I start off this weeks blog with a quote from Bill Kerr; It seems to me that each _ism constructivism, behaviorism, cognitivism and now a new one, Connectivism is offering something useful without any of them being complete or stand alone in their own right. Learning theories allow theorist to take sides and draw conclusions or explain what happens when learning takes place.
Behaviorism driving forces is based on stimulus response. Although this is a key aspect to learning, there are other isms that open other avenues to learning. In favor of cognitivism and Connectivism, I disagree with Stephen Downes views that the mind is not like a computer. Much like the human memory system, computer systems are centered on processing and retrieving information, storing and accessing data. I am not alluding to the fact that the mind is exactly like a computer but the two display similar characteristics. Cognitivism theoretically bases its principals from an internal mental processing state, which in my opinion correlates with Connectivism which expands learning from a single mind to a connection of learners or networks that provide knowledge across various fields, ideas, and specialized information sources.
The notion that over years of development, one theory replaces another is incorrect. As society evolves the way we view education should evolve as well. Ideas are not simply replaced but enhances. Thus like learning theories, research on how one learns evolves with new concepts and ideas that build upon the existing theories.
Hi Andree
ReplyDeleteI agree with your notion that computer and human brain displays similar characteristics. However, I still believe that there are so much more to human brain which cannot be measured. Anything can be done by computer is based on computation meaning something can be observed and measured. Computer is all about calculation.
However, from psychology and music therapy point of view, we still have so much more to learn about human brain. Even though technology helped us to analyze our brain based on its psychological, psychiatric function, it is still unknown. In Music Therapy world, people went crazy measuring outcomes in order to satisfy insurance/government funding requirement and some school of music therapy started to criticize other school that could not produce scientific evidence. Does that mean we have to drop everything which we cannot explain? I do not think so.
Theories are formed in our research and learning process. Philosophers develop frame work to explain phenomena. That theory helps us to put things into context and help us to determine what the areas of deficiency are.
From that point of view, I also agree with your statement about "Ideas are not simply replaced but enhances." Theories and "_ism" s evolves and create new ideas/school of thoughts. That is the beauty and legacy of academia, I believe.....
Andree,
ReplyDeleteYours and my thought processes are very similiar. I thought some of the same thoughts as I read the blogs. We are all created differently so of course we must all learn differently...why is it, some must always have an explanation for how things work? I guess it must be job security...
Andree,
ReplyDeleteI agree with your comments Connectivism that is offering something useful without any of them being complete or stand alone in their own right. Learning theories allow theorist to take sides and draw conclusions or explain what happens when learning takes place. I think similar in that not any one theory can explain our complex thoughts and actions. I agree with Jeannine's comment on why must there always be an explanation for how things work. I wonder why there is an excuse for everything that happens good or bad. Cause and effect right?