Fitting the Pieces Together

Only a few short weeks ago I started my studies in Instructional Design to hopefully earn a certification, and subsequently a job, in Online Instruction. At that time I wrote what I believed was my own personal learning style, and what particular Learning Theory best fit my understanding of learning. I gravitated toward Constructivism, though my heart was not settled on it by any means. At the time I was very conscious of how I personally learned things, and how that might differ from how others learned, in order to best find the theories and styles that would help me to define the systems and methods I might have to use to design good, comprehensive online lessons. My goal at the time was, as I wrote, to find “the appropriate system to design instruction is critical to help facilitate learning that works for a greater number of students in a more efficient, simplified and interesting manner”, and this has not altered in any way. “The goal of education should be human development and personal growth (as opposed to higher test scores)” (Andrew, 2012). This was always my goal and my goal remains the same, but now I feel I am much closer to that goal overall. I must say that my understanding of the various possibilities for designing instructional material has grown considerably and I now realize that the options are much more comprehensive and intricate than I thought possible. At the very least, I am now aware in more detail of the ways in which I learn myself and reflection on these has helped me to better understand how I might serve others in finding the knowledge they are looking for.

Because there are so many theories on learning and identified styles of acquiring knowledge, I might easily be overwhelmed by the choices to be made among them. I almost was overwhelmed, until I realized that these were actually compartmentalized ways of viewing how the mind learns, theories on how the mind works in relation to its environment and sensory inputs, and methods used to find the answers we all need to navigate and survive in the world around us. The truth was actually simpler than that, in that a lesson, no matter how devised, delivered, or related to, are parts of a whole, and that regardless of my understanding of specific theory or style or trait, my approach should be to use as many as possible given the nature of the subject and the resources available. 

At first I assumed that there must be only one Learning Theory that best fits me, one best Learning Style that best defines me, or that would be found to best fit any student or learner in and educational program. Each of the various theories and styles I have learned about this week, from Behaviorism to Cognitivism, from Constructivism to Connectivism, from Social to Adult Learning, and every shade in between, all have many things in common and overlap each other in ways that really has to be considered in light of defining individual characteristics of learners. The truth is that there really is no unifying theory of learning. Perhaps the best answer is that all learning theories are right, but represent their own strengths and weaknesses to understanding how people learn and, more than anything, is better applied as subject, environment, and goal specific. In this I view all of the theories I’ve learned this quarter in a holistic light, but since I am an Adult, long in tooth, the theory that perhaps best fits me today is Adult Learning. “The basic premise of this theory is that the 'individual personality consists of many elements ... specifically ... the intellect, emotions, the body impulse (or desire), intuition and imagination (Laird, 1985, p.121) that all require activation if learning is to be more effective.”  (Dunn, 2000). And wouldn’t you know it, Adult Learning Theory is actually a holistic way of viewing learning, minus the obvious roadblocks for falling behind on technological advances. Another theory closely related to Adult Learning I found that sounds intriguing and deserves some more research is something called Humanistic/Holistic Learning Theory where a holistic (revisiting the theory of Gestalt learning but applied to a body, mind, spirit aspect) approach is being developed. Another is Experiential Learning Theory, but this seems more geared toward the management learning research. Seems everyone is jumping on the Learning Theory band-wagon.

I also found it fascinating to review how technology itself is playing a role in my own education, and how technology is uses to educate me on technology. In self-reflection I also find it fascinating how the technology I am using this instant to do my online lessons has become invisible to me as the extremely complex tool that it is. I am using technology to learn about the technology I am using to learn it. Another interesting fact is that the role of technology in this effort to design online lessons is, as I have discovered, much greater even than the online lesson I am personally taking today, and this encourages me in that what I perceive, as perhaps a design flaw in a current online course, should be seen more as a challenge to create a better, more dynamic instructional design. Because I utilize a fairly high degree of technology in my own online learning and day-to-day work, and because I take the notion of Adult Learning theory as my own personal template, I can see a potential for me to use what I know and have experience in as a guide to creating some of the best Instructional Designs available. I see the potential, now I need to find my way to implementing it. My only regret now is that I can only afford to take the Instructional Design Certification program as further study offered by a full Master’s program has completely entranced me.

