Tag: Behaviorism

Module Two

Behaviorism, Cognitivism, and Rubrics

Behaviorism is a learning theory that focuses on the observable behavior changes influenced by external stimuli; it focuses on testing to observe the intended outcomes of behavioral changes.

Behaviorism in learning is more about the right or wrong answers; assessments that incorporate behaviorism commonly are given as multiple-choice and/or right or wrong answers.

Behaviorists argue that behavior is a learned habit; it can also be unlearned and replaced with a new one.

John B. Watson and B.F. Skinner are the two advocates of the behaviorism theory of learning.

Watson’s behaviorism involves external stimuli that “elicit certain responses” (Zhou and Brown, 2022, p. 6). Watson’s behaviorism is built upon Ivan Pavlov’s classical conditioning which refers to “learning that occurs when a neutral stimulus becomes associated with a stimulus that naturally produces a behavior” (Zhou and Brown, 2022, p. 6).

Elements of behaviorism in education: rewarded response and system of reward and punishment.

Skinner’s behaviorism is built upon Watson/Pavlov’s behaviorism using operant conditioning that refers to “satisfying responses are conditioned”; thus, Operant behaviors (operant conditioning) – occur under conscious control, spontaneously or purposely. The consequences of these behaviors make up a learning process (Zhou and Brown, 2022).

Behaviorism application in the classroom:

  • Contracts – can be implemented in school and at home.
  • Consequences – positive and negative consequences.
  • Reinforcement.
  • Extinction.

Behavior modification – “a method of eliciting better classroom performance from reluctant students” (Zhou and Brown, 2022, p. 9).

Observational learning (Modelling) – a learning method where one is learning by observing others. Alex Bandura is the originator of this method, “of the many cues that influence behavior, at any point in time, none is more common than the actions of others” (Bandura, 1986, p. 45 qtd by Zhou and Brown, 2022).

Shaping – “the process of gradually changing the quality of a response” (Zhou and Brown, 2017, p. 9).

Cueing– perform an act at a specific time, verbally or non-verbally, to demonstrate appropriate behavior.

Social Cognitive Theory

The stage of Cognitive Development Theory is coming from social learning theory, developed by Alex Bandura with his Bobo doll experiment.

Alex Bandura claims that “Social Learning Theory shows a direct correlation between a person’s perceived self-efficacy and behavioral change (Zhou and Brown, 2022, p. 19).

Jean Piaget (1896-1980) – research on the child’s four stages of mental growth: (Brown, 2017, p. 13):

  • Sensorimotor stage – birth to age 2 – gaining motor control and learning about physical objects.
  • Preoperational stage – age 2 to 7 – preoccupied with verbal skills. “Intelligence is egocentric and intuitive, not logical” (Zhou and Brown, 2017, p.14).
  • Concrete operational stage – age 7 to 11 – deal with abstract concepts: numbers and relationship. “Thinking becomes less egocentric with increased awareness of external events, and involves concrete references” (Zhou and Brown, 2017, p. 14).
  • Formal operational stage – adolescence to adulthood – reason logically and systematically.

Piaget’s work provides a foundation for constructivism with the belief that knowledge is constructed.

Educational implications:

  • Instructional content must be consistent with the developmental level of learners.
  • Discovery learning.
  • Hands-on experiences.
  • For adolescents and adult learners – use visual aids and models, discussions on social, political, and cultural issues, teach broad concepts rather than facts, and situate in a context meaningful and relevant to the learner.

Social learning is also known as observational learning. Social learning theory emphasizes that “behavior, personal factors, and environmental factors are all equal and interlocking of each other” (Bandura, 1973, qtd by Zhou and Brown, 2022, p. 20).

Social cognitive theory is a bridge between behaviorism and cognitivism.

Human agency (Bandura, 1996) refers to a situation where individuals are “self-developing, self-regulating, self-reflecting, and proactive” (Zhou and Brown, 2017, p. 21).

The human agency operates within three nodes:

  1. Individual agency – a person influences the environment.
  2. Proxy agency – an effort to secure one’s interest.
  3. Collective agency – a group of people working together for a common goal.

Human agency’s four core properties:

  1. Intentionality
  2. Forethought
  3. Self-reactiveness
  4. Self-reflectiveness

Human agency’s four core properties:

  1. Intentionality
  2. Forethought
  3. Self-reactiveness
  4. Self-reflectiveness

Four human capabilities that are important to social cognitive theory:

  1. Symbolizing capability – direct and indirect events influence a person.
  2. Self-regulation capability – one can regulate one’s intention and behavior.
  3. Self-reflective capability – one can evaluate one’s thoughts and actions.
  4. Vicarious capability – the critical cognitive ability to adopt skills from available information.

