OK--that title should definitely draw some traffic and interest! I just finished viewing Bill Kerr and Karl Kapp's respective blogs, and I have a few observations and ideas that emerged as a result of this "new data":
Kerr mentioned that there was a need for some theory to support new ideas and concepts in learning. If it weren't for theory providing a foundation, there would be nothing to keep schools and other learning organizations from joining the "Flavor of the Month Club" of educational/training philosophy. Having worked in a government organization that did that very thing some years back (anyone remember TQM?), I know firsthand the angst that gets produced in the workforce when the official view of "what should be" gets whipsawed around as senior managers with short attention spans read the latest literature (but only the abstracts).
As I see it, any good new idea about learning should still be grounded in some kind of theory or a combination thereof--I am a pragmatist! Ideas that spring half-baked and ill-conceived from the minds of consultants and defense contractors should be avoided at all costs.
Kapp brought up an interesting thought as well: what exactly DO we mean when we refer to learning? You can learn to walk, learn to dance, learn to play a musical instrument, learn good manners and social skills (although my husband skipped this particular area in its entirety), learn a language, learn calculus, learn to paint, learn to use the APA style in writing, and even learn to write a dissertation. These degrees of learning have different outcomes, and upon analysis, it's interesting to note that these learned skills span the broad spectrum of human knowledge. If you are familiar with Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences (of course you are if you are reading this!), each of these areas of intelligence has aspects that can be learned (and therefore, taught).
As usual, I have far more questions than answers...however, I know that there is no single right answer to all of them (except "42"). There is a time and place for all different types of learning, so let's use the best practices and applications across the spectrum of -isms to teach what best fits the task at hand.
Resources
Bill Kerr's blog:http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html
Karl Kapp'a blog:
http://karlkapp.blogspot.com/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational.html
A good background and overview of Gardner's Multiple Intelligences work:
http://www.infed.org/thinkers/gardner.htm
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
I liked your thoughts on the theories being the foundation. The theories do give a consistency to dialogue and thoughts.
Anne,
I see in your post the same common thread many of us have woven into our posts: the need to consider and apply each of the -isms as appropriate to the situation.
I wrote something similar myself.
However, reading your post has me thinking. Does that approach transform into the "Flavor of the Month Club" as instructors and academic administrators struggle to maintain retention and improve graduation rates?
It seems there must be an educational string theory, if you will.
Post a Comment