Wednesday, June 26, 2013

Module 2 - Response to Bill Kerr, Stephen Downes, and Karl Kapp Discussions

I am responding to the blog discussions, which can be accessed at the following links::  ttp://www.ulqcl.com/kappnotes/index.php/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational/ and http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html

The discussions were focused on the learning theories and the conversation began with the topic of behaviorism and was labeled by Downes as being outdated and "dehumanizing"(Kerr,2007); however, as I went through the dialogue, I saw opinions from Kerr, Downes, and Kapp leaned toward the blending of the best of each theory.  I feel that Bill Kerr said it best on his blog when he wrote "It seems to me that each _ism is offering something useful without any of them being complete or stand alone in their own right"(Kerr,2007).  I know that in my classroom, it seems that I use different theories according to the level of learning for the students.  I tend to follow the learning theories as identified by Kerr with my own different levels of 7th graders.  With my introductory lessons and for my remedial classes, I normally use more of the behavorist theory, the when it comes time to apply and practice the learning, I switch to the use of the Cognitive theory, and finally, when I want the students to complete multi-step problem solving that require critical thinking, I move to the Constructive approcah. I try to include problem based learning as much as possible and use performance tasks often as formative assessments, but find myself reverting back to the behavorist theory quite a bit as I settle back into our standardized testing environment (old habits).  I do agree that all of the theories are useful and necessary and give me guidelines to follow as I try to help my students achieve the learning goals. 

I participated in discussions on the follwing blogs for Module 2:
http://castanosblogs.blogspot.com/
http://pnesrsta.wordpress.com

3 comments:

  1. Karen,
    Your views and the way you use the different theories seem to be a lot like mine. Since I teach 6th grade mathematics,and you are 7th grade, I wonder if this is how many math teachers teach. I believe in blending different theories to find the best way for my students to learn. I agree that all the theories have a certain place in education and that we have to understand our students to know when to use each one.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Karen,

    Great eclectic use of theories. More importantly, by using different theories depending on the student, you are truly differentiating instruction. That is hard to do with the time constraints teachers have in K-12. Props to you!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Karen, I got the same thing from the discussion, not one theory explains it all, and a more blended approach is probably what is best. Each of the theories has its own merits and each have problems in explaining some issues in behavior and learning.

    ReplyDelete