Week 3
Engagement Activity: The cognitivist approach
Reflection on readings
Although
there appear to be many ways of viewing learning theory, the interpretation
presented in the notes provided suggests one angle is where the primary organiser
is the nature of knowledge – objective or subjective.
The
objectivist view of learning is that the learning is fixed and independent of
individual perspectives. It is evidenced in learning theories such as
behaviourism and cognitivism.
The
objective nature of knowledge seems to be an attempt to linearise a non-linear
concept. Although not ideal, the linear approach enables the researcher to
tease out the complex multidimensional processes that may be occurring in
learning. This notion was alluded to in the article on cognitivism by Winn and
Snyder (1996), where cognitive psychology arose because behaviourism was deemed
not sufficient to account for all human activity. Indeed, cognitive psychology
still draws from a behaviourist view …”objectively observable behavior is all
even cognitive researchers have to go on”. This notion is further supported by
the likes of Blooms’s cognitive taxonomy (1956); Gagne’s conditions of learning
(1956), Kirkpatrick’s learning and training evaluation model (1959) and Anderson’s
memory system in the brain (2000) where a hierarchical approach to learning is
mooted.
Although the
nature of knowledge and learning is multidimensional, these readings suggest
that one way to study the process in this paradigm is to look at it in a hierarchy
– as assumed in the information processing theory mentioned in the notes.
Value of the cognitivist approach to my
teaching context
The
objectivist approach to eLearning does have some value in my teaching context. The
advantage of this type of learning is when the outcome required is a set of
rules and/or responsibilities that must be understood and followed by the
employee. Understandably, a clinician undertaking the learning module may have limited
time and this also has impact on the scope and creativity exercised in the
learning event. A favourable outcome may not be the most rewarding and
memorable learning experience, however, the instructions received by the
‘student’ would be clear and unambiguous and their behavior would be observed as
OH&S compliant.
This
methodology is valuable certainly to the organisation, whereby the important
message is delivered and received in a timely manner. It would be an
interesting exercise to investigate if there has been a reduction in the level
of OH&S non-compliance since the introduction of the types of modules mentioned
above. Further to this, recall of the learning experience would also be
intriguing to determine.
Content areas that lend themselves to this
approach to learning
The drill
and practice and staged form of eLearning is commonplace in the Qld Health
milieu. For example, clinicians are required to complete mandatory training
often annually to maintain registration or currency, or simply to remind them
about fire and safety, manual handling procedures etc. For some, this task is
tedious and felt to be a waste of time, for others is does serve as a useful
reminder about the OH&S requirements of their facility. There is some value
in the cognitivist approach where some rules/regulations must be understood and
followed without deviation.
As far as a
learning experience – that I believe is debatable.
Learning outcomes predicted
According to
the Oxford Dictionary, learning may be defined as the acquisition of knowledge
or skills through, study, experience or being taught. This being the case,
there may be some acquisition of knowledge as a result of this type of didactic
learning – perhaps this is a euphemism for compliance?
Limitations to the cognitive approach to
learning
Some of the
limitations to the cognitive approach to learning are the lack of opportunity
for creativeness, lack of opportunity for inquiry and freedom to pursue
emerging topics of interest. The holistic approach to the multidimensionality
of learning may elicit more relevant learning outcomes, however I do believe
there are situations that call for the cognitivist approach. As mentioned
above, where rules and regulations need to be understood and followed. A
combination of all approaches tailored to the desired learning outcomes may
deliver best results – it certainly opens many opportunities for facilitator
and learner.
I think the
meaningfulness of the learning modules (mentioned above) to the student is a
huge area of blur – so too, seeking feedback on ways to improve the format and
experience of the learning from the student – that is, feedback is not
currently sought/analysed and then used for further improvement. This path of
inquiry seems to lead to the topic of constructivism…
References
Central
Queensland University (2014) EDEL20001: Learning
theory in the digital age, Student notes, http://moodle.cqu.edu.au, viewed 9 March 2014
Winn, W &
Snyder, D (1996) Cognitive perspectives in psychology, in D.H. Jonassen (ed.) Handbook
of research for educational communications and technology, NY: Simon &
Schuster
