Cognitivism and Other Learning Theories

One of the current issues we're covering in our class on learning theories is whether one theory serves to explain learning more fully than the other theories. Is Constructivism, for example, better than Behaviorism in explaining how people learn? In particular, we're called to examine two blog posts this week that center on an educational debate among Bill Kerr, Karl Kapp, and Stephen Downes about Behaviorism and Cognitivism.

The first blog post bounces back and forth between attacks on Behaviorism and Cognitivism. These arguments use various examples such as nuclear reactor meltdowns and chess to substantiate arguments. At the end of the piece, Kerr (2007) offers the suggestion that various learning theories should be used as filters, not blinkers. Taking this argument a bit farther, Kapp (2007) in his blog post, argues that learning is a multi-faceted concept that doesn't fit into one learning theory.

I strongly agree with Kapp's (2007) conclusion that learning is a much more complex concept than it is usually given credit for in debates on learning theories. This would seem to me to be the heart of the issue. In the arguments on behaviorism versus cognitivism, for example, the learning situations given to support each author's argument would seem to be cherry-picked as examples of learning that are well explained by that particular theory. Instead, I'd suggest that we can think of learning theories as tools to be used dependent on the particular task at hand.

For example, in my Japanese classes, there are times when students need to build fundamental vocabulary skills. At this point, behaviorism works great to build and structure drill and reward type activities that help reinforce learning of memory-related concepts. As students learn more complex concepts, however, cognitivism plays a larger role. I must use schema, recycling, and strategies to develop more complex skills and knowledge. Lastly, as students move forward to the point where they are asked to create projects or solve less well defined problems, both constructivism and connectivism can play larger roles.

In short, Kapp's (2007) point is right on target that learning is too complex to fit into one theory. This would suggest that perhaps what is needed is not more discussion on learning theories. Instead, perhaps we should be focusing our efforts on categorizing the various forms of learning first.

References

Kerr, B. (2007, January 1). _isms as filter, not blinker [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html

Kapp, K. (2007, January 2). Out and about: Discussion on educational schools of thought [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.kaplaneduneering.com/kappnotes/index.php/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational/

Photo Credit:
CollegeDegrees360, via flickr Creative Commons license. Thanks!

Role of the Educator

Siemens (2008) argues that there have been three models proposed for the role of the educator in a networked world: master artist, network connector, and concierge. To these three he adds a fourth model, that of curator. Each of these models is subtlely different from the others, but all involve a role significantly different than the teacher as master performer, or the sage on the stage depiction of teachers so common ten years ago.

A master artist emphasizes a role that encourages students to emulate the performance of the teacher, yet still provides a model by which students can show their own work to the class. A network connector, on the other hand, gives an image of a point of access through which students can connect to other learning opportunities, but seems to minimize the potential of a teacher to actually teach content. In the concierge model, the teacher takes on more of a guidance element, with the implication that he or she will lead students to content and learning experiences tailored to their individual needs.

Siemens' (2008) own model offers some variations on the three previous models in that he argues that the teacher is more of a curator. In other words, in addition to a concierge function that guides students to high quality and meaningful content, the curator teacher can also teach and provide in-depth knowledge about a particular resource if a student needs it.

I like Siemens' curator model better than the concierge model, and the concierge model better than the network administrator model. In short, the curator role seems to imply a more active role for the teacher than that of a concierge, who merely can guide students to good content. And a concierge seems to imply a more active and engaged role than that of a network administrator, who merely presents content to students with little thought to quality and personalization. The master artist role, on the other hand, implies an active teacher who can share expertise on a subject and inspire students to learn. While I like Siemens' curator model better than the master artist model, I can see how in certain environments the master artist model could work.

Having said this, all four models fall short. I don't like the curator model because it implies that the learning is one-way. A curator can present information on a museum topic and capture the attention of museum attendees, but it strikes me as a one-direction experience. Learning today in a digital environment, however, should engage the students in activities higher up in Bloom's Taxonomy. A curator doesn't capture this feeling.

I'm not sure that I have a good alternative yet, but I do think that a model presented by Wagner (2012) offers a better picture. He argues that a teacher in today's digital world functions as a coach, providing instruction and activities to students as they strive to explore and learn in complex and engaging environments. I like this model better because the image of a coach strikes me as someone who provides opportunities and interesting activities to students, yet at the same time is there with them, side by side, helping them to succeed. It's engaging, fast-paced, and centered on the student's learning, not the teacher's presentational skills.

If you're interested in hearing more of Wagner, I've embedded a TED talk he recently gave on play, passion, and purpose.

   

References
Siemens, G. (2008, January 27). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers. Paper presented to ITFORUM. Retrieved from http://itforum.coe.uga.edu/Paper105/Siemens.pdf

Wagner, Tony. (2012, December 11). Opening Keynote Speech. Speech presented at the TIES 2012 Educational Conference, Minneapolis, MN.


Photo Attribution
axlape, via flickr Creative Commons License.