Thought Paper No.1

September 16, 2012

Behaviorism can be causally linked to the intricacies of learning mechanics. Students displaying

appropriate learned behavior strategies are more receptive to knowledge. Specifically, this linkage

provides a new way of addressing why sometimes learning fails, even when the ability and potential of

the student is identified. Current studies illustrate that behaviors involving students’ self-regulation play

a key role in how well they learn (Zimmerman & Schunk, 2008). Connecting behaviorism as necessary to

the actual mechanics of learning provides cause and effect in situations where learning is stunted even

with a capable student.

To reflect that all cases where learning fails to occur as attributable to behaviorism would be

simplistic and naive. One cannot ignore the multitude of factors integral to any positive learning

situation including; the needs of the learner, the actualities of the knowledge, the role of good

assessment and the community’s needs (Anderson, 2008). Human learning is a complex and highly

involved process.

Recently, researchers have identified the need for behavioral skills to be taught and

incorporated for student success. These studies provocatively point to a lack of specific behavioral skills,

mainly self-regulatory, as explaining the discrepancies seen with some learners known ability and their

actual academic performance (Zimmerman & Schunk, 2008). Self regulatory factors such as

organization, setting goals, and managing time are all tools that fall within the scope of behaviorism

strategies. Thereby promoting directly the conclusion that behaviorist interventions can increase the

ability for learning to occur through initiating self-regulatory behavior that ensure student success.

References

Anderson, T. (2008).Towards a Theory of Online Learning. In Anderson, T. & Elloumi, F. (Eds) The Theory

and Practice of Online Learning (pp.45-48) Edmonton, AB: AU Press

Zimmerman, B. & Schunk, D (Eds). (2008) Motivation and Self-Regulated Learning: Theory, Research

and Applications (pp. 7-9)New York, NY: Taylor and Francis Group

Thought Paper No. 2

September 28, 2012

I cannot help but express how amazed and excited that I am that this particular type of research between brain development/modification and learning is finally underway. As Coch and Ansari point out - there is a significant ways to go, but it’s a start. The readings certainly challenged me, but also supported some of what I have seen in my teaching and with my own learning. It really took me some extra time to extract different definitions for “brain” and “mind”. Truth be told, they have always been one in the same for me and I think that’s because I have always been applying the definition of mind and overlaying it on top of brain. Here’s how I understand it now.

A person’s brain is the actual organ with it’s roughly 100 billion neurons and the connections (synapses) that either occur or don’t occur between them. To contrast this, a person’s mind is actually a higher order set of functions that is contrived from a combination of personality traits, memories, environmental stimuli and experiences. In essence, as I heard it explained quite eloquently by a colleague a few years ago - the brain is the car and the mind is the driver. And sometimes the driver wants to go somewhere.... but there’s four flat tires and a leaking transmission.

Returning to the question of would I still employ the basic drill&kill approach to math after reading these papers and the answer is yes. I consider it an effective learning tool, when used in conjunction with other techniques. From the second reading, it became clear that neuroimaging studies show positive changes from intensive drill based practice for both mathematics and other subjects. Personally, I have seen the benefits in other aspects of my own learning as well. I first learned to play instruments as a young person in school. We were taught the basics for reading music - given drill based scales (to practice alone and with the class) and then we played some songs. I became fairly proficient and was able to adapt to other instruments. Then as an adult, I picked up the guitar. I paid for lessons from a teacher (he was much younger then me) and we would play songs together but I never really felt that I developed the proficiency that I had with the other instruments that I played.... until on my own I picked up a scales book for guitar. And started drilling myself at home. Now I have the competence to sight read new pieces of music.

Given this example and the question would neural imaging studies help us if retrieval wasn’t the goal, but creative writing was - I would answer a resounding yes! As the articles mentioned - as we get older and more proficient with our learning, the way that we use our brain changes. These changes could be seen on the scan and could provide significantly important information to the teacher. It could almost be used for prescriptive purposes. If we could see an image of a student’s brain ability map, so to speak, we could use it to inform our practice. I could have had a scan of my brain done while trying to play new songs (would have showed minimal activity) and the music teacher would have known I wasn’t ready and sent me home with some scales to practice. Might have even saved myself a few dollars:]

Even as I have finished writing this, I can also see a potential downside to such prescriptive practice. It might prevent teachers from challenging students to try something outside of their comfort zone... I have read other literacy research that has said 95% of the time you should be working within your ability level and then 5% of the time you should approach something that is really challenging to increase ability. What if this never happened? Would this potentially slow down your learning? Definitely, gives us some food for thought.

