SUBJECT: Assignment #1, Summary Paper #1 Course: MCTE670-Learning Theory & Computer Applications Textbook: Perspectives on Learning (2nd ed.) D. C. Phillips & Jonas F. Soltis (1991) Professor: Dr. Steve Terrell Student: Leanne C. Boyd Usercode: boydl Due date: October 12, 1997 Response to _Perspectives on Learning_ I. Summary of _Perspectives_ Textbook With just the smallest bit of trepidation, I approached the reading and study of the book, _Perspectives on Learning_. Beginning with a quick overview of the chapters, there were references to outstanding, classical figures in the area of learning theory that immediately stood out -- especially the dauntless figure of Plato, himself! However, the authors of _Perspectives_ afforded a gentle surprise with their concise, clear and many times very humorous accounts concerning the deepest theories surrounding learning, cognition, and the scientific history of these related subjects. From the start of the book, there were startling new insights into the originators of these theories. The overall plan of _Perspectives_ gave the reader the sense that this was, indeed, almost like literature in the making. Their delightful menu put new, digestible details on subjects that traditionally might be a bit tough to chew and swallow! Because the presentation form of these topics was given in such a delightful way, this book seemed to read like a novel, with definite heroes and happenings. For example, as the reader is led into the genius of Plato's line of thought (p. 9), we can see that the very tools that describe the student learner are also the tools that describe the typical reader of the book -- the educator as student! (In the field of computer technology in education, this theme occurs quite often, where the educator/student becomes the prototype for study, in observing and applying new techniques and means for use with their own students.) The authors remind us that Plato was "concerned to use examples and stories that would make an impact...and this [sic]... reflects the unsurprising insight that it is most effective to present material in a way that is both interesting and understandable to those who are to learn it." (Phillips & Soltis, 1991) It became apparent that even the thoughts and methodology of Plato had been discerned in such a manner as to permeate the writing of this book. In just nine chapters, the reader is introduced to all of the major figures in this arena of learning theory. Each level leads smoothly to the next. As the theorists expanded on the findings of their predecessors, new levels were "built" in the exploration of cognition in humans. As readers of this history, it was inescapable to find one's self immersed in the building of the level of knowledge. In this stepping-stone effect, Plato strides off the pages of the book as the reader is introduced to his theory of infinite regress, where knowledge is innate and is with us at the moment of our birth. The retelling of Plato's works, _The Republic_ and _The Simile of the Cave_, provided the necessary foundation for the understanding of the history and scientific thinkers that came after him. As the reader progresses through these chapters, it is important to pay attention to the names and dates, but the real importance seems to lie in recognizing the "step" process that ensued. Plato placed great value on the place of abstract reasoning in these studies. John Locke, in the 1600s, stated that human infants are born with certain preformed abilities that lie dormant. When a catalyst occurs (something is experienced) this results in having ideas, which are retained. Because the mind has the power of memory, the child will then use powers such as combination and abstraction to build up his base of complex ideas. After Darwin's theory of evolution was published in 1859, there was a decided leaning toward a curiosity about the way that animals learned, and the theory of behaviorism was developed. This was seen to be a form of revolution within the psychological fields, and led to a level of non-concern toward Plato's "origin of ideas" teachings. The new thrust of activity was toward finding out how NEW BEHAVIOR was acquired. The book touches on the works of many known and also less familiar figures. The authors introduced Pavlov and his dogs, and the act of conditioning animals (or humans!) to behave in certain ways. At this point, the reader learns that with Pavlov, as with many of the scientific theorists in this book, his findings were a result of _serendipity_, or chance discovery. Part of the delight found in the readings was the authors' insistence that we see these men and their studies in a very human way. The importance of "chance discovery" cannot be discounted in any overview of human history or knowledge, as many of the important discoveries made over the centuries have been indirect, and by chance. John Watson, in the first half of this century, had closely observed Pavlov's work. He expanded on these ideas that classical conditioning is the underlying foundation of all human learning. This can be viewed as rather outlandish when applied to the learning of something as difficult and abstract as Einstein's theories! E.L. Thorndike provided almost a touch of comic relief with his cat-in-the-box experiments. His "law of exercise" and "law of effect" had to do with conditioned responses becoming stronger and more "well-learned" with each reward. This theory was more versatile than Pavlov's, and opened doors to further expansion of the idea of behaviorism. B.F. Skinner came along with his pigeons and rats and his "thinking machine." Again by serendipity, Skinner found that an action didn't have to be rewarded every time, but that random rewards very often elicited better responses. The reader is reminded (p. 27) that this theory goes hand-in-hand with the saying, "a little praise goes a long way." In studying this section of the book, I recognized that many educators and