Thursday, February 2, 2012

Section 2: Theories and Models of Learning and Instruction

Often students have trouble differentiating between the different types of government. As a Social Studies teacher, this learning goal would be useful to incorporate two learning theories to teach this concept to students.
            The first theory that would be useful is the Situated Learning Theory (Reiser and Dempsey, 2007).[1] Realistically, educators are unable to send students to other countries to observe first hand these different types of governments for this learning theory.  However, role-playing in the classroom setting can be highly effective. For instance, each day of a week, the classroom could be organized around a certain type of government (democracy, monarchy, etc.). Then, at the end of the week the students should retain the information from their participation in the activities. In other words, through the use of role-playing, the learning takes on more meaning. Think of occupations of the past, like a blacksmith. One did not learn to be a good blacksmith by reading about it in a book; they had to learn by doing through an apprenticeship. Same kind of concept of the situated learning theory: application of objectives in a real world setting (Reiser and Dempsey, 2007). 
The second learning theory that would be useful in learning about different types of government is the Gagne’s Theory of Instruction. Gagne’s Theory of Instruction resembles many lesson plan cycles used by school districts for teachers to follow; only Gagne's is more thorough. Grabbing the students’ attention is important in order to get them to listen. One could get their attention for the government lessons by starting off with a dictatorship in the classroom. The students should notice the difference immediately. The objective would be stated to the students and a discussion on prior knowledge is a great way to start off (Reiser and Dempsey, 2007). The discussion enables students to add on to their prior knowledge of the different types of governments for better retrieval in the future. The students would complete activities through the week as in the situated learning theory. The teacher would provide guidance that enables the students to practice what is being learned. As the students are learning, educators are providing feedback and students are being assessed. Applications of their knowledge of governments to match with different types of economies would be a good extension of the lesson. Simply by combining two learning theories, Situation Learning and Gagne’s Theory of Instruction, students could thoroughly understand the concepts of the different types of government. This supports the design models of the previous blog post about teamwork, collecting data, etc.


Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction[2]
Common Characteristics
First Principles of Instruction
Gain Attention
Engage the Learner
Problem Centered
Inform Learner of Objective


Recall Prior Knowledge
Build from Existing Knowledge
Activation
Present Material
Instruction
Demonstration
Provide Guided Learning


Elicit Performance
Apply Learning
Application
Provide Feedback


Assess Performance


Enhance Retention or Transfer
Use in a real world setting
Integration and Implementation

