Experiential Learning

In 1984, David Kolb published Experiential Learning and introduced educators to definitions of four learning styles - Divergers, Convergers, Accomodators, and Assimilators.

Experiential Learning Theory purports that:

People learn best from their own experiences - and their own reviews.
What people do is more important than what they know.

It is not enough to explain to people what to do; they must be shown how to actually do it and then how to improve it.

Experiential learning moves beyond knowledge and into skill by generating learning experience - the more experience the greater the skill.

To be remembered over a long period of time the learning process should be enjoyable, motivating and rewarding.

Experiential learning gets to grips with the most important aspect of training and that is to achieve change in behaviour and attitude.

Experiential learning renders behaviours and attitudes visible and thereby can become acknowledged and then addressed.
(Kolb, www.teamskillstraining).

It was Kolb who stated “Virtual spaces can become inhabited places.” In his article, Real Places in Virtual Spaces, he goes on to explain, “I am claiming, though, that while places need to be within a perceptible space that space does not have to be physical.” (Kolb, p. 1).

Kolb’s philosophical approach to learning and learning spaces has encouraged the online educational environment – helping to establish it as a viable place for teaching-learning interaction.

An example of Experiential Learning Theory in an online course is to develop assignments that students become involved with, receive clear instructions, feedback and direction, and an opportunity to apply the learning.

In COM 622, we will follow these principles as we develop a course to be taught online.

__________________________________________________
Kolb, D. Retrieved 9-25-09 from http://www.teamskillstraining.co.uk/articles/exp_learn.htm#08

Kolb, D. “Real places in virtual spaces”, Retrieved 9-25-09 from http://www.dkolb.org/sprawlingplaces

Smith, M. K. (2001). “David A. Kolb on experiential learning”, The encyclopedia of information education, http://www.infed.org/b-explrn.htm.

Student Centered Learning

Many scholars have upheld the Student-Centered Learning Theory – but the first to be credited with the idea of learners being given power in the teaching-learning process, was Hayward, as early as 1905. In 1956, Dewey continued upon this tenet, and today, the number of researchers to add to the literature and discussion is too many to mention. In 1999, Carl Rogers was given the credit for developing SCL into an educational theory.

In traditional education, teachers lecture and present assignments and give quizzes and tests. Instructors who ascribe to SCL methods, attempts to share the responsibility of learning with the student – by taking a role of “coach” in the learning process, creating “active learning” situations, and putting groups together to learn cooperatively.

Seven tenets of Student-Centered Learning were published in 2003:

The reliance on active rather than passive learning.

An emphasis on deep learning and understanding

Increased responsibility and accountability on the part of the student

An increased sense of autonomy in the learner

An interdependence between teacher and learner

Mutual respect within the learner teacher relationship

And a reflexive approach to the teaching and learning process on the part of both teacher and learner.

(Lea, et al, O’Neill & McMahon).

One of the major contributions SCL has made to education is the concept of Cooperative Learning. This practice has improved classroom learning by encouraging dialogue, cooperation, and active learning. Research has even shown that students who work in cooperative learning groups, earn better grades.

The online environment is a perfect place for SCL to find itself at home. Because of the physical distance between teacher and student, traditional lectures and tests are not sufficient for learner success. The Discussion Board element of an online course is a perfect example of SCL at work. Students are given a topic, a list of readings, and are asked to discuss a set of questions related to the topic.

_______________________________

O’Neill, G. & McMahon, T. (2005). “Student-Centered Learning: What does it mean for students and lecturers?” HEA-AISHE. Retrieved 9-26-09 from http://www.aishe.org/readings/2005-1/oneill-mcmahon-Tues_19th_Oct_SCL.html

Felder, R. M. & Brent, R. “Navigating the bumpy road to Student-Centered Instruction”. Retrieved 9-25-09 from http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/Resist.html

Constructionism

Seymour Papert is credited with Constructionism Theory; but would likely defer his main ideas to Jean Piaget, scientist, who was fascinated to learn how children come to gain knowledge. Papert says of Piaget: “One might say that Piaget was the first to take children’s thinking seriously.” (Papert, p. 1).

