Death by -ism
Lisa Durff,
Durff's Blog,
Dec 28, 2010
Some really smart thinking from Lisa Durff, which I'll quote at length because the post, visible in my RSS Reader, doesn't appear on her blog (I assume this is a Blogger error, and not a retraction, because there's really no reason to retract this post).
"After reading the posts and comments by Bill Kerr, Karl Kapp, and Stephen Downes, I created the graphic [at right] combining the learning theories and Bloom's Revised Taxonomy. Karl Kapp suggests that the lower levels could best utilize the Behaviorist theory, while Cognitivism addresses the middle levels and the top levels are best described by Constructionism. This graphic neatly puts Bloom's and the three -isms into place, but leaves out the fourth -ism -> Connectionism. Perhaps Bloom's needs yet another revision, adding another level for learning which is best explained by the Connectionism theory. It might say forming PLNs & networks.
I have challenged @gsiemens on twitter to define his theory in the allotted 140 characters.He answered me with, 'knowledge exists in connections. Learning is growing/pruning those connections.' So I see another level may be needed as well, one that says-> Pruning & Cultivating Connections. I do agree with Karl Kapp that different ways of learning are best explained by different theories and that teachers should not limit themselves to one theory but should be able to use an arsenal of methods (grounded in various theories) to educate students. Bill Kerr also considers each -ism to be valuable for various ways of understanding learning."
I've create my own graphic, below, which extends Bloom's as suggested, adding a 'Connectivism' level with the related skills, 'relate' and 'integrate'. I don't completely agree with this approach - there are places where Behaviorism and Cognitivism are just plain wrong - but I think there's insight in the method.
"After reading the posts and comments by Bill Kerr, Karl Kapp, and Stephen Downes, I created the graphic [at right] combining the learning theories and Bloom's Revised Taxonomy. Karl Kapp suggests that the lower levels could best utilize the Behaviorist theory, while Cognitivism addresses the middle levels and the top levels are best described by Constructionism. This graphic neatly puts Bloom's and the three -isms into place, but leaves out the fourth -ism -> Connectionism. Perhaps Bloom's needs yet another revision, adding another level for learning which is best explained by the Connectionism theory. It might say forming PLNs & networks.
I have challenged @gsiemens on twitter to define his theory in the allotted 140 characters.He answered me with, 'knowledge exists in connections. Learning is growing/pruning those connections.' So I see another level may be needed as well, one that says-> Pruning & Cultivating Connections. I do agree with Karl Kapp that different ways of learning are best explained by different theories and that teachers should not limit themselves to one theory but should be able to use an arsenal of methods (grounded in various theories) to educate students. Bill Kerr also considers each -ism to be valuable for various ways of understanding learning."
I've create my own graphic, below, which extends Bloom's as suggested, adding a 'Connectivism' level with the related skills, 'relate' and 'integrate'. I don't completely agree with this approach - there are places where Behaviorism and Cognitivism are just plain wrong - but I think there's insight in the method.
Today: 0 Total: 92 [Direct link] [Share]