References:

Dunn, Lee (2000). Theories of learning. Oxford Brookes University, online article. Retrieved 2-24-2013 from: http://www.brookes.ac.uk/services/ocsld/resources/theories.html

Johnson, Andrew P. Ph.D. (June 13, 2012). Humanistic and Holistic Learning Theory. Minnesota State University, online article. Retrieved 2-24-2013 from: http://www.opdt-johnson.com/Ch_9_humanistic_holistic__1_.pdf

Yang, Baiyin. (2004). Holistic learning theory and implications for human resource development. Advances for Developing Human Resources, 6(2), 241-262. Retrieved 2-24-2013 from: http://carlosalbornoz.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/yang.pdf

Kolb, A. & Kolb, D. (2008). Experiential Learning Theory: A Dynamic, Holistic Approach to Management Learning, Education and Development. (abstract). Retrieved 2-24-2013 from: http://learningfromexperience.com/media/2010/08/ELT-Hbk-MLED-LFE-website-2-10-08.pdf

Connectivism - Reflections

The concept of Connectivism provided me with some thoughts on how I use information to access resources and outline tools for the intricacies of mapping ideas on a cognitive level. If I eventually learn to become an accomplished Instructional Designer, the task at hand is to not only learn how I learn but to incorporate that understanding into learning how others learn. Seems simple enough, right? Since the majority of learners utilizing Online and eLearning instruction these days are adults, and I am an adult, it makes sense that I need to understand more about how both adults, and I, learn. Next, either as the instructor myself or as the facilitator to a subject matter expert, I need to find a way to transmit information into an instructional method through which a learner may acquire that information and do so in a way that takes into account as many possible learning styles, theories, resources, technologies and delivery systems as possible or available. That is what Connectivism means to me.

That complexity referred to by the idea of Connectivism, postulated be George Siemens, points out some of the difficulty in achieving technological parity in designing an intuitive and interactive learning environment. As was pointed out in additional reading resources, “The most significant trend that continues to make an impact on facilitators is the demand for the incorporation of technology into the content and delivery of professional development “(King, 2003).  One begins to get the ominous feeling that as soon as a design might be completed, technological advances may indeed make that design outdated. Things are moving that fast, it’s hard to keep up. But I balked a bit at this notion of Connectivism as a Learning Theory. One of Siemens’ principles, by his definition of connectivism, was “Learning and knowledge rest in diversity of opinions.” This seemed a little odd to me in that it appears to give priority to opinions at the expense of facts. Connectivism also appears to rely mainly on the precepts of technological advances and this includes the requirement of being technologically equipped. One must not only learn to use the technology needed to access the networks and data bases now available, but access to that technology is also required when this is hardly the case. Not everyone has that access. I also feel that it not only assumes such access is universal but that it concentrates on what we should learn and what we need to learn it and makes no real attempt to get into the nitty-gritty of Learning Theory itself. So, it seems I have either misunderstood what the principles behind connectivism are or I am in some disagreement with it. Fortunately I’m not alone in my argument. “An outspoken critic of the theory, Pløn Verhagen, Professor of Educational Design at the University of Twente, believes connectivism to be relevant on a curricular level as it speaks to what people should learn and the skills they should develop. (But) to be relevant at the theoretical level, connectivism should explore the processes of how people learn.” (Conlan, Grabowski, & Smith. 2003).

