I really liked the article from last week: Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism. . ." I liked it for several reasons. First, having a husband who is a teacher (and although I sometimes teach, my degree is in math), I have heard these terms for years and not really completely understood them. This article was a really great concise explanation of the prevailing "doctrines" of education, and as I read it, things began to fall into place. Especially as I read about how those different groups of people (behaviorists, cognitivists, etc.) would use Instructional Design, I began to understand how I will use Instructional Design as I teach. I was especially intrigued that there are some things that a "behaviorist" and a "constructivist" would do the same, but for different reasons (like feedback -- either to reinforce behavior, or as a learning tool) Of course, in practice, we would hope to use all of these philosophies where they fit best, but it was very helpful for me to understand all of these different approaches to utilizing ID.
I also really liked the article because I realized where I lie on the behaviorist-congnitivist-constructivist spectrum. It is useful for me to realize this about myself -- where I am coming from, and what style of teaching I naturally gravitate to. This is especially useful because I can now see the great value that is in the other two "camps" and when these techniques might also be of use to me. Wow!!
No comments:
Post a Comment