Thought Paper No. 3

October 28, 2012

Von Glasersfeld’s words reflect the essence of constructivist paradigm in the need for learning to be collaborative, experiential and reflective. Never is it simply dispatching the “transferable commodity” of a learned reality to students ready for acquisition. Instead it is a feat of meme engineering belonging entirely to the learner’s subjective experience.

These quotes resonate strongly for me because of my cultural background and experience teaching in Aboriginal communities. They parallel Canadian Indigenous pedagogy, which relies upon oral histories to elucidate and provoke thought from a student. Similar to other constructivist practices, these ill-constructed pieces often lack a clearly defined message. There is no linear set of ideas to be communicated but rather a venue for the student to dissect, reconnect and create personal meaning. Reciprocal to other constructivist practices, Native Canadian oral traditions did not involve communication for the sole purpose of “conveying” ideas directly to the listener. As with case studies or project-based learning they encourage the scrutiny of multi-layered dimensions of thought.

Constructivist activities such as this further emphasize the meta-cognitive development of the learner. Von Glasersfeld describes this as the learner being able to “assess the truth of their knowledge”. In constructivist learning, students must be empowered to create a learning road map that clearly identifies the end learning objectives so they can revisit and assess the extent of their understanding. Assessment can manifest as dialogue with peers, personal reflection or evaluative feedback from their teacher. In essence, allowing a gauge of how well they have understood “what they come to know,” before they have actually finalized a knowing of it.

Von Glasersfeld’s quotations subtly illuminate the impact of constructivist techniques for both learner and classroom. Creating an understanding for educators that, “what we make of our experience constitutes the only world we consciously live in” (Von Glasersfeld, 2003).

Von Glasersfeld, E. (2008). Learning as a Constructive Activity. AntiMatters, 2(3), 33-49.

Von Glasersfeld, E. (2003) Radical Constructivism: A Way of Learning. RoutledgeFalmer NY, New York p. 1 Retrieved from http://bit.ly/PB3Yx8

Thought Paper No.4

November 11, 2012

By their very nature, both wikis and open-source software allow the formation of a virtual

network which is paramount to the full realization of the precepts for Situated Learning and

Distributed Cognition. It is within the many community-based interactions unfolding through

engagement with such collaborative devices that participants have a means for seeding

constructivism; a foundational philosophy integral for both Situated learning and Distributed

cognition. Additionally, wikis and OSS both amalgamate high-level cognition that has as a base

requirement the need for engaging in a synergetic fashion to successfully complete tasks.

Situated learning manifests through cognitive activities within these web-based

environments which reinforce successful immersion. Exemplified powerfully by the nature of

participating in the creation of a wiki, which parallels working in a capacity where one has to

collaborate to produce industry standard documents or journal/research articles. Especially in

business and science sectors, as with any face-face professional collaborative team

environment, creating this type of document encourages mitigated speech, professional

critiquing, role-playing, case-based learning and project-based learning which by their very

nature consolidate situated environments.

Similarly, as embodied by Distributed cognition, a further critical affordance of these

technologies exists with learning unfolding in a networked setting. Participants are incited to

incorporate learning that occurs from utilizing a variety of resources. This galvanizes a multitude

of experiences from online conversations and involvement with readings, artifacts and

technologies into scaffold success. While they successfully complete the online tasks required

in the creation of a wiki or participating in the development of new software. Completion of such

on-line collaborative tasks occur “distributed” meaning that members of the group share in the

function of the production (Hutchins, 2000).

Distributed cognition and Situated learning reflect learning philosophies where

networked collaboration and immersion are required for completion and reward; exemplified

thoroughly by the nature of wikis and OSS.

Resources

Hutchins, E. (2000). Distributed Cognition. San Diego, USA Retrieved from http://eclectic.ss.uci.edu/~drwhite/Anthro179a/DistributedCognition.pdf