Module 2 Review of Theories for Adult Learning
Section 3: Strengths and Weaknesses of Learning Theories
Strengths and Weaknesses of Each Learning Theory
Schuman (1996) provided a good comparison of the three learning theories discussed in the previous sections (1 and 2).
Behaviorism
Weakness -the learner may find themselves in a situation where the stimulus for the correct response does not occur, therefore the learner cannot respond. A learner who has been conditioned to respond to a certain cue at learning situation may stop moving to the next step when an anomaly occurs because the individual does not understand the whole process.
Strength - the learner is focused on a clear goal and can respond automatically to the cues of that goal (as found in many athletics training programs).
Cognitivism
Weakness - the learner learns a way to accomplish a task, but it may not be the best way, or suited to the learner or the situation. For example, logging onto the Internet on one computer may not be the same as logging in on another computer.
Strength - the goal is to train learners to do a task the same way to enable consistency. Logging onto and off of a workplace computer is the same for all employees; it may be important to do an exact routine to avoid problems.
Constructivism
Weakness - in a situation where conformity is essential, divergent thinking and action may cause problems. Imagine the fun the IRS of the US would have if every person decided to report their taxes in their own way - although, there probably are some very "constructive" approaches used within the system we have.
Strength - because the learner is able to interpret multiple realities, the learner is better able to deal with real life situations. If a learner can solve problems, they may better apply their existing knowledge to a novel situation.
Why Bother?
Why do we have to consider all these differences and similarities residing in each learning theory? The answer is: depending on the learners and situation, different learning theories may apply. The instructional designer must understand the strengths and weaknesses of each learning theory to optimize their use of appropriate instructional design strategy. Theories are useful because they open our eyes to see other possibilities and ways of designing an instruction. This is especially true for novice designers.
Jonassen's Approach to Use Different Learning Theories
Jonassen (1991) identified the following types of learning that appropriately matched each learning theory.
Introductory learning - when learners have very little prior knowledge about a skill or content area, classical instructional design (behavioral approach) is most suitable because it is predetermined, constrained, sequential and criterion-referenced.
Advanced knowledge acquisition - passing through introductory knowledge and preceding to expert knowledge. At this point constructivist approaches may be introduced.
Expertise learning - at this final stage of knowledge acquisition the learner is able to make intelligent decisions within the learning environment. A constructivist approach would work well in this case.
Ertmer and Newby's Approach
Ertmer and Newby (1993) stressed instructional strategy and content development strategy reflecting the level of learners. Similar to Jonassen, they claimed that a behavioral approach can effectively facilitate mastery of the content of a profession (knowing what); cognitive strategies are useful in teaching problem-solving tactics where defined facts and rules are applied in unfamiliar situations (knowing how); and constructivist strategies are especially suited to dealing with ill-defined problems through reflection-in-action (knowing why). Examples of learning tasks for each approach include:
Behavioral - tasks requiring a low degree of processing (e.g., basic paired associations, discriminations, rote memorization) associated with behavioral features (e.g., stimulus-response, contiguity of feedback/reinforcement).
Cognitive - tasks requiring an increased level of processing (e.g., classifications, rule or procedural executions) associated with strategies having a cognitive emphasis (e.g., schematic organization, analogical reasoning, algorithmic problem solving).
Constructive - tasks demanding high levels of processing (e.g., heuristic problem solving, personal selection and monitoring of cognitive strategies) with such strategies advanced by the constructivist perspective (e.g., situated learning, cognitive apprenticeships, social negotiation).
Learning Activity 2 Imagine yourself as an instructional designer who needs to develop a program to teach how to develop a web page for instructional purpose. Which approaches and learning tasks from the Ertmer and Newby' model are most appropriate to be used as a frame of reference to design the course?
Post your selection and its rationale in the discussion forum (Forum-Module 2, Topic-Learning Activity 2) under the Discussions area of the class homepage. Also review three other students threads and reply them with any suggestions you would have. (2 points)
Previous