“Constructionism is built on the assumption that children will do best by finding (“fishing”) for themselves the specific knowledge they need.” (Papert, 1993, p. 1). Constructionism is not to be confused with Constructivism, though it most likely was inspired by it. They both recognize the value of the learner constructing the learning – adding to what is already known. And constructionism, unlike constructivism, is most associated with children.

Big ideas of the theory are to allow children to build and play, discover and design. Papert, himself used the phrase: “learning by making”. (Papert & Harel, p. 1).

The technology available today to children is a tool that gives autonomy to the learner; and constructionism is largely involved in using the computer to improve learning. Papert has developed LOGO, a computer language for children, and many construction kits (LEGO) that allow children to build something “active” – a robot, a climate-controlled house, etc.

Constructionist theory opposes Instructionist theory, which is prevalent in the education system of the United States. Papert is seen as a change agent – working tirelessly for educational reform – where children are learning by active involvement. ”…telling children how scientists do science does not necessarily lead to far-reaching change in how children do science; indeed, it cannot, as long as the school curriculum is based on verbally-expressed formal knowledge. And this, in the end, is what construction is about.”

In Papert’s view, educators have yet to take advantage of Constructionism – he is probably “ahead of his time” in much of his research and development. But with technological advancement, and positive attention toward Experiential Learning Theory, he hopes that his ideas will reform the educational system – starting with children.

Online course systems exist for children as well as adults, and in this realm of online learning, Papert’s ideas and work have the possibility of setting up a parallel universe for education children. For instance, a kindergarten course can focus on activities and development using game technology that is available today.
___________________
Papert, S. (1993). The children’s machine: Rethinking school in the age of the computer. New York: Basic Books.

Papert, S. (1999). Papert on Piaget. Retrieved 9-25-09 from http://www.papert.org/articles/Papertonpiaget.html

Papert, S. & Harel, I. (1991). “Situating constructionism”, Constructionism. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing. Retrieved 9-25-09 from http://www.papert.org/articles/SituatingConstructionism.html

Transactional Distance

Michael G. Moore is a pioneer in the field of Distance Education. In 1972 he presented his Theory of Transactional Distance: “Transactional distance is the gap of understanding and communication between teachers and learners caused by geographic distance that must be bridged through distinctive procedures in instructional design and the facilitation of interaction.” (TD handout, p. 1).

The assumptions of the theory are that there is interaction between Dialogue, Structure and Learner Autonomy. The equation looks like this:

greater structure + less dialogue = more learner autonomy needed.

When instructional designers consider these three “clusters”, and design according to the amount of learner autonomy that can be tolerated, the theory of transactional distance is promoting successful distant learning.

Moore believes that distance is a “pedagogical phenomenon”, making the point that a face-to-face and distance learning are different species. “Distance learning has distinctive differences in the way the course is taught and learned designed, delivered, managed and organized. (TD handout, p. 1).

TD has changed the way educators look at developing online courses. Rather than taking a traditional face-to-face and adapting it to an online course delivery system, consideration is given to the balance and variety of components to plan for success. Proponents of TD believe that an online course will be successful if the instructor and institution follow these principles:

Appropriate structure in design of learning materials.

Appropriate quantity and quality of dialogue between teacher and learners.

Taking into account the extent of the learners’ autonomy.

(TD handout, p. 3).

An online course that has integrated Transactional Distance theory into it’s design, will have meaningful Discussion Board topics, with active participation from the instructor. The instructor will get to know the students, and understand the level of learner autonomy that can be expected for the assignments given. The course will be organized well and kept up-to-date. I would expect the instructor to utilize the Announcement function for news items and summaries each week.

_________________________

Moore, M. G. “Theory of transactional distance.” Keegan, D., ed. “Theoretical principles of distance education (1997), Routledge, pp. 22-38.

“Theory of transactional distance”, COM 622 Module 2 Handout.

Moore, M. G. (1991). “Distance education theory”. The Distance Education Online Symposium, Vol. 1, No. 25. Retrieved 9-25-09 from http://www.ed.psu.edu/acsde/deos/deosnews/deosnews1_25.asp.