apply constructivist methods in my classroom and library.

I experienced a conflict during my undergraduate years as a Spanish major. There was one professor in particular that I often had issues with due to our different stances. This conflict came to a boiling point during a study abroad trip to Spain. The professor took more of a positivist stance. She believed that her method was the best method of instruction regardless of student feedback or concerns. She attempted to create a system in which the behaviors that she desired were rewarded and the behaviors that she didn’t desire were met with distaste.

Her methods were more in line with behavioral learning theory. In behavioral learning theory, the “learning can be understood, explained, and predicted entirely on the basis of observable events, namely, the behavior of the learner along with its environmental anecdotes and consequences” (Reiser & Dempsey, 2011).

This caused a great conflict between us that almost resulted in my return to the United States before the end of the study abroad program. I wanted to explore Spain and learn the language and culture through interactions with Spaniards. I believed that there were many ways to learn and experience Spanish beyond sitting in a classroom. I wanted to practice my new-found skills in the market place, at the theater and in the main plazas with my fellow classmates. Ultimately, I ended up with a B in her class even though I received an A+ from the Spanish professor that I was taking classes with at the University of Salamanca. Since she was my teacher of record for my university back home, she determined my grade.

Explain differences in problem solving when approached from behaviorist and constructivist perspectives. How do the approaches differ in both the nature of the problem to be solved and in facilitating the problem-solving process? Finally, what effect might these differences have on learner motivation?

The behaviorist perspective focuses on the behavior of the learner and the consequences, both positive and negative, that result from the learner’s actions in the instructional setting. For example, I’ve seen teachers ask students questions and reward the students that got the answer right with a piece of candy. The students that did not get their answers right were not rewarded.

I’ve experienced both good and bad with this perspective. I believe that the behaviorist approach to problem solving can be a bit defeating to some students. Of course, praising desired behaviors is not a bad thing. However, I’ve witnessed this system back fire when students become upset at their inability to obtain an award or positive feedback. They felt defeated and knew exactly which students would be rewarded. The students that felt defeated quickly lost interest and created behavior issues in the classroom.

The constructivist perspective focuses on learning as an active process and is student centered in nature. An aspect of this perspective is project based learning, which allows students to take accountability for their own learning. I’ve personally had great experiences in the classroom with the constructivist perspective. When I stopped focusing on controlling every aspect of the learning process and allowed the students to think critically and collaborate to reach a goal, the students responded better. I also found that I didn’t have as many problems with behavior, and the student actually WANTED to do the assignment. It was no longer something that they were forced to do, but it was something that they had fun doing.

Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (2017). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology. Boston: Pearson Education.