Core Concepts of Social Cognitive Theory:

Modeling/Observational learning – the characteristics of the model, the attributes of the observer, and the consequences of the model’s action.

Four important component processes in SCT:

  1. Attentional process – cognitive and personal association to attract attention from learners.
  2. Retention process – involving memory; visual imagery and verbal coding are important in early development.
  3. Production (reproduction) process –
  4. Motivational process –
  5. Outcomes expectancies
  6. Self-efficacy – cognitive process.
  7. Self-regulation – includes both self-reinforcement and self-punishment. Cognitive process.

SCT is widely used in media, health education, and morality.

Assessing Learning/Rubrics – Why assessment is crucial in a learning process?

“Assessment is the most significant prompt for learning” (Boud, 1995, qtd by Ashford-Rowe, Herrington, and Brown, 2014, p. 205).

“… the result of our assessment influences our students for the rest of their lives and careers…” (Race, Brown, and Smith, qtd by Ashford-Rowe et al, 2014, p. 206). 

Eight (8) critical elements of authentic assessment from the literature:

  1. Authentic assessment should be challenging – the assessment should connect what is learned in school and real-world experience (Lund, 1997, qtd by Ashford-Rowe et al, 2014, p. 207).
  2. The outcome of an authentic assessment should be in the form of a performance or product (outcome) – students should be able to demonstrate the knowledge in their work (Ashford-Rowe et al, 2014).
  3. Authentic assessment design should ensure the transfer of knowledge – transferring the knowledge into real-world applications as conveyed by Tanner (1997) (Ashford-Rowe et al, 2014).  Furthermore, an authentic assessment should prepare students to use the knowledge not only to the focus one is learning but beyond it (Berlak, 1992, qtd by Ashford-Rowe et al, 2014). (I like this one, I think this is pertinent to the world today where many things are intertwined with each other. Thus, we are to be able to see beyond what is in front of us; instead, we ought to be able to see things as a whole — is this Systems Thinking?)
  4. Metacognition as a component of authentic assessment – metacognition is the higher thinking level, the goal of cognitivism. Metacognition can be achieved through critical reflection and self-evaluation (Ashford-Rowe, 2014).  Reflection is a medium for the student to “extend their learning experience beyond the classroom by giving them a meaning and place in a bigger picture” (Ashford-Rowe et al, 2014, pp. 208-209).
  5. The importance of a requirement to ensure accuracy in assessment performance – two-dimensional. The learner is not only understanding, developing, and applying the knowledge, but also demonstrating the developmental process that has led to the final assessment outcome; to determine how central-assessed skills are to the work-related application (Ashford-Rowe et al, 2014, p. 209).
  6. The role of the assessment environment and the tools used to deliver the assessment task – because recreating the working environment for training is not easy, thus, the extent of simulation to accommodate the assessment has to be determined (Ashford-Rowe et al, 2014).
  7. The importance of formally designing in an opportunity to discuss and provide feedback.
  8. The value of collaboration – constructivists value the importance of collaboration that they incorporate into the assessment process. Collaborative assessment allows teachers to observe students’ communication skills and teamwork skills, which are valuable in the workplace.

According to Brookhart (2010), constructing an assessment always involves three basic principles:

  1. Specify clearly and exactly what it is you want to assess.
  2. Design tasks or test items that require students to demonstrate this knowledge or skills.
  3. Decide what you will take as evidence of the degree to which students have shown this knowledge or skill.

To assess higher-level thinking involves three additional principles:

  1. Present something for students to think about, usually in the form of introductory text, visuals, scenarios, resource material, or problems of some sort.
  2. Use novel material – material that is new to students, not covered in class, and thus subject to recall.
  3. Distinguish between the level of difficulty (easy vs. hard) and level of thinking (lower order or recall vs. higher order), and control for each separately.

Constructed response and essay questions – designed to tap various kinds of reasoning. A rubric with a short scale. Start with the criterion, the type of thinking you intended to assess.

Performance assessment – to assess performance, papers, and projects. The NWREL Mathematics Problem-Solving Scoring is an example of this performance assessment.

Understanding E-learning Technologies-in-practice through Philosophies-in-practice (Heather Kanuka)

Three (3) philosophies of technology according to Dahlberg (2004):

  • Uses determinism – the way we use technology artifacts within learning & teaching. Tech artifacts are neutral tools that extend our capacities. Users have control over the artifacts. Clark’s (1983; 1985) “mere vehicles that deliver instructions but do not influence student achievement…” (Kanuka, 2008, p. 96). Dahlberg (2004) disagreed with the idea that tech is merely the delivery vehicle.
  • Technological determinism – the form and effects of technology artifacts on the uses and society. Dahlberg (2004), technological determinism view technology as a causal agent that has a big role in social changes (Kanuka, 2008, p. 100). De Castel, Byrson, and Jenson argue that “e-learning tech is yet another form of cultural colonization…” (Kanuka, 2008, p. 101). Marxist class analysis, view technology as an instrument of dominance by the advantaged class over others (Kanuka, 2008, p. 99). Technology can be a tool of oppression.
  • Social determinism – how social and cultural affects forms and uses of technology artifacts (Kanuka, 2008, pp. 95-96). The way people use technology is influenced by social and cultural backgrounds.

