I found an article online that is called “Cognitive Constructivism.” Available at http://gsi.berkeley.edu/gsi-guide-contents/learning-theory-research/cognitive-constructivism/ In this article, the psychologists Jean Piaget and William Perry argue against behaviorist theory that focuses strictly on observable behavior. They both thought that the approach that focuses more on what is going on inside the learner’s head is more important in the learning environment than providing positive or negative feedback. Jean Piaget, Swiss psychologist who worked mainly with kids, thought that equilibration takes place through a process of assimilation of new information to existing cognitive structures and the accommodation of that information through the formation of new cognitive structures. William G. Perry, an educational researcher at Harvard University, developed an account of the cognitive and intellectual development of college students. He agreed with some of Piaget’s approaches; however, he laid far greater emphasis on the idea that learners approach knowledge from a variety of different standpoints. Gender, race, culture, and socioeconomic class influence our approach to learning just as much as our stage of cognitive development. We interpret the world differently based on our backgrounds. “Things are right or wrong, true or false, good or bad. Students see teachers as authority figures who impart right answers. The role of the student is seen as being to receive those answers and demonstrate that they have learned them” (Perry, 1999). Although both, Perry’s and Piaget’s, theories are not now as widely accepted, they have had a significant influence on later theories of cognitive development. In my experience of instructing military students, I believe that I could use both arguments. First, for a person who grew up obtaining education based on objectivist philosophy, I do think it is essential to focus on what is going on inside the learner’s head, connect it with previous experiences, and construct that knowledge by adding those puzzle pieces. Also, because most military personnel come from different backgrounds, they have different “previous” experiences and backgrounds. Therefore, giving various examples and using all five senses in providing that necessary knowledge is very important. That is why I think it is imperative to use videos, written material, practice exercises, and active interaction with the students. The more variable my approaches to teaching are, the closer I can get to the students’ cognitive thinking processes. Therefore, I do agree with Holmberg’s empathy approach to distance education. The more we interact with our students, the more they learn, not only because we are more interested, but also because receiving an appropriate amount of feedback makes our long-term memory work better. It allows students to learn through understanding. However, I think empathy is important for both, online and in classroom, environments. References Holmberg, B. (2004, September). The empathy approach to distance education. [Lecture video]. Available from http://youtu.be/mXRMKkHe9yE. Transcript: Holmberg-transcript.pdf Perry, William G. (1999). Forms of Ethical and Intellectual Development in the College Years. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Piaget, Jean (1968). Six Psychological Studies. Anita Tenzer (Trans.), New York: Vintage Books. The First Wave of DE Skipping forward to more modern history, correspondence education developed on a mass scale as part of the industrial revolution. A learner in the mid-nineteenth century might receive written materials to study and after a period, have their competencies tested. Correspondence education remained popular into the 20th century with many universities offering extension courses to off-campus learners. For example, it was common for agricultural courses to be provided by correspondence to farmers in rural areas (Peters, 2004). This is where I can give my own example. I grew up in Russia and went to a Russian school, and then a college. In Russia, they have an objectivist approach to teaching and learning, where truth exists outside of our mind, laws of physics are constant, and a body of knowledge needs to be presented by a teacher to be learned by students (Bates, 2015). The teachers do include some elements of fun and game playing techniques to their students when they are younger, but it all gets eliminated in higher grades. For example, the students study a math chapter with a teacher, practice it in class, then they go home and read the same chapter, do additional exercises and answer additional questions not answered in the classroom. Repetition and revision are the key to success in Russian schools, because at the end of the semester the students always take accumulative exams that last about 6 hours for written exams, and the rest of them are oral, face-to-face with a teacher, who can ask any additional questions from the course. Basically, they work on long-term memory and understanding (Bates, 2015). Schools in the U.S. have a behaviorist and cognitive approaches to teaching and learning, where students stay longer in schools, absorbing and processing most of it in the classroom. Their homework is not that complicated until the start their higher education. The behaviorists rely on feelings, attitudes, and consciousness, where students can process a lot of information on a subconscious level using their five feelings (Bates, 2015). What I am trying to say is that people learn differently. Some have different backgrounds and culture. That is why it is important to understand the theory of knowledge. As a distance education professor, I will have to work on not only on giving my students materials to read, although this is how I learn, but also practical exercises, videos, tests, writing materials. Some people learn right then, and right there, others need some quiet atmosphere to revise and process, and a lot of it depends on their background and understanding. Therefore, I do not think DE has any disadvantages when it comes to learning. All the principles that were used in 19 century have been polished and reinvented. Technology allows us to make DE as good as face-to-face education, no matter what country one lives in, or what backgrounds we have. References Bates, A. W. (2015). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning. Retrieved from: https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/ Peters, O. (2004). Distance education in transition: New trends and challenges (4th edition) (pp. 13-24). Oldenburg, Germany: BIS-Verlag der Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg. Retrieved from: http://www.box.com/shared/5x3tpynqqf
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |