Running Head: SYNTHESIS AND ANALYSIS OF LEARNING THEORIES

Synthesis and Analysis of Learning Theories Danika Barker University of Ontario Institute of Technology

SYNTHESIS AND ANALYSIS OF LEARNING THEORIES

Synthesis and Analysis of Learning Theories

Introduction

As a new teacher, one of my mainstays was Grade 10 Applied History. I was confronted with the somewhat daunting task of ensuring that 28 largely unimpressed and unmotivated teenagers had a deep understanding and respect for all of the historically significant events that affected Canada between 1900 and 2000. It was difficult to ever get much further than the Second World War. Still, I enjoyed teaching the course, mostly because, unlike my English courses, history seemed to be pretty straightforward. There was specific content that I had to teach. There were lots of key words and terms to put in word searches. The material was very conducive to creating Jeopardy-style review games. As I leaf through my vaguely mildewed course binders from my first few years of teaching, I am able to view that teaching environment with a new set of eyes.

The Lesson: Grade 10 Applied History, 2004

Planning the course seemed relatively simple. I had a textbook and I used that as the basis for all of my lessons, and while I was focusing on what the students had to learn, I didnt give much thought to how they were going to learn it. Im relieved to see

SYNTHESIS AND ANALYSIS OF LEARNING THEORIES

that much of my teaching, while not informed by a great deal of theory, does not shock or horrify me in light of my growing knowledge and understanding of learning theories. Looking at a standard lesson plan I see that I started most if not all of my classes with a word of the day. I remember that an associate teacher called this bellwork, and it was really much more about classroom management than learning. It sent the message that learning began right away, but it didnt require any work from me so that I could take attendance, deal with individual students, and put out any fires. Students knew that there would be a word on the board each day that they had to define by using their textbook. Then they would have to use the word in a particular context. The word of the day always tied into the days lesson. We would then move on to some sort of whole class instruction. In the lesson plan example I looked at, I saw that I had students turn to a particular page in the textbook that dealt with turn of the century technology. There was a picture, and I asked students to identify what they saw in the picture. Im reasonably certain that I asked the question and then waited for hands to pop up, at which point Id call on the same three students who always volunteered ideas. Then I probably would have identified all the things I noticed in the picture. The next stage in the lesson involved a note. At an early stage in my career, I thought note taking was an essential part of each lesson. It gave students a binder full of paper (the sign of a conscientious teacheror so I thought), a task they could accomplish (in most cases). And it gave me the sense that I had somehow transmitted knowledge into their brains through the sheer act of pen moving across paper.

SYNTHESIS AND ANALYSIS OF LEARNING THEORIES Next I moved on to a jigsaw lesson where I arranged students in home groups (Best Practises, 2004). I numbered the students and then based on the number, each student was responsible for researching a particular topic. Students moved into expert groups where they worked with other students to become experts on one particular topicin this case an early 20th century inventions. When they finished, they reported

back to their home groups. I remember that one of the problems I encountered was that rather than teach the other students, they tended to just pass their notes around and let the other students copy. We debriefed this activity by having each group choose which technology they thought was most important. Finally, students drew a fate card from a box I kept on my desk. At the beginning of each unit, students were assigned a particular identity. On specific days, students would draw a card that would reveal a change in their fate, corresponding to actual historical events. They would reflect on how the event would change their lives and how they felt about this.

Analysis and Synthesis

When trying to determine which of the three main learning paradigms weve studied informed my instruction, I expected to find one particular theory would be most prevalent, but I found elements of Behaviourism, Cognitivism, and Constructivism. I was working under the misconception that one learning theory was best, but after reading Brenda Mergels paper on instructional design, I realized that different learning theories may be more appropriate for different learning tasks (Mergel, 1998).

SYNTHESIS AND ANALYSIS OF LEARNING THEORIES

Behaviourist Elements

At first I laughingly considered a connection between bellwork and Pavlovs classical conditioning, but upon further consideration realized that my word of the day activity more closely corresponded to Skinners operant conditioning (TIP: Theories b). I wanted students to get into the habit of grabbing their textbooks off the shelf, reading the word on the board and looking up the definition without any assistance from me so that I could complete my attendance and other housekeeping duties while engaging the students in a meaningful activity. Without fail, however, I would have to remind students to get started, refocus their attention, and deal with students who claimed that they couldnt find the word (even though it was usually in bold and I provided the page reference), or didnt understand the definition. Looking back now I realize that there were two problems that I didnt diagnose. First, the task may have been too challenging for some of my students to do independently. Second, I probably didnt provide enough positive reinforcement. While grades did function as reinforcement for some students, others found them less motivating. If I were to modify the activity in light of what I know now, I would ensure that the activity was accessible for all students by providing strategies for students to use if they encountered difficulty, such as discussing their definition with a partner. I would also ensure there were more opportunities for immediate positive reinforcement such as providing verbal praise.

SYNTHESIS AND ANALYSIS OF LEARNING THEORIES Cognitivist Elements

Admittedly, I didnt have a great deal of theory to inform the planning of my instruction, but when I consider Gagnes Conditions of Learning (TIP: Theories a), I can see that I did apply a number of the different learning events based on what I was trying to achieve, albeit with varying degrees of effectiveness. I gained their attention with the word of the day, but I didnt clearly identify the objective of the lesson. While I wasnt consciously trying to make a connection to prior knowledge, I am aware now that was what I was doing when I had them identify the different pieces of technology they saw in a photograph from the textbook. In retrospect, it would have been more effective if Id asked students to discuss what they believed to be the most important piece of technology in their lives. I presented the stimulus, a note. While, that may not sound particularly stimulating, I do recall that I had the students help to build the note by reading from the textbook and then as a class, summarizing the key ideas to put into a note. Then I guided their learning and elicited performance by having the students work on the jigsaw activity. Steps seven through nine (provide feedback, assess performance, and enhance retention/transfer) seem conspicuously absent, with the exception of the lesson debriefing. I probably had the students hand in their worksheets, but I expect that feedback or remediation was limited. While I think I realized the importance of breaking a task down into steps, I did not have a clear enough concept of what I wanted students to know and be able to do by the end of the lesson. I also didnt have a clear enough plan to assess what students knew by the end of the activity. If I were to revise this lesson I would use a strategy like an exit

SYNTHESIS AND ANALYSIS OF LEARNING THEORIES and entry card to determine what students already knew and find out what they had learned by the end of the lesson so I would know whether or not I needed to readdress any topics in the next lesson (Constructivism in learning).

Constructivist Elements

The jigsaw element of my lesson reveals clear elements of Vygotskys theory of the zone of proximal development. While Vygotsky is technically a Cognitivist, his social development theory is one of the foundations of Constructivism. By working in expert groups, students were able to interact with their peers which Vygotsky believed was essential for cognitive development (Learning Theories Knowledgebase). Students were able to discuss ideas and clarify misconceptions before returning to home groups as experts. Given the varying degrees of knowledge and ability within the class, some of the students were able to benefit from interacting with the stronger students in the class so that when they returned to their home groups, they were able to feel confident about the material they were sharing with their peers. Also, by teaching the material to their peers, they were more likely to retain the knowledge. Students were playing an active role in their learning rather than being passive recipients of knowledge. As previously stated, one of the challenges I encountered was that rather than teaching their peers, many students just passed their notes around. I can see on my lesson plan that I have actually written, MAKE SURE THEY DONT JUST COPY EACH OTHERS NOTES. I believe now that I was taking for granted the students knew what I meant when I asked them to teach each other. They probably felt that what was

SYNTHESIS AND ANALYSIS OF LEARNING THEORIES important was having information copied into their notes and that by copying the information, they had learned the material. Im not sure how I could impress upon the students that copying the information does not equate to learning the information, but perhaps by modeling what I expected in terms of teaching, the students would be less inclined to copy. I would also consider telling students that they need to be prepared to share the information contributed by one other group member without use of their notes. This might increase accountability. I think I also would have been more purposeful in

structuring the groups so I could ensure heterogeneous groupings. It would be difficult to get students into the zone of proximal development if the group did not have a more knowledgeable other. While this particular lesson did not provide much in the way of problem based learning (PBL), I would argue that, unintentionally, I provided many other opportunities for students to experience more authentic learning opportunities. The fate cards that students drew were an attempt to create a more authentic learning experience for the students. During the First World War unit, students each took on the role of an actual local soldier from the area. While I fictionalized many of their fates, I did know which soldiers survived the war and which ones died. I withheld this information until the end of the unit. The students were much more engaged in this activity than any other we did, likely because they were able to make a more personal connection to the curriculum. The focus was on solving or at least reacting to a problem rather than learning specific content. This was a major focus for my department. My department head turned his entire farm into a First World War reenactment site where students could experience life in the

SYNTHESIS AND ANALYSIS OF LEARNING THEORIES trenches. Now that I have a better understanding of how and why PBL is effective, I would use this strategy more frequently (Maxwell, Mergendoller, & Bellisimo, 2004).

Connectivist Elements

Connectivism is a very new learning theory, but it addresses many of the challenges that educators face when dealing with teaching in an increasingly connected world. In my experience, students often find history difficult to connect with; they do not see it as relevant or meaningful. Applying some of the theories of Connectivism might help students see history as something that is not removed from their own experience. First, I would have students create blogs instead of journals so that they could share their thoughts with the other students in the class. According to George Siemens, one of the principles of connected learning is that learning and knowledge rests in a diversity of opinions (Siemens, 2005). Through comments on blog posts, students would be able to see and experience more than one opinion. Then I would look for other classes to connect with so that students could expand their personal learning networks. By opening up our classroom to other classes, parents, and perhaps even professional historians, students would have greater access to a variety of opinions. Gradually I would introduce other sources for knowledge so that they could form new connections and begin to understand that the teacher and the textbook are not the centers of all knowledge in the classroom. Outside the classroom, students experience a rich variety of sources of information. One of my new priorities would be teaching students how to connect these information sources (nodes) in effective ways.

SYNTHESIS AND ANALYSIS OF LEARNING THEORIES

10

Conclusion

I was initially apprehensive about evaluating my early teaching in light of what I now know about learning theories, but by doing so I learned that I was unintentionally applying a number of aspects of the learning theories weve studied in this course. Knowing more about these theories allows me to better diagnose reasons for successes and failures with certain learning tasks. Rather than a trial and error approach, I can anticipate the ways in which students will respond to different teaching methods and I will have a better rationale for choosing these methods.

SYNTHESIS AND ANALYSIS OF LEARNING THEORIES References Best Practices: Pieces of the Puzzle (2003). Retrieved 12/5/2010, 2010, from http://www.saskschools.ca/curr_content/bestpractice/jigsaw/index.html Constructivism in learning Retrieved 11/21/2010, 2010, from http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/constructivism.htm Learning Theories Knowledgebase (2010, December). Social Development Theory (Vygotsky) at Learning-Theories.com. Retrieved 12/5/2010 from http://www.learning-theories.com/vygotskys-social-learning-theory.html Maxwell, N., Mergendoller, J., & Bellisimo, Y. (2004). Developing a problem-based

11

learning simulation: An economics unit on trade. Simulation & Gaming, 35(4), 488498. doi:10.1177/1046878104264789 Mergel, B. (1998). Learning theories of instructional design Retrieved 12/4/2010, 2010, from http://www.usask.ca/education/coursework/802papers/mergel/brenda.htm Siemens, G. Connectivism: Learning as network-creation - 2005 - ASTD Retrieved 12/5/2010, 2010, from http://www.astd.org/LC/2005/1105_seimens.htm TIP: Theories (a). Retrieved 12/2/2010, 2010, from http://tip.psychology.org/gagne.html TIP: Theories (b). Retrieved 12/4/2010, 2010, from http://tip.psychology.org/skinner.html