Epistemology and Learning Theories

Epistemology (the study of what and how we come to know) is discussed in multiple chapters in this section. Distinguish epistemology from instructional methods or theories. What are the differences between theories, methods, or models of learning and epistemologies or underlying beliefs about ways of knowing?

Epistemology is defined by Webster’s Dictionary as “The study or a theory of the nature and grounds of knowledge especially with reference to its limits and validity”.  Epistemology is different from instructional methods because epistemology is a metaphysical view of how we learn. It is theory.  Learning theories such as those discussed in Chapter 4, deal more with real world function.  In the text Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology, Robert Reiser, discusses different learning theories such as B.F Skinner’s Behavioral Learning Theory.  Skinner states “The consequences of a behavior then determine whether it is repeated and thus considered to be learned. For instance, a learner who is rewarded with a teacher’s smile for paying attention in class will be more likely to follow the teacher’s direction at a later time than one whose behavior goes unnoticed.” (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012).  Other learning theories discussed in the text include the Cognitive Information Processing Theory.  Atkinson and Shriffin’s created a multistage theory of memory.  This theory has developed the way educators understand the information processing theory today.  “Three memory systems in the learner (sensory, short-term, and long-term memory) are assumed to receive information from the environment and transform it for storage and use in memory and performance.” (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012).  The text also illustrates the Cognitive Load Theory by Sweller, van Merriënboer.  Van Merriënboer suggested “Instructional strategies designed to reduce extraneous cognitive load in instructional materials.”  In laments terms, educators should not overload students with information that is not important to the task.  Robert M. Gagné developed a theory of instruction that declared “Instruction and how what is known about learning can be systematically related to the design of instruction.”  Gagné proposed an integrated and comprehensive theory of instruction that is based primarily on two foundations: cognitive information processing theory and Gagné’s own observations of effective teachers in the classroom.  The text also depicts the theory of Constructivism.  Reiser states that this theory has “had a substantial impact on views pertaining to the learning conditions and instructional strategies believed to support constructivist learning goals.” (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012).

Chapters in this section discuss three contrasting epistemic stances: positivist, relativist, and contextualist (or hermeneutical). Positivists believe that the only truth or knowledge is objective truth. Relativists don’t believe that objective truth is possible and that all knowledge is subjective to perception or relative to a particular frame of reference. Contextualists believe that truth or knowledge is relative to context rather than individual, subjective understanding. While designers and educators with a positivist stance generally apply behaviorist principles to the design and development of instruction, those with either a contextualist or relativist epistemological framework employ constructivist theories and methods. Reflect on whether your stance is primarily positivist, relativist, or contextualist. Then, identify an instance when your perspective or stance as a learner conflicted with that of your instructor. Describe the conflict that you experienced and analyze whether opposing epistemic stances may have been at the heart of the conflict.

I believe I have a constructivist perspective approach in my classroom. Constructivists theory states “Constructivism as a paradigm or worldview posits that learning is an active, constructive process. The learner is an information constructor. People actively construct or create their own subjective representations of objective reality. New information is linked to to prior knowledge, thus mental representations are subjective.” (https://www.learning-theories.com/constructivism.html).  I have been a project based teacher for the last 2 years.  Constructivist allow the classroom to be more student centered. Students are taught a mini lesson, or multiple mini lessons in the unit and are then asked to create a project (usually from a menu). Students are able to work independently and collaboratively depending on their focus and goals.  My learning objective clashed in classrooms where the teacher would lecture and students would be expected to take notes, study, and take an exam.  I am a much more hands on learner.  I found this to be the environment at Texas Tech during freshman level classes.  I understand in theory why the classes were structured in this way, but it is also no surprise that I didn’t d well in them.  I have been much more successful in my graduate level classes where I have been asked to create projects, websites, blogs, and portfolios.

Differing epistemic stances lead to differing approaches to learning and instruction, and ultimately to problem-solving. Explain differences in problem-solving when approached from behaviorist and constructivist perspectives. How do the approaches differ in both the nature of the problem to be solved and in facilitating the problem solving process? Finally, what effect might these differences have on learner motivation?

A behaviorist perspective approach to problem solving would be based on a reward system. This is used in schools, especially mine.  We had a rewards based system called Bobcat Bucks.  We gave out the “money” when students went above and beyond in the classroom.  When they helped solve a problem, motivated others to make the right choices, or showed exemplary behavior or classwork students were rewarded with “bucks” they could then save and spend in the Bobcat store.  When students did not make the right choices they were not rewarded and therefore did not get to participate in any of the benefits of earning the reward.  Students began to instinctively understand the motivation to solve the problems and the behavior was engrained into their systems.  The constructivist approach is much more student involved and is more project based as I stated earlier. The constructivist approach focuses students on problem solving and critical thinking skills that are more relevant to real world problems.  Students are taught a mini lesson, or multiple mini lessons in the unit and are then asked to create a project (usually from a menu). Students are able to work independently and collaboratively depending on their focus and goals.  I believe this approach will help students be much more prepared for the real world by giving them to skills needed to think critically, work collaboratively, and be focus on a problem and solution.  The differences in these learning approaches need to be acknowledged and I believe students need more abilities and chances to choose which approach they enjoy and succeed in.  As I stated earlier, I personally do not do well when my class is teacher led and am more successful when I am asked to work in more of a project based learning environment.

Constructivism. (2016, September 08). Retrieved June 13, 2017, from https://www.learning-theories.com/constructivism.html

The New Merriam-Webster Dictionary. 1989. Print.

Reiser, R., & Dempsey, J. Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (3rd ed.).