The advantages of e-learning technologies according to Kanuka (2008):

  1. It can effectively respond to global competition.
  2. Increase the quality of the learning experience.
  3. Remove situational barriers (such as geographic location?)
  4. More cost-effective.

Concerns for e-learning:

  1. Commercialization of teaching
  2. Lack of F2F between student and teacher
  3. Techno-centric over F2F
  4. Devaluation of discussion practices
  5. Complex and deep learning cannot be achieved.
  6. Technological uniformity (technological affordance?)
  7. Surveillance might violate privacy.

Why is knowing our philosophy important?

Because we then have the option to choose what methods (solo or combination) would work for our context.

Because philosophy provides us with background information that would help us to determine the pros and cons of the method before we apply it to the context

Because philosophy incorporates what technology is best implemented for our delivery.

A philosophy of teaching and technology can be defined as “a conceptual framework that embodies certain values from which we view the many aspects of education (Zinn, 1990, qtd by Kanuka, 2008, p. 94).

Philosophy of teaching:

Liberal/perennial – the oldest teaching philosophy in the Western world. Aims to: (1) to search the truth, and (2) to develop good and moral people (Kanuka, 2008, p. 102).

Liberal philosophy derives from Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle.

Instructional methods: (1) rigorous intellectual training – grammar and rhetoric, sciences, history, literature, and philosophy; (2) teaching focuses on the content with an emphasis on investigation, criticism, and communication; (3) humanities are believed to be superior to sciences; (4) teacher is prominent in content dissemination; and (5) students are the recipients of the dissemination (Kanuka, 2008, p. 102).

Role of technology: technological determinism.

Teaching implementation: (1) automated courses with modularized units; (2) tutorials and/or simulations; (3) goal is the development of student’s character; and (4) e-learning technology is seen as a disruption to the objectives of liberal teaching (Kanuka, 2008, p. 103).

Progressive – objectives: personal growth, maintenance, and promotion of a better society. Focuses on the movement toward democratic cooperation and personal enlightenment.

Three standard outcomes: (1) knowledge; (2) wisdom; and (3) skills.

Education is viewed as practical, pragmatic, and utilitarian (p. 103).

Instructional methods: (1) teachers have a role in social reform and reconstruction; (2) students and society are inseparable; (3) the student-teacher relationship as a partnership; (4) learning is something that students do for themselves (constructivism/connectivism?); (5) learning involves experience; (6) teacher’s role is to organize, stimulate, instigate, and evaluate through mediating and consultation; (7) interactive learning.

Instructional methods: (1) experimental; (2) problem-solving; (3) situation approaches to learning; (4) curriculum is organized around issues that students can relate to.

The role of technology uses determinism.

E-learning technology can be effectively used for progressive teaching resulting in a learner-centered environment.

Behaviorist– to bring observable changes in students’ behavior.

Behaviorist views society’s problem as caused by people’s behavior; thus, education is aimed to change people’s behavior to create a better society (behaviorist seems to view the world from a more negative angle although the argument is legit, but it feels more on the negative side (pessimistic?) instead of optimistic and sees people from a positive angle).

Instructional methods: (1) cleared learning objective at the beginning of the learning process or predetermined learning outcomes; (2) reward & punishment; (3) focus on the content with a subject-centered approach; (4) assessment; (5) teacher’s role is to create an elicit environment for behavior change; (6) teacher’s role is to control the environment; (7) student’s role is passive and recipients; (8) computer-based tutorial; (9) standardized course management system; and (10) feedback for correction (pp. 105-106).

Role of technology: technological determinism – e-learning technology helps to create effective and efficient learning experiences.

Humanist – aims to support individual growth and self-actualization. Learning is personal (not social, unlike social constructivism? But the instructional method emphasizes group activities? So which one? I am confused).

“Personal growth and development, self-actualization, and discovery are important learning and thinking skills” (Kanuka, 2008, p. 108).

Focus on freedom and autonomy, trust, active participation and cooperation, and self-directed learning (Wedemeyer?)

Instructional methods: (1) group activity; (2) group training; (3) sensitivity workshop (?); (4) transactional analysis; (5) self-directed learning; (6) experiment discovery; (5) students identify their own learning needs; (6) focus learning on students’ growth and development, NOT content, and affective rather than cognitive education; (7) student as the center of the learning process; (8) teachers are facilitators; (9) students are responsible for the learning, not teachers; and (10) personal growth and self-actualization as main goals.

Role of technology uses determinism – e-learning can, under conditions, can serve important roles in flexibility, convenience, and meeting the individual needs of students.

Radical – “to invoke change in the political, economic, and social order in society via the intersection of education and political action” (Kanuka, 2008, p. 108).

Instructional methods: (1) dialogic encounters that lead to praxis (what does it mean?); (2) problem posing; (3) problem identification; (4) discussion based on respect, communication, and solidarity; (5) collective dialog; (6) critical questionings; (7) teacher’s role is to raise students’ consciousness to political and social contradictions in their culture; (8) equal status between teacher and learner (?); and (9) students are considered an unfinished product, which teacher’s job is to shape them? (a bit like behaviorist?)

Role of technology: social determinism – e-learning technologies are companies and people with money owned; thus, it is conflicting with their objectives (Marxism?).

Analytical – “aims to develop rationality, which is assisted by the fearless transmission of educationally worthwhile knowledge” (Kanuka, 2008, p. 110).

Instructional methods: (1) the teacher is core in providing guidance and direction; (2) teachers make a choice of material that is worthwhile taught to students; (3) class discussion is ideal learning activity; (4) students are subordinate to teachers, and (5) society and education SHOULD NOT be linked especially in multicultural and plural society (opposite of social constructivism and connectivism?).

The role of technology uses determinism with conditions.

REFLECTION

Behaviorism and cognitivism share similarities from the aspect of the learners. Both behaviorism and cognitivism convey that learners are individuals; therefore, the process of learning is taking place within and in the individuals. For behaviorism, behavioral changes by external stimuli are the outcomes expected from this learning theory. On the other hand, cognitivism emphasizes that the process of learning is happening inside the learner’s cognitive; learning is an internal process of learners although Bandura’s social cognitivism argues that the environment also participates in influencing the overall learning process.

Behaviorism work for Special Ed, younger students because this phase of being human is one of the most critical phases of learning basic behaviors. The rewards & punishment method and modeling method, for example, are the common method used in parenting, I would argue. Behaviorism and cognitivism work in certain circumstances. Learning in behaviorism and cognitivism can be learned and unlearned. The timing seems important to ensure smooth delivery.

Bandura provides an example in his Social Cognitive Theory that children learn from their environment by duplicating what they see and observe and making it into their own. We often hear and are told to be conscious of what we say and do in front of the children for this reason, I would argue.

As for Piaget’s theory, I would argue, that his theory is important to set the foundation for children’s four stages of development although there are many children who excel above the provided standard. I really think that Piaget’s research comes in very handy in providing the foundation for learning so that any learning techniques and contents can be altered accordingly, depending on the learner’s development stage, to maximize the learning experience.

Although, arguably, in my opinion, there are similarities between behaviorism and cognitivism theory from the aspect of the learner as the focus of learning. I found it interesting that behaviorism and cognitivism advocates used different subjects/objects in their research. For example, as conveyed in Zhou and Brown’s journal article, I see that behaviorism originators such as Watson and Skinner used animals as their research objects, as opposed to Piaget and Bandura, cognitivism originators, who used humans as their subjects. It strikes me that the fundamental difference of their research subjects/objects actually demonstrates how learners are deemed as objects in behaviorism theory. I feel like behaviorism’s black box can also be Play-Doh, the wax-like compound children use to make arts and crafts. The Play-Doh compound is shaped the way children want it to be.

Furthermore, I personally like Bandura’s thoughts on human agency. I believe that human agency is an important part of being human. I learned that many social changes in our society are prompted by the human agency towards the issues, for example, the right to vote for women was prompted by the human agency that women are not second-class citizens in society.

For assessment learning, I would argue that assessment is critical to the success of the overall learning process. In my personal opinion, assessment is the reason for my learning progress. I always look forward to my assessments. I wanted to hear from the subject matter experts, such as teachers, about how I do on my assignments. I surely want to know more about what I can do better. It is also nice to have acknowledgment when I do well. Assessments are intended to help learners improve their performance. Assessments generate motivation to do better, ideally. Assessments help learners to be on track with their goals.

I personally prefer formative assessment compared to summative one. Formative assessment allows me to detail my progress in each module, for example. I believe that information is built upon one another; thus, knowing the detailed progress of my learning helps me to see the bigger picture even better. I know that both assessments are, perhaps, equally important to the overall success of learning. Summative assessments are the kind of assessment that evaluates how much understanding a student has obtained from his/her learning. I guess I am not much of a fan of final exams or standardized testing.