Figure 1

Figure 1 shows characteristics for Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction and the First Principles of Instruction. Based on the table, there are many similarities among the different designs. Ultimately, Gagne’s design has a few more processes to go through during the instructional lesson. Both designs start with engagement and end with the transfer of knowledge to a real world application. As stated earlier, a lesson teaching about the different forms of government can be delivered using the Gagne’s design. However, when applied to the First Principles of Instruction, the cycle of the lesson is very similar. The first task would be engaging the students by creating an atmosphere of a dictatorship regime in the classroom (problem centered). Then the students can conduct a survey or have a discussion on prior knowledge of the different governments (Activation). It would be easiest to start with our government, since most students are somewhat familiar with it. Throughout the week the information will be demonstrated through a series of lessons (scaffolding, etc.).  As students obtain the information, they need to apply their knowledge through written work and argumentative discussions (Application). During application, the teacher will provide feedback to check for understanding. Lastly, the information should be transferred to depend their understanding through reflection and real world application. As stated under Gagne’s design, a transfer could be to take their knowledge about government and apply it to the different types of economies. Many of the instructional design models are similar. Some just have more details than others. Regardless of the model an educator chooses to use, the most important outcome is student learning (Reiser and Dempsey, 2007).
If an educator wanted to teach a lesson on reading maps, the objectives could be taught using three different styles: whole-task approach, scaffolding, and mathemagenic methods to help students perform a task. Whole task approach, students need to have “expertise” for a specific task (Reiser and Dempsey, 2007). To get to that level for reading maps, student would learn knowledge for map reading specifically. Next, they would practice reading maps until they had very few errors. Then, they should be able to perform at an expert level with the complex skills (Reiser and Dempsey, 2007). When using the whole task approach, students must reflect on their progress. Once students learn each activity over maps, they must integrate that knowledge to build an expert understanding of maps.
Scaffolding could also be used to teach students how to read maps. This is similar to the Bloom’s Taxonomy of learning; it is a learning hierarchy. One must start with the lower part-task approach and gradually move up to whole-task while integrating the learned knowledge (Reiser and Dempsey, 2007). For learning about reading maps, an educator could start with the basic parts of the maps and their meanings. Then move up to comprehension of what the maps are showing. Students should apply their knowledge in a series of activities regarding map reading. As they progressed, they should start analyzing data from maps. At the final stages of learning, the students should be able to evaluate and create maps using their acquired knowledge. During many staff development sessions, experts have referred to scaffolding as building a house. The builders must start with the foundation. Once the foundation is in place, then the builders build the frame. After that is accomplished, they build the rest of the house. In other words, students need to have the foundations of a concept before moving one to more complex skills.
The mathemagenic method is focused on having students transfer their knowledge to the real world. With the new standards and testing for the state of Texas, there is an increasing tendency to teach to the test. The state puts pressure on the school districts for high passing percentages and in turn the school districts put pressure on administrators and so forth. This goes on until finally many educators attempt to teach to the test. When this happens, where does this leave real world application? Mathemagenic method is useful in helping teachers teach a concept to students and having them transfer that knowledge. For instance, when teaching students about maps, if students are just taught each part of the map in isolation without bringing it together, then they may have difficulty with the integration. Additionally, they would have a low transfer of the knowledge. Students need the different constituent skills to help with this transfer of knowledge (Reiser and Dempsey, 2007). Regardless of the instructional goal, students need to be taught to apply what they are learning to the real world. In this case, apply map reading to real world experience.
Motivation is important in getting students to learn. There are studies and debates in education about intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation. ARCS model of categories and subcategories is a good starting off place if one were to design a course that needed to motivate learners (Reiser and Dempsey, 2007). The first task is to grab the student’s attention. Without attention the students will not learn anything that is being said. Going back to the map reading scenario, perceptual arousal under attention could be useful. An educator could give students a “treasure map” that led to an object that they must find in their classroom or school. Next, under ARCS model is relevance. If students do not find the information relevant, they will not find any value in what they are learning. Familiarity would be a great way to make it relevant to students. Many students today are familiar with GPS systems and Google maps. Confidence is the next category. Students need opportunities to experience success and gain confidence. Students with confidence in their abilities will perform better than students without confidence. An educator could start a student off with easy maps to gain confidence, and then gradually make it harder. The last category on the ARCS model is satisfaction. A combination of the subcategories might be useful in a classroom full of students. The intrinsic reinforcement might be enough for many of the students. They know the value of what is being taught and appreciate their growth in understanding of the topic. However, there are always those students who need that little something extra through extrinsic rewards. This could be a good grade, praise, or something of a tangible object (give them a compass) etc. As an educator motivating students to learn is a daily challenge. This author finds the ARCS model helpful in providing a guide to helping students become motivated to learn the material.
After completing the activities, one can conclude that there are positive aspects of learning instructional design in education. For one thing, this author always thought instructional design was the same old lesson plan cycle that was given to us undergraduates and that school districts still pass down as a requirement. Instructional design is so much more complex and detailed. Also, there are differences in the various instructional design models. However, these differences can be a good thing. This benefit of having different options enables an educator or designer to choose the best instructional design that works for them. Everyone is different and what works for one educator will not work for another. Another benefit in engaging in design research is to have a guide/outline in planning. Often planning is not structured and steps are left out. By becoming more familiar with instructional design, one can be more conscious of the different thought processes and sequencing when planning instruction.








[1]   Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (2007). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology. (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
[2] Mountain, L A. (2010). Evidence based videoconferencing: Results of a series of quasi-experimental replication studies. In Dissertation abstracts international section a: Humanities and social sciences.  (pp. 4575).Ann Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilms International.


1 comment: