Personal Theory of Practice
Overview
I am convinced that learning occurs, as Kenneth Gergen wrote, “...not automatically driven by the forces of nature, but [as] the result of an active, cooperative enterprise of persons in relationships ‘ (2003, p. 9). There is an empirical aspect of learning that happens when students are given the materials to experience problem-solving for themselves, but that experience will be raw and incomplete unless they can motivate themselves to refine their understanding and deepen their knowledge through a community of practice.
Learning is most frequently a social activity; even the solitary act of reading is an exchange of ideas with an author present in language if not in person. From a Vygotskian perspective, the agent of change can be either a mentor or a peer; both can substantially affect learning. Also, learning, like literacy, is always situated and contextual. Whatever cognitive events take place will be grounded in the moment they occur (Wertsch, 1985). As teachers, we must be aware that our delivery and methods must be flexible and relevant to that moment. Web-based learning substantially accommodates both of the social as well as the motivational, and can contribute a uniquely creative multimodal vitality.
a. Conceptualization of Learning
Learning occurs in the act of communication, both interpersonally and intrapersonally. Learning also occurs in the presence of activity. Some kinds of learning, like insight, can be experienced alone but has generally germinated from a moment of collaboration. My teaching and learning experiences have taught me that we have an instinct to inquire about our environment, to investigate, and to problem solve the dilemmas that confront us.
As a teacher, I am there to provide the material foundations and cognitive scaffolding to support conceptual exploration. With my students, we form a collaborative learning community. Peers can be more instrumental in facilitating the active stages of understanding than an expert who intervenes with solutions. Learning outcomes are always measurable, although not all of the outcomes are quantitative. Intangible results, such as self-efficacy and mastery, may be evaluated through the creative expression of material, imaginative experience.
b. Conceptualization of Teaching
Teachable moments occur as a natural facilitation through a process of shared inquiry, or as a form of scaffolding through a staged process of understanding. I teach because I was badly taught and as a child I believed that there were better ways to develop an understanding of the world and my role in it. Teaching can open roads to the unimagined, encourage exploration and discovery, and promote strength in spirit that can be hard to generate in isolation. Alternatively, teaching can lead to a rigidity of mind and lack of confidence and volition that contributes to a narrow perspective on the world. I believe that teachers have the greatest opportunity to contribute to the development of a creative and innovative society, or alternatively, one of conformity and stagnation.
Teaching offers an opportunity to engage in an ever-changing ‘hand-to-hand’ process of progressive inquiry, actualized through the immediacy of engaging in a shared investigation of a problem or the mutual building of a concept map. Most recently, I have had my assumptions regarding the universality of logical thinking challenged by my students in online learning environments, where the linear nature of traditional text-based learning is subsumed into the unlimited void of cyberspace. I cannot dictate nor anticipate my students’ exploration of content; autonomy and collaboration in virtual learning environments appear to be polar but necessary co-requisites for successful web-based learning. My philosophy about learning is built on a belief in the learner’s ability to use motivation and self-directed cognitive processes to integrate prior and new knowledge within a situated and collaborative environment, guided by relevance and a strong sense of their own developing mastery.
II. Principles of Learning: SRL, Motivation, & Self-Efficacy
Self-Regulated Learning
Self-Regulated Learning evolved from Bandura’s premise of Social Cognition: all human functioning is triadic in nature (1986). Cognitive/affective, environmental/contextual and social factors interweave in a reciprocal and generative pattern. Self-regulated learning is an open-ended, recursive process that requires activation by the learner and practice to develop mastery. The learner engages in forethought, followed by a volitional performance phase, and evaluates the outcome in a reflective phase. This analysis should result in adaptations to improve performance (Zimmerman, 1998). Bandura acknowledged that people are motivated to behave in a way that presupposes a reward; however, he deviated from Behaviorism in crediting the major force of motivation as derived from the individual’s expectations of the outcomes, not the actual rewards themselves (Zimmerman, 2001). Motivation and the learner’s belief in their ability to succeed, or self-efficacy, frame the effort to learn.
Motivation & Self-Efficacy
The emphasis on expectations makes motivation and related aspects like self-efficacy, key contributors to action. The significance for teaching is that we too often focus on the learning outcomes without considering the volition or motivation to learn that must come first. There are numerous findings that have demonstrated improvement in student performance when a student finds the work relevant, engaging, and within their range of mastery (Ning & Downing, 2010; Schwinger et al., 2009).
A central part of volition is the feeling of self-efficacy, or ability, that the student has to complete the task successfully. As teachers, we can serve as powerful “persuaders” to persistence and mastery if the feedback is positive and constructive. Students who feel good about their ability to succeed use more and varied strategies to learn, persist longer, and collaborate more effectively (Pajares, 2008). In effect, they become more autonomous in their learning while also becoming better contributors to community learning. The ability to effectively self-direct one’s learning while in a collaborative setting is an imperative skill set in online learning environments, currently the fastest growing category of instruction (Dabbagh & Kitsantis, 2004)).