References

Ashford-Rowe, K., Herrington, J., & Brown, C. (2014). Establishing the critical elements that determine authentic assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(2), 205-222. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.819566

Brookhart, S. M. (2010). How to assess higher-order thinking skills in your classroom. http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/109111/chapters/General_Principles_for_Assessing_Higher-Order_Thinking.aspx

Kanuka, H. (2008). Understanding e-learning technologies in practice through philosophies-in-practice. In The theory and practice of online learning (pp. 91-118). Athabasca University Press.

Zhou, M., & Brown, D. (2017). Educational learning theories (2nd ed.). https://learn.umgc.edu/content/enforced/732486-022082-01-2232-GO1-9040/Zhou_Brown_2017_Educational_Learning_Theories_2nd%20Edition.pdf?_&d2lSessionVal=r4qDkpL56wOt0Ym1yz8sDGEIN&ou=732486

Module One

Background and Foundations

Objectivism epistemology believes that facts, theories, and principles have already existed or will exist eventually (Bates, 2009).

Objectivist approaches to teaching, according to Bates (2009):

Knowledge is something that is pre-conditioned.

“A course must present a body of knowledge to be learned” (para. 2).

The content ought to be delivered effectively by instructors.

Instructors are granted big authority to create and compile well-structured content.

Students are expected to acquire and comprehend the knowledge as it is.

Students are expected to “find right answers and justify them” (para. 3).

Behaviorism theory argues that “learning is a change in observable behavior caused by external stimuli in the environment” (Ally, 2008, p. 19). The theory focuses on a quantitative measure of the learner’s learning process. Behaviorism stems from objectivism (Bates, 2009).

Behaviorists’ approaches to teaching, according to Bates (2009):

Reinforce the reward (carrot) and punishment (stick) style.

Provide feedback for correction purposes.

Multiple-choice testing style.

Measurable learning objectives.

Computer-assisted instruction.

Behaviorism implications to online learning as conveyed by Ally (2008):

A clear expectation of the overall learning process, content, and the outcome is stated early on.

The content must be well-structured and in sequence.

Students’ academic standing is measured by testing.

Feedback must be provided for monitoring and correction purposes.

Cognitivism “See learning as an internal process that involves memory, thinking, reflection, abstraction, motivation, and metacognition” (Ally, 2008, p. 21). For cognitivism, learners and their memory, consciousness, and emotion are active agents in a learning process.

Bloom’s taxonomies of learning objectives, which were later on modified by Anderson and Krathwol, are the most widely used taxonomies by cognitivism, as follows:

  • Cognitive
  • Affective (feeling)
  • Psychomotor (doing)
  • Creating (Bates, 2009, para. 4)

Cognitivism online learning approaches, according to Ally (2008):

Incorporate students’ different learning styles.

Due to a limited duration of memory; therefore, information is best to be transmitted in increments.

Encourage real-life cases in the assignments.

Present a material that is well-designed and aesthetically pleasing to create interests for the memory to acquire, process, and link the information with the existing one in order to make a connection.

Encourage learners to use their metacognitive skills (p. 29).

Constructivism asserts that the “learner is the center of learning, with the instructor playing an advising and facilitating role (Ally, 2008, p. 30). (Charles Wedemeyer, Michael Moore, and Borje Holmberg share the cognitivism/constructivism ideal when it comes to the focus on distance learning, a learner is the center of learning. Is it?)

Constructivism shares similarities with cognitivism when it comes to the learner as the center of the learning process. However, constructivism signifies the importance of human “consciousness, free will, and social influences” (Bates, 2009, para. 1).

(This is more like Charles Wedemeyer because he emphasizes the learner who makes a decision about what to learn, what the objectives are, and how he will learn such objectives.)

For constructivists, knowledge is not just acquired; instead, knowledge is constructed “by assimilating information, relating it to our existing knowledge, and cognitively processing it” (Bates, 2009, para. 3).

“Learning is a constantly dynamic process” (Bates, 2009, para. 7).

Constructivism centers on the learners as its active agents because each learner is unique and has social interactions. (Borje Holmberg’s learner’s center of learning focuses on the personal connection between learner and instructor – “guided didactic conversation”. Is it?)

Constructivism implications to online learning, according to Ally (2008):

Learners have the control, with some guidance, to construct knowledge during the learning process.

Collaborative learning, such as group work, facilitates social interactions.

Interactive learning amongst learner, interface, content, support – instructor and expert, and context.

Connectivism “is a theory for the digital age, where individuals learn and work in a networked environment” (Ally, 2008, p. 34).

In the digital age, the available information is massive and interconnected, and it flows across networks.