even parents of the 1950s and 1960s probably had incorporated Skinner's ideas into their work and lives. Many times as a child, I was left sitting on the edge of my seat, waiting and hoping for the reward of praise...which often was randomly given! One very effective technique that the authors used in _Perspectives_ was the manner in which they tied all of this information together, in a Great Mandala, Circle-of-Life, which- came-first-the-chicken-or-the-egg sort of way. They state that behaviorism has many positive attributes (p. 29) because it is very simple with its single mechanism of conditioning being responsible for the whole of humanity's knowledge. They ask the reader to ponder whether behaviorism then bypasses Plato and his theories? If we again think of Einstein's theories, the question becomes one of determining how much conditioning could affect the learning of something so difficult -- and how much we would have to rely on prior things learned! I agree with the authors when they said that the ancient Greek isn't easy to get rid of! _Perspectives_ continues with excellent overviews of Gestalt theory of learning and Wolfgang Kohler's serendipitous discoveries with Sultan the Chimpanzee. The reader is introduced to the "act of insight" and the power of mental connection. It is my belief that it is at this point, with researchers such as Bertrand Russell, that theories that are extremely meaningful to us in this age of technology begin to emerge. Russell's work in the Gestalt theories (gestalt means "organization" or "configuration") began to produce lines of thought that humans learn through meaningful patterns and organized wholes. We learn to make intellectual connections and links. We will never learn Einstein's theories because of a reward, but because we've learned to link information and ideas. The authors tell us (p. 37) that "insight is a mysterious, if not magical thing." As humans, we are compelled to find out more about what is going on inside of ourselves, and this applies to what is going on inside the learner as he/she learns. For me, the launching pad for understanding more about "Learning Theory" was in this place in the book, with the introduction of John Dewey, at the turn of the century. It kept occurring to me that one thing that was left out of the studies of these great researchers was the position of the individual in learning, and the commitment each individual has to the gathering of knowledge. In that Great-Circle-of-Life manner that I mentioned before, Phillips and Soltis did such an excellent job of answering this, my most basic question. If I had written it myself, it couldn't have performed a better job of placing all this information in order! On page five of the textbook, they explain the use of the term "theories," which is plural. There are many forms of learning. Although many researchers have sought just one comprehensive theory of learning, even the same researchers have different and diverse ideas! How, then, can it be expected that there should be only ONE theory for learning? The humorous overtones of the opinions of this book's authors were finalized on page 96: "My point is that not everybody can learn the same things as easily as others and I don't think they should. People should learn what they're best suited to learn so they can develop to the fullest of their potential as individuals... Taken to its logical extreme that would mean we'd need a special and unique curriculum for each student!" In my opinion, the general expectation of _Perspectives_ is that we really DO need a special and unique curriculum for every student. Phillips and Soltis make it clear that even to "learn about learning," or to develop beliefs in how learning is acquired, are unique and individualized quests. The final question of the book has to do with the fact that all of the theories presented, to one degree or another, explain the same phenomenon...that humans do indeed LEARN. We are asked to ponder which of the theories is right. The answer (p. 98) was yet another question, "Whoever said theories need to be right or wrong?" As we take our individual bases of knowledge into the next century, as we approach learning from not only historical standpoints but also the point of view of the technologist -- we must pay more attention to the benefits of learning for the individual and how the individual performs within a group. Perhaps the important consideration is not HOW learning is achieved, but how learning is APPLIED. Alongside with giving an excellent overview of the historical perspectives, Phillips and Soltis have given us an important insight into understanding theories as they relate to daily life. II. Applications for My Personal and Professional Life One of the most important things I received from this book was a deeper understanding of some great historical figures that previously had caused some internal turmoil. I came to actually "like" Plato enough to go and research his life and works online. Phillips and Soltis, with their almost hysterically funny passages concerning rats, cats, dogs, chimps, and robots, made these figures come alive for me. I can see that, although my entire professional life has been directed toward art, graphics, publishing and presentation, even the most "high-brow" of subjects can become crystal clear and alive for the learner! As an audio-visual specialist in a local Denver high school, I helped develop curriculum and presentations concerning almost all of the researchers discussed in our text. It is easy to see why so many students are reluctant and maybe even fearful when presented with people such as Plato, B.F. Skinner, or even John Dewey. So many of our traditional means for teaching students are cut, dried, and generally not interesting. It is my hope that, for instance, someone will find a way of introducing Plato to young students as the imaginative storyteller and unique, opinionated "old geezer" presented in _Perspectives_! The highlight of my reading was "meeting" John Dewey. What was the method of introduction? I would surmise that it was a combination of Plato's theory of infinite regress and the Gestalt theory. As a co-worker in the media center of Denver's largest high school, I feel that I was born with an innate sense of the Dewey Decimal System. (Intended as a joke.) In a Gestalt manner, a meaningful pattern began to emerge. Not knowing a whole lot about Dewey other than his contribution to frustrated library-goers, I was instigated to add to my base of knowledge. In an extended research of online documents, I learned things about John Dewey that will change aspects of my future career! Dewey would probably have "given his eye-teeth" to be a part of the current trend in education, learning and technology. It is amusing to think that he saw himself in the middle of current scientific thought, but that is only because we are here, looking back. For his time, this man was astoundingly innovative; his thoughts were provocative to educators of his time and still stand as an excellent measure for us today. In "Continuity versus Dualism," (sub-chapter 1 of Chapter 25) of his book, _Democracy and Education_, Dewey gave wisdom that is still well-fitted for modern thought on learning: "The experimental method is new as a scientific resource -- as a systematized means of making knowledge, though as old as life as a practical device. Hence it is not surprising that men have not recognized its full scope. For the most part, its significance is regarded as belonging to certain technical and merely physical matters. It will doubtless take a long time to secure the perception that it holds equally as to the forming and testing of ideas in social and moral matters. Men still want the crutch of dogma, of beliefs fixed by authority, to relieve them of the trouble of thinking and the responsibility of directing their activity by thought. They tend to confine their own thinking to a consideration of which one among the rival systems of dogma they will accept. Hence the schools are better adapted, as John Stuart Mill said, to make disciples than inquirers. But every advance in the influence of the experimental method is sure to aid in outlawing the literary, dialectic, and authoritative methods of forming beliefs which have governed the schools of the past, and to transfer their prestige to methods which will procure an active concern with things and persons, directed by aims of increasing temporal reach and deploying greater range of things in space. In time the theory of knowing must be derived from the practice which is most successful in making knowledge; and then that theory will be employed to improve the methods which are less successful." (Dewey, 1916) This passage summed up my readings and study in Learning Theory. It is sad to think that "Men still want the crutch of dogma, of beliefs fixed by authority, to relieve them of the trouble of thinking and the responsibility of directing their activity by thought. They tend to confine their own thinking to a consideration of which one among the rival systems of dogma they will accept." What seems terribly sad to me is that this was an observation of one highly unusual and creative man in the early years of this century. As we, the educators of the impending new century read his words, which among us can truthfully say that anything has changed? It is my belief that humans -- gifted with the only things that set us apart from the animals, the gifts of thought, reasoning and a passion for learning -- still tend to try and take the easy path, and to do it with a modicum of thought. _Perspectives_ has shown me that there have been many who have tried to take the higher path, one that will lead to a better understanding of the human mind and its capacity to think, learn, and affect changes. Dewey's insight into the "experimental method" of his day should become a goal for each of us ensconced in current experimental methods. In talking about behavioral conditioning as an instigator for learning, Dewey said that, "...habit, apart from knowledge, does not make allowance for change of conditions, for novelty. Prevision of change is not part of its scope, for habit assumes the essential likeness of the new situation with the old. Consequently it often leads astray, or comes between a person and the successful performance of his task, just as the skill, based on habit alone, of the mechanic will desert him when something unexpected occurs in the running of the machine. But a man who understands the machine is the man who knows what he is about. He knows the conditions under which a given habit works, and is in a position to introduce the changes which will readapt it to new conditions." (Dewey, 1916). Agreement with Dewey seems simple to me. A certain amount of learning will come by conditioning -- or habit. But if one truly UNDERSTANDS "the machine," then he knows what he is all about. It is my hope that my future in computer technology will include a healthy dose of this attribute. If we are, indeed, in a position to readapt to new conditions, this theory is absolutely necessary in order to effectively face the challenges of the new century and the new methods of education. --- References Dewey, John. _Democracy and education_. Copyright (c)1916. New York, NY: The Macmillan Company. Copyright renewed 1944, John Dewey. HTML markup copyright 1994, ILT Digital Classics, Institute for Learning Technologies, Columbia University, New York, NY. ___Chapter Twelve: Thinking in education. [Online.] Available: http://www.ilt.columbia.edu/academic/texts/ dewey/d_e/chapter12.html. ___Chapter Twenty-Five: Theories of knowledge. [Online.] Available: http://www.ilt.columbia.edu/ academic/texts/dewey/d_e/chapter25.html Phillips, D. C., & Soltis, Jonas F. _Perspectives on learning_ (2nd ed.). (1991). New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Pp. 5, 9, 27, 29, 37, & 96.