The theories related to adult learning are interesting, but I felt they might be a little vague in some ways. Certainly they provide a nice outline of four possible methods (Action Learning, Experiential Learning, Project Based Learning, and Self-Directed Learning), but to be fair I have yet to encounter one of those methods in practice alone as my experiences tell me that more than one of them, or at least elements from more than one, are either incorporated into those learning methods or inherently need to borrow from more than one even if one is the main focus in its intent. At the same time I notice that some of the variables in adult learning needed to include a few more reality checks. Though it was noted that, “learners can easily be distracted by their own needs, assumptions, values, and misperceptions.” and “some adults are unable to engage in self-directed learning because they lack independence, confidence, or resources,” (Conlan, Grabowski, & Smith. 2003), this only identifies, for me, some of the most obvious of variables. What’s missing and what this so-called theory seems to ignore are those variables that adversely affect learning, such as distractions from attempting to conduct learning from an Online course while maintaining a full time job, raising a family, illness, or juggling funds on a low income. Needs and resources? Quite a bit more complicated than that. 

One of the main things that I gained from exploring these concepts, on a positive note, was that as an adult learner myself, I am able to reflect on how I personally learn things and agree on how I prefer these days to utilize the basic premise of two of the adult learning theories outlined in Connectivism: Action Based and Self-Directed learning. This was interesting, but really didn’t provide much new information for me, just a context of new terminology to work from that I didn’t have before. But one thing of significance did occur to me as I was reading. As I reflect on where I am in my learning, I realize that there have been several instances where I had to reevaluate some knowledge over time, in which I had discovered a previous notion or bit of information I had acquired was no longer valid, and needed to be thrown out and replaced with something new. This notion brought back to mind a certain quotation:

“The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn.”  ~ Alvin Toffler

In a sense I was “unlearning” something and making room for “replacement knowledge”. I wasn’t relearning something differently or making adjustments to some knowledge I already had, I was completely dumping a block of information in favor of something entirely new. I was literally unlearning. I then found a nice little blog by Dr. Steven Wheeler, “Learning with ‘e’s”, where I discovered an article on the subject of “unlearning and relearning” and I find it speaks well to the concept. Both the quote above and my own experience in unlearning bring to mind that it’s not a simple matter, and I have to now remember that if this concept has any bearing on my future outlook on Adult Education, I should be aware of some important things. Specifically that it not an easy thing for most people to be convinced that what they know might be wrong as there is “a barrier that often stops unlearning from occurring. We are living in an acquisitive society, (…) where learning theorists talk about acquisition and retention of knowledge, but they never refer to giving away or expulsion.” (Wheeler, 2012) It’s a road block I have run into in the past and is stressed within that blog. So, sometimes the road to learning needs to start with some unlearning. “But unlearning is not simply about forgetting something, he continues, sometimes it is about rejecting a previously held belief, or repudiating a long revered theory. This often feels counterintuitive for educators, and can pose a threat to many learners.” (Wheeler, 2012) What this signifies to me is that, though I can see unlearning working for me, one would have to approach it carefully and it may not be pressed upon anyone as a negative reaction would be counterproductive. I do feel it is something that should be pursued more in-depth in an overall learning Theory was of looking at things, but perhaps that is for someone else as I think I’d be out of my depth in its pursuit. However, though this idea of unlearning isn’t something new, apparently, this week was certainly when I finally actually made the cognitive connection. Perhaps that will have to suffice for my contribution to Connectivism. 

References:

Conlan, J., Grabowski, S., & Smith, K. (2003). Adult learning. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved 2-6-2013, from: http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Adult_Learning

Davis, C., Edmunds, E., & Kelly-Bateman, V. (2008). Connectivism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved 2-6-2013, from: http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Connectivism

Wheeler, Steven. (Jan. 9, 2012). Learning, Unlearning and Relearning. Learning with ‘e’s (Blog site). Retrieved 2-5-2013 from: http://steve-wheeler.blogspot.com/2012/01/learning-unlearning-and-relearning.html

Siemens, George. Connectivism. (Video) Laureate Education (Producer). (n.d). [DVD]. Baltimore, MD:

Connectivism - My Mind Map