Cognitivism as a Learning Theory

In Bill Kerr’s New Year’s day blog of 2007 _isms as filter, not blinker, in which he said that learning theory is full of _isms, and asked the question ‘Are they useful guide to what to think and do?’– I would both agree and disagree with points/statements that he conjectured during the discussions with his colleagues Stephen Downes and Karl Kapp. The learning theories of behaviorism, constructivism, connectivism, etc, are indeed necessary when discussing the full potential of the learner. However, like full employment in macroeconomics, full potential of a learner is unattainable. There is no ultimate learning, as learning is a life long process. This brings me to the statements made by Kerr, when he said ‘The learning theory is indispensible to the curriculum reform effort. What I have noticed is that these _isms do not stand still. They evolve, they listen to criticism and move on. I've also noticed that learning theorists, who have a different favourite _ism to mine, might still come up with significant findings in their empirical studies that I find hard to reject or ignore. So, although it is possible to make perfectly valid criticisms of Skinner's behaviourism or the theoretical foundation of cognitivism that is not the end of the story. The outcome of Kerr’s statements here signifies the impact that social change has on learning theory. The phenomenon of social change is greatly impacting society, and the theories of learning are not averted in this endeavor.

In the dialogue between Downes and Kapp about learning theories, with reference to Kapp’s blog – Definitions: ABCD Objectives (which I found interesting), we are still rewarding behavior, whether is positive or negative. However, the tendency, in recent times, is to acknowledge and recognize the learner when the behavioral outcome is suitable to our liking, which really makes us behaviorists at this stage. Punitive measures for not learning have, more or less, become obsolete, especially with the ongoing discussions in the psychology of learning.
The notion of stimulus-response ( a programmable behavior) highlighted in the discussion, cannot be dismissed, as it relates to today’s technology of ‘on’ and ‘off’, or ‘stop’ and ‘go’, or ‘yes’ and ‘no’ which had their discovery in the binary mathematics system. However, a simply ‘yes’ or ‘no’ or in my mathematics logic class, ‘true’ or ‘false’ without any reason whatsoever, is not sufficient to foster the learning system. Therefore, the theories of behaviorism, cognitivism, or connectivism cannot be isolated from each other, if ‘adequate’ learning is to take place. In the continued dialogue between Downes and Kapp the term ‘dehumanising’ was mentioned. But, how does it affect learning? If it does! It does have an effect on the learning process. Take the examples (machines) stated in the argument; they are right on target, but using machines, such as the calculator, enhances the process of learning if properly utilized. Depending solely on these tools of technology does hinder the learning process. In my mathematics classroom, permission is granted to use the graphing calculators when it’s absolutely necessary, and not just to do simple algorithmic calculations like addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division or even simplifying ‘well known’ squared and cubed numbers.

The blog post by Kapp (Definition: Cognitivism), in which he drew attention to some of the theories of learning, showing their relevance to cognitivism, is indeed relevant to today’s technological era. The learner is indeed a complex information-processing system, as he rightly stated. So, for this reason, Stephen's response of ‘the mind is not like a computer....... and depicting the mind as analogous to symbol system processors is to misrepresent it in a fundamental way’, is certainly admired by me. Understanding how the learner learns is still a complex task for educators today, as different individuals learn differently, and with the use of different styles/methods. This brings me to the use of the buzz words that are used in my school: Differentiated instruction. Since students learn differently and at a different pace, the administrators at my school ‘insist’ on the use of different modes of teaching, of which the use of technology, with its different formats, is one of the key methods. Thinking about one’s own thinking (metacognition) is really important to the ongoing development of the theory of cognitivism. This is the place that I would like to get my students, so that they can take ownership of their learning and stop blaming the society for their misunderstandings.
In the blog Out and about: Discussion on educational schools of thought, Karl Kapp’s discussion about the use and importance of blogging is well taken. Like Bill Kerr in the blog _isms as filter, not blinker, responses were acceptable, and taken as constructive criticisms that further the discussion which I believed, was quite scholarly. The three men seem to form, whether purposefully or accidentally, a learning community, which should be beneficial to not just them, but other readers of the blog. Like Bill, Stephen, and Karl, the learning community of Leasa, Sheila, and myself should replicate the goal of blogging-that of discussing, critiquing, and encouraging each member’s blog in a scholarly manner, as we aim to become scholarly-practitioners in our own right. With this thought, I invite my two other members of the learning community, and anyone who blogs, to respond to this blog.

Personal beliefs about how people learn, and the purpose of learning theory in educational technology.

Learning, in my opinion, is the epitome of the educational system. It is the ability to acquire knowledge, and to use that knowledge to the benefit of oneself, and to the wider society. But, what is really meant by the term ‘learning’? Why do people learn? How do people learn? These are some of the questions that have been asked over the years; solutions have been given, but many people, I believe, are still yearning for more answers. To some, an ultimate solution needs to be found, while to others, the process is ongoing. There is no final answer to these questions, as the belief of many, is that, the education system, with its structures and alignment, are always developing as the social systems of society changes. The term ‘learning’ has been defined in so many ways by psychologists, educators, and scholar practitioners, to name a few. It has also being critically assessed by ancient and modern scholars. One such scholar is George Siemens, a theorist on learning in a digitally-based society.

In a video ‘What is learning for me?’ Siemens view learning as a connect. This connection is with other people, and with tools that enhance his learning. However, he mentioned that there are barriers to his learning whenever things like copyright and government initiatives arise.

What-Is-Learning-For-Me-George-Siemens

Even though I agree with Siemens in part with his theory of the concept of leaning, with regards to the connection with people, I believe that when things like copyright or even government initiatives come alive, that is also learning, and not really a barrier, as he stated. Philosophically, how would he know that these tools are infringing on his right to learn if he did not learn that these tools exist to perform the task that he said they are performing? Overall, I believe that people learn through doing and repeating a task that allows them to gain the concept of the task, which eventually becomes a part of their inner being, as they demonstrate it to the wider society.

The theory of learning is of utmost importance to any discipline in society. One such discipline is educational technology. Learning is a mindset, so Siemens, the digitally-based theorist on learning, compares the mind to the computer. He said that, like the computer, ‘we accept inputs, manage them in short-term memory, archive them in long term memory, (and retrieve in short-term memory when needed), generating some type of output’. Technology is a tool that is used to enhance learning, and learning occurs when it’s coupled with teaching or instruction. Together, they formed what has come to be known as educational technology. Therefore, since technology has an effect on the learning process, the theory of learning must be a part of this digital discipline, which has whirlwind into the 21^st century, with no intention of retreating.

Reference

Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

Siemens, G. (2008, January 27). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers. Paper presented to ITFORUM for discussion. Retrieved December 8 from http://www.tskills.it/userfiles/Siemens.pdf