Being that there are many aspects of –isms, there are also vast
views that anyone can accept and there are many views that one begs to differ. As I read the blogs between Karl Kapp (http://www.kaplaneduneering.com/kappnotes/index.php/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational/)
and Bill Kerr (http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html
there are different -isms that have diverse
beliefs and many ways at looking at their theories which is entirely up to the
individuals way of exploring that concept.
Kapp (2007) states that “The issue many forget is that “learning” is not
one thing…it is a multi-layered word that tends to get treated as if it were
just one thing…and it’s not. It is multi-facetted and that is why developing
new models for “learning” is so difficult…there are too many levels for one
school of thought or one model to do it all.” With this in mind one can
articulate many possibilities from learning theories. According to Boese (2011) “By relying on
someone else’s theory, we shut out new possibilities. I will move forward
looking at isms as possibilities, not rules, to discovery.” Theorists have the right to argue ones theory
but it is entirely up to the individual learner to accept and reuse their
views. From Skinner to today’s followers
there will always be a deeper understanding as time moves forward where
congnitivism and behaviorism is concerned. As I look at it, it makes one ask
the question “What is the –ism to your understanding?”
Kerr, B. (2007, January 1). _isms as filter, not blinker [Web
log post]. Retrieved from http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html
Kapp, K. (2007, January 2). Out and about: Discussion on
educational schools of thought [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.kaplaneduneering.com/kappnotes/index.php/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational/
Boese, M. (2011, September 30). Ism consideration over regulation: cognitivism
and behaviorism. Retrieved from http://mboese.blogspot.com/2011/09/ism-consideration-over-regulation.html
I responded to:
Regina Malz http://educationaltechnologyrm.blogspot.com
Amanda
Langston www.langstoneducationaltechnology.blogspot.com
I like your quote from Boese. I agree that it is important that we use people's theories as stepping stones instead of rules set in stone. Since learning has to do with the mind (something that is not fully discovered) we don't truly know everything about how learning takes place.
ReplyDeleteHi Ellen,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the post. You are right because if we did, there would not be so many students in ESE classes.
Brigit
Christopher's response to Brigit
ReplyDeleteI really like how you provided evidence that learning is multi-facetted and can not be explained by one theory. I also included in my post that we should consider parts of each theory when describing learning.