Siemens (2004):

Knowledge is outside the control of humans, and it is constantly changing.

Subsequently, Siemens (2005):

Learning is an external process (forward-looking and part of the bigger picture kind of situation?) instead of an individualistic activity (cognitivism? And/or constructivism?).

Learning is a process of connecting the dots (and making a cognitive conclusion?).

Staying up to date helps to maintain learning aptitude (it helps when we need to reconnect with the existing information stored in our memory).

Learning and unlearning are part of the learning process (I agree).

The validity of information is depending on changes in society.

Pragmatism and System of Thinking. American Pragmatism is “a school of thought that focuses on action and on the idea of practice and the practical” (Saba, 2003, p. 9).

What distinguishes distance education from other forms of education (traditional?) is the feature where learners are the focus of the learning process (shared by Borje Holmberg, Charles A. Wedemeyer, and Michael G. Moore).

Holmberg’s “guided didactic conversation” refers to the importance of personal relationships between learner and teacher (Saba, 2003, p. 4).

Wedemeyer’s learner’s independence on learning management -time, space, and pace.

Moore’s “transactional distance” refers to a relationship between learner and teacher (as Wedemeyer’s) in the learning process (Saba, 2003, p. 5). (In a social science framework)

How distance education is organized is another distinguishing feature of distance education (structural issues? shared by Desmond Keegan, Otto Peters, Randy Garrison, and John Anderson).

Industrialization in education by Peters (1994) demonstrates the importance of technology contributing to distance education. A distinguishing feature of industrialization is the division of labor. Thus, industrialization in education refers to the division of labor in distance education (Saba, 2003).

“… there were no statistically significant differences between classroom instruction and educational television…” (Saba, 2003, p. 6).

(How about in today’s time? Is there any comparative study comparing classroom instruction and video recording instruction or live training webinar?)

Salomon’s “distributed cognition” (1997) refers to “the role of the individual versus the role of the group” in computer-mediated communication (Saba, 2003, p. 7).

Social events (big ones) can influence the expansion of distance education in the U.S., such as:

  • Industrialization (extensive use of technology and division of labor) and post-Industrialization (is it not also involving extensive use of technology, what differentiates between the two?)
  • Post-Cold War
  • Internet
  • Economic development

As Peter stated (1967) of his evolved definition of distance education (from Industrialization time to post-Industrialization) is “a complex, hierarchical, nonlinear dynamic, self-organized, and purposeful system of learning and teaching” (Saba, 2003, p. 12).

Due to the various epistemology and changes that take place in society, American Pragmatism offers the wisdom of a “reconciler and mediator” (Saba, 2003, p. 10).

(Is it because pragmatism is about practicality? And therefore, it is adaptable when the intersection of changes is taking place?)

The Community of Inquiry (CoI) Frameworks has three elements (Garrison, Cleveland-Innes, and Archer, 2010):

  • Cognitive presence – the extent to which learners can construct meaning through interaction
  • Social presence – learners’ ability to demonstrate their personality in the CoI
  • Teaching presence – learning process encourages cognitive and social presence to form a meaningful learning experience (video, discussion board, access to new material)

All these elements are interrelated with each other to provide the best learning experience possible.

Charles Wedemeyer – cognitive presence

Michael Moore – teaching presence (transactional distance)

Borje Holmberg – social presence (the personal connection between learner and instructor, guided didactic conversation)

So, each of their focuses demonstrates the Community of Inquiry elements.

How to measure presence according to Nolan:

  • Social presence – online post – new post and reply
  • Teaching presence – tutoring – post and reply
  • Cognitive presence – engaging the learning video.

Teaching presence demonstrates students’ overall positive learning experience.

Four key changes in learning design methodology: (Nolan, 2019, pp. 5-6)

  • The online module lasts for three weeks instead of weekly (Prof. Steve uses this method).
  • Reward systems in discussion sessions – compulsory or optional to post (participating in discussion increase interaction and information sharing, to the very least).
  • Increase tutor involvement.
  • Shorter video duration and spread out throughout the module, integrated with other material. Open-ended questions encourage the thinking process, note-taking, and reflection (Prof. Steve uses this method).

Online education videos should be no longer than six minutes with three minutes break (Nolan, 2019, p. 5).

Social presence is the bridge that connects cognitive and teaching presence. Communication is required for collaboration and interpersonal skills development (Garrison, Anderson, and Archer, 2010, p. 7).

REFLECTION

Thinking about objectivism, behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism, and connectivism theories, I would argue that each of these theories is interconnected to each other in a path of providing a comprehensive model of distance education.

I would argue that no theory is perfect, it is not a situation that is one size fits all. There are many variables, internal and external, to take into consideration when designing what structure would work for certain circumstances.

Internal variables, I would argue, comprise maturity, personality, pre-existing cognitive skills, attitude toward learning, and more. External variables, I would argue, comprise socio-economic, upbringing, geographic location, and culture.

My preferred method of delivery in distance education is hybrid (with synchronous and asynchronous formats). I still think that social interaction is needed because humans are, by nature, social beings. Although not all humans are social butterflies, the need to be social would still be there. An introvert would still be social; she/he just does not need socialization as much as an extrovert.

Although hybrid is my preferred method, I would argue that it should not be made compulsory. What I would do, instead, is to come to a consensus with each student to come to an agreement to meet on the core day(s). The core day(s) is to be decided collectively.

As mentioned in the readings, behaviorism seems to be a good theory to be applied in a learning process that is more factual and standardized. The carrot and stick model fits in behaviorism theory. The same goes with other epistemology, each one of them is a good model for certain learning processes and objectives, depending on its population.

The way I see epistemology in distance education is like I see how we parent our children. We do not exactly use only one theory for the rest of our lives as parents. We adjust and adapt our parenting epistemology depending on the children, the situation, the challenges, and the means and the objectives we have for the children. Parenting children is not a static act; it continuously evolves.

I would argue that Charles Wedemeyer, Michael Moore, and Borje Holmberg, share, to a certain extent, the cognitivism/constructivism ideal when it comes to the focus on distance learning, the learner is the center of learning. The difference is, I would argue, the implementation of this learner’s center focus. Wedemeyer, focuses strongly on independent learning where the student is the one who makes the decision about what lesson he/she wants to learn and how to learn it. Arguably, by giving autonomy to the learner, the outcome would be more ideal, meaning that the student would be more responsible for his/her own objectives. Setting one’s objectives, she/he would make a better strategy. When I see Wedemeyer’s learner’s center focus, I think of the cognitive presence element of the Community of Inquiry Framework.

On the other hand, Michael Moore’s learner’s center focuses on the transaction between the learner and instructor during the learning process. When a learner and an instructor interact more, the learning increases. It goes the opposite when a learner interacts less with the instructor, the learning decreases. I feel like Moore’s paradigm demonstrates the teaching presence element of the Community of Inquiry Frameworks.

In addition, Borje Holmberg’s learner’s center focuses on the personal relationship between learner and teacher, “guided didactic conversation.” A teacher, ideally, would guide and be the real mentor to the learner. With a good personal relationship, the quality of the teacher’s teaching the student, I would argue, is higher, which would result in a better learning experience. I would argue that Holmberg’s learner’s center displays the social presence element of the Community of Inquiry Frameworks.

After reading Saba’s paper, I got to think more about the epistemology of distance education. I would start with the behaviorism theory of learning, which I would argue, demonstrates a seemingly one-way learner-teacher relationship. Although the relationship is not fully one-way; however, a teacher seems to have more control over the students as well as the overall learning process.

Because behaviorism is about observing the expected behavior from learners, thus, teachers would set up expectations for students early in the process. Furthermore, it makes sense that the teachers would also be the ones that set the examples to learners on how to achieve those expectations. It is sort of a learn-by-example kind of relationship. Teachers set positive examples and encouragement, and students are expected to follow.

In addition, the reward/punishment method in behaviorism reminds me of the K-12 learning process. Teachers would give stars/rewards/points to students who do well and give corrections to students who need to do better. There are many applications that K-12 teachers use for this reward/punishment method, for example, ClassDojo. There are individualized reward points given to students who show the expected quality behavior. Throughout the school year, each student will collect Dojo points and will be able to earn rewards. In my son’s ES, the biggest reward that a student aims for is a 30-min free time where the student can do anything, including playing games with their computer. For K-12 students, this 30-min free time is an awesome reward to have; and committed students, like my son, aim for it 😊. ClassDojo rewards app is also utilized by the whole school, which means each class competes to win the classroom reward.

Behaviorism theory also fits the teaching style in the military and for people with learning disabilities. I would also argue that behaviorism is applicable to teaching older generations. In my culture, the older generation tends to have an either-or and/or yes/no mindset. So, I wonder if behaviorism is applicable to teaching older generations, in general (I am not trying to brush all older generations with the same brush, of course).

Cognitivism theory seems to be ideal to be implemented in learners from a very early age to prepare and develop the learner’s brain and cognitive skills to acquire and process information available to and for them. Arguably, for this to work, the instructor’s ability to create and develop such a learning environment is vital.

Since cognitivism focuses on the learner, therefore, learner’s level of comprehension of the learning content is varied. Thus, an individualized approach, guidance, and assessment become significant to measure each learner’s standing in acquiring the information during the learning process.

