In my thesis, I had a brief paragraph about Burke’s Pentad, but I didn’t really discuss that until about halfway through Chapter 2. I’ll ignore that paragraph for now and include it when I get to the relevant section.
In the last post, Interpersonal Interactions, I started to discuss what I mean by interaction. Within learning environments, it is very much an interpersonal process. Seeing as the focus of my research is the way people learn, it’s important to have some definition of what we mean by learning. I think the whole of my thesis (all 280+ pages) helps to define learning, particularly mediated learning, but in order to create a shared understanding of learning, I need to establish how I view it. I welcome comments that aid in the elaboration of this social process.
{Begin extract}
Defining learning is a complex issue with multiple perspectives and theoretical underpinnings. Most recently, constructivist principles have focused on the construction of knowledge by individuals, either solely or in groups. Constructivism has its roots in the work of Bruner (1966) and deals with four major aspects: (i) how individuals are predisposed to learning; (ii) how a body of knowledge can be structured for ready construction by learners; (iii) the effective sequencing of materials which provide access to knowledge construction opportunities; and (iv) the nature of incentives and penalties. Effective methods for structuring knowledge should result in simplification, the generation of new propositions, and an increase in the manipulation of information. This is because these attributes are seen as being those possessed by individuals who demonstrate competence within a domain of activities (Ericsson and Lehmann, 1996). Jonassen’s (1998 online) version of constructivism views knowledge as “individually constructed and socially co-constructed by learners based on their interpretations of experiences in the world”. Co-construction refers to the reciprocal processes of interaction between two people, which shape the processes and outcomes of the constructive process (Lawrence and Valsiner, 1993). For instance, two individuals can discuss a concept, each adding their own insight, which may result in a shared definition of that concept. However, the co-construction interaction between humans mediated by non-human artefacts is less well understood. Objectivist notions, on the other hand, treat knowledge as an ‘object’ that can be transmitted and acquired by learners. While initially constructivist philosophy focused on the notion of the individual working with knowledge, some social constructivist positions also take the view that “cognition is a situated activity rooted in social practices” (Grossen, 2000 p21).
{End extract}
I recently came across a book entitled “The Nurnberg Funnel” which I think is related to the Nuremburg Funnel, if not the same thing. It is particularly relevant for discussing how we teach and learn about the use of computers and I find it quite distressing that many of the training tools we have take on the conceptualisation of pouring information into one’s head as a metaphor for learning (what for my discussion of this later). This is very much an objectivist approach: fact-based, easily assessable, and easily learnt. However, I much prefer co-construction as a model and need to further develop some of my ideas on adult learning and how we get there.
References:
Bruner, J. (1966) Toward a Theory of Instruction, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Carrol, J.M. (1990) The Nurnberg Funnel: Minimalist Instruction for Practical Computer Skill, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Ericsson, K. A. and Lehmann, A. C. (1996) Expert and exceptional performance: Evidence of maximal adaptation to task constraints, Annual Review of Psychology, 47, pp 273-305.
Grossen, M. (2000) Institutional Framings in Thinking, Learning and Teaching, in Social Interaction in Learning and Instruction: The Meaning of Discourse for the Construction of Knowledge, Cowie, H. and van der Aalsvoort, G. (Eds) Pergamon, Amsterdam.
Jonassen, D. (1998) Designing Constructivist Learning Environments, In Instructional theories and models, Reigeluth, C. M. (Ed) Lawrence, Mahwah, NJ, http://www.ed.psu.edu/insys/who/jonassen/cle/cle.html.
Lawrence, J. A. and Valsiner, J. (1993) Conceptual roots of internalisation: From transmission to transformation, Human Development, 36, pp 150-167.