And the learning continues....
The following are my responses to the Pratt and Skinner readings:
What are the defining characteristics of the two epistemological traditions? (objectivism and subjectivism)
Objectivism-people can rationally come to know the world as it really is. Learners and content are separate. Knowledge exists “out there” waiting to be discovered. The values of the teacher should not influence what they teach.
Subjectivism-knowledge and truth depend upon what individuals bring to the moment of perception. Knowledge is created, not discovered. It is a construction of the person experiencing the knowledge. Prior knowledge has great influence upon the acquisition of new knowledge. Intentions infuse actions with meaning. Thus, it is impossible to keep our values separate from what we teach.
What do you think some of the implications of each tradition would be for the design of instruction?
Objectivism would lend more to direct styles of instruction. The instructor designs packets of knowledge for the students to learn, be it by rote or by simple forms of cognitive instruction. Subjectivism, on the other hand, would be more evident in constructivist designs of construction. The learner brings their past experiences and knowledge to the constructivist table, so the two would fit nicely together.
What are some of the ways in which the behaviorist principle of reinforcement has been applied to education?
Some ways are:
Rote learning, memorization, studying verbs and times tables, for example.
What are the roles of the teacher and the learner in the behaviorist framework?
The teacher is the Guru and the learner is Pavlov’s dog.
What are some of the criticisms of behavioral objectives? Some say that memorization is not true learning. They are unable to apply the memorized material to new learning situations.
What epistemological tradition (objectivism or subjectivism) do you think underlies the behaviorist view of learning?
Behaviorism is underlined by objectivism.
Can you think of anything you do as an instructor that is influenced by the behaviorist view of learning?
I do use behaviorism when memorizing verbs in French. Sometimes a mnemonic device allows learners to memorize the framework of a test question, so they can better expand on the content.
In what contexts do you think it would be appropriate to use a behaviorist approach to teaching?
I think verbs, basic essentials that are required. I can still recall the things I learned through this method.
In what contexts do you think it would be inappropriate to use a behaviorist approach to teaching?
If you are looking to see if students have truly achieved mastery, the demonstration of higher order thinking skills, details of higher complexity require further depth of understanding..not just “what” but “why”.
Pratt, D.D. (1997). Indicators of Commitment (pp. 22-25). Malabar, Florida: Krieger Publishing.
Skinner, B.F. (1958). Teaching Machines. Science, 128, pp. 969-977.
The following are my responses to the Pratt and Skinner readings:
What are the defining characteristics of the two epistemological traditions? (objectivism and subjectivism)
Objectivism-people can rationally come to know the world as it really is. Learners and content are separate. Knowledge exists “out there” waiting to be discovered. The values of the teacher should not influence what they teach.
Subjectivism-knowledge and truth depend upon what individuals bring to the moment of perception. Knowledge is created, not discovered. It is a construction of the person experiencing the knowledge. Prior knowledge has great influence upon the acquisition of new knowledge. Intentions infuse actions with meaning. Thus, it is impossible to keep our values separate from what we teach.
What do you think some of the implications of each tradition would be for the design of instruction?
Objectivism would lend more to direct styles of instruction. The instructor designs packets of knowledge for the students to learn, be it by rote or by simple forms of cognitive instruction. Subjectivism, on the other hand, would be more evident in constructivist designs of construction. The learner brings their past experiences and knowledge to the constructivist table, so the two would fit nicely together.
What are some of the ways in which the behaviorist principle of reinforcement has been applied to education?
Some ways are:
Rote learning, memorization, studying verbs and times tables, for example.
What are the roles of the teacher and the learner in the behaviorist framework?
The teacher is the Guru and the learner is Pavlov’s dog.
What are some of the criticisms of behavioral objectives? Some say that memorization is not true learning. They are unable to apply the memorized material to new learning situations.
What epistemological tradition (objectivism or subjectivism) do you think underlies the behaviorist view of learning?
Behaviorism is underlined by objectivism.
Can you think of anything you do as an instructor that is influenced by the behaviorist view of learning?
I do use behaviorism when memorizing verbs in French. Sometimes a mnemonic device allows learners to memorize the framework of a test question, so they can better expand on the content.
In what contexts do you think it would be appropriate to use a behaviorist approach to teaching?
I think verbs, basic essentials that are required. I can still recall the things I learned through this method.
In what contexts do you think it would be inappropriate to use a behaviorist approach to teaching?
If you are looking to see if students have truly achieved mastery, the demonstration of higher order thinking skills, details of higher complexity require further depth of understanding..not just “what” but “why”.
Pratt, D.D. (1997). Indicators of Commitment (pp. 22-25). Malabar, Florida: Krieger Publishing.
Skinner, B.F. (1958). Teaching Machines. Science, 128, pp. 969-977.