Cognitivism’s goal for learners is to possess critical thinking skills, which is a higher level of cognitive skills for problem-solving.

When I think of constructivism, I think of the Montessori method of teaching. I wonder if the Montessori method is built upon or based on constructivism, after all, Maria Montessori was a researcher and professional who focuses on early childhood education.

I would argue that the Montessori method covers both cognitivism and constructivism; but it is lining towards constructivism more due to Montessori’s key components that emphasize collaborative work among peers, instructor as a guide, and learning-by-doing context (Montessori method, n.d.). Furthermore, because social interaction (peers review and collaborative work) is an important component in constructivism, this differentiates constructivism from cognitivism, where information is more “provided” by the instructor and that learning is an internal mental process, excluding the socialization process during the learning process.

Whereas cognitivism is acquiring, storing, and processing information – that is structured for the learners – into knowledge; constructivism is constructing the knowledge from the information available in a social interaction.

As for connectivism, I would argue that this theory is still in progress as we are still in the digital age. Computer, internet, and information technologies are still evolving with potentially newly updated and upgraded ones. With the advancement of technology and progress in many countries’ socio-economic, the availability and flow of information become extremely abundant. Internet’s availability is no longer reserved only developed countries; the internet is almost available in every corner of the world, even in a location that is much less populated and civilized. Accessing information is no longer dependent on our ability to have a desktop computer. In developing worlds, a computer is something still considered a luxury item. However, a smartphone, although it can be equally expensive, has become a necessary tool for communication. The smartphone becomes not only a tool of communication but also a tool for acquiring information that, to various levels of extent, many people turn into knowledge.

The presence of social media, for example, has revolutionized how information is available and presented. I feel like many things in today’s time run so extremely fast, I feel the need to disconnect, sometimes. Of course, what is “fast” in the U.S. can differ from what is “fast” in my home country, Indonesia. However, one thing that is “at the same time” is, I would argue, the availability of the information itself. People all over the world can access the same exact information simultaneously despite their geographic regions. This is extremely fascinating, concurrently a bit concerning (not in a bad way necessarily). Information can last a few days, months, years, or days if not minutes! The value and validity of information are, in many ways or for popular information at least, depending on a collective consensus of the recipients or people who acquire it.

For example, now, breaking news seems to be happening all the time. Back then, I remember, breaking news is something that does not take place every day; it was meant for a special events. But today, every news channels always have breaking news. After that, that breaking news do not seem to last very long because they are replaced by other breaking news. It demonstrates connectivism’s learning and un-learning component, I would argue.

In connection with the Community of Inquiry Framework, I would argue that the social presence is definitely there. The network in connectivism is probably the teaching presence (connectivism argues that the information is, out there, in the network). As for the cognitive presence, I would argue, in connectivism would be the learner’s ability to acquire this diverse information, make collective observation, and determination on the information they are worth keeping or not.

Although from what I have read connectivism is still an ongoing theory, I would say, yes, because human civilization is still ongoing. Would it be another theory like the previous ones? I would say, yes. Would it be perfect? I would say, of course not, just like other theories before it that are not perfect. I guess this is where pragmatism in the U.S. distance education comes in. Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism, and connectivism still stay because they each have qualities that are applicable to learning and distance education. After all, pragmatism, in my own way, means being practical. It is like Darwin’s theory of survival. These theories of learning still survive to date because they have components that allow them to survive.

References

Ally, M. (2008). Foundation of educational theory of online learning. In The theory and practice of online learning (pp. 15-44). Athabasca University Press. https://www.aupress.ca/app/uploads/120146_99Z_Anderson_2008-Theory_and_Practice_of_Online_Learning.pdf

Anderson, T. (2008). Towards a theory of online learning. In  The theory and practice of online learning (pp. 45-74). Athabasca University Press. https://www.aupress.ca/app/uploads/120146_99Z_Anderson_2008-Theory_and_Practice_of_Online_Learning.pdf

Bates, A. W. (2019). Teaching in a digital age. Victoria, BC: BCcampus. https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2010). The first decade of the community of inquiry framework: A retrospective. Internet and Higher Education, 13(1), 5-9. http://www2.mcdaniel.edu/its/BPO_2011/readings/Garrison-first%20decade.pdf

Montessori Generation. (n.d.). Montessori method.https://montessorigeneration.com/pages/montessori-method

Nolan-Grant, C. R. (2019). The community of inquiry framework as learning design model: A case study in postgraduate online education. Research in Learning Technology, 27, 1-15.

Saba, F. (2003). Distance education theory, methodology, and epistemology: A pragmatic paradigm. In Handbook of distance education (pp. 3-19). Lawrence ERL Baum and Associates.