III. The Teaching-Learning Context Online
E-learning is growing at an exponential rate. 70% of universities worldwide offer distance education courses. The e-learning market has increased from US$ 6.6 billion in 2002 to US$ 23.7 billion in 2006 (Chiu et al., 2007). Although money is not a traditional metric in educational research, I believe that framing web-based learning in consumer terms brings home the point that consumer satisfaction has become a significant factor driving the growth of online learning environments. A reasonable inference can be made from those numbers that consumers are generally satisfied with online learning as an educational experience. However, individual experiences negotiating hypermedia can be challenging.
a. Web-based Learning Environments
One key characteristic of web-based, or hypermedia, environments is that they require learners not only to integrate and synthesize information, but also to master the environment. Online environments exist in a nonlinear space, and concepts can be connected in ways that demand focused, non-sequential navigation (Moos & Azevedo, 2009). Despite the ‘bulletin board’ format of most course management systems, there is always the opportunity to link (or get lost) elsewhere. Students have the option to enter alternate fields, both in sanctioned resources and personal interest entities. The motivation to stay on task is a major contributor to student success online, and perceptions of self-efficacy, as discussed above, are a major driver of task persistence and mastery.
One of the chief appeals of online learning is the vast resource base of hypermedia. The variety of mediums (e.g., text, PowerPoint, iMovie, iTunes, Podcasts), media (e.g., TEDtalks, CNN, YouTube), games (e.g., Neverwinter, Wolfram), support (DragonSpeak), and knowledge tools (KnowledgeForum) opens endless opportunities for multimodal learning and levels the field for those with processing disorders and learning differences.
However, the learning context online can become a test of cognitive load management and task navigation. The student needs to identify which tools and resources are appropriate and how to utilize and manage them to accomplish their learning goals, often while coordinating with another learner or group of learners (Scott & Schwartz, 2007). Students with higher levels of self-efficacy, demonstrated by the frequency with which they reviewed their goals, will organize their navigation of the online environment in a purposeful, thematic manner based on relevance of content, suggesting that self-efficacy can manifest as a form of monitoring, possibly related to reliable judgments or feelings of knowing (Azevedo et al. 2008). This is an important finding, as self-efficacy is a transferable skill that can be developed through articulated instruction and activity outcomes, and may contribute to increased ongoing academic achievement.
b. Motivation & Self-Efficacy
Satisfaction related to success can be a used as a metric for the relevance of the learning experience, and in a related sense, a reflection of the motivation the learning experience generated for the student. Eccles et al.’s expectancy achievement model suggests that individual’s choice, performance, and persistence is linked to their expectancy of success in the task (1983). In other words, a learner’s perception of their self-efficacy dictates their persistence in both the immediate task and in the choice of future tasks. In traditional face-to-face learning environments, the teacher has a level of control over what material the learner engages in, both in the linear nature of the text and in the sequence of learning activities. The configuration of the actual classroom environment also limits the extent of off-task engagement (however, there is a longer discussion to be had regarding internet access in classrooms).
As a result of this control over the navigation of content and the direction of learning activities, the instructor can have an immediate effect on learner motivation. Web-based learning environments can expand on this and extend learning in modalities beyond the verbal and create communication spaces that produce tangible knowledge products from conversations, generating motivation in the challenge of charting new territory. The key is in building an environment that is engaging, not exhausting.
c. Web-based Pedagogical Tools
Content Creation & Delivery Tools
In terms of designing a web-based learning environment that supports motivation and the development of self-efficacy (and contributes to keeping students on task), course designers have a variety of pedagogical tools that prioritize relevance and organization. For instance, domain-specific task strategies such as tagging text and commenting in the textbox provide an immediate opportunity to critique and extend concepts for elaboration. CMAP type formats can be used to create concept maps for recall activities to cement facts and visually identify relationships between terms. These kinds of concrete learning strategies are directly related to academic achievement and help build self-efficacy (Pintrich & De Groot, 1990). While reminiscent of paper and pencil text annotation, the opportunities for graphic illustration, audio and video modalities, and use of html publishing tools creates opportunities for multiple forms of processing content. Engaging in a variety of creative formats increases time on task, which also contributes to overall academic achievement and self-efficacy (Dabbagh, 2001).
Collaborative & Communicative Tools
The use of computer-mediated communication facilitates active and reflective dialogue with peers, connection with resources, and supports the co-construction of knowledge (Berge, 1999). These tools can: provide the opportunity to create asynchronous conversations where there is time to develop concepts over days rather than the minutes a f2f exchange requires: leave a tangible record of a developing knowledge object to refer to; and foster a supportive community of practice over a large and diverse network (Dabbagh & Kitsantis, 2004). Students can communicate across highly accessible and user-friendly venues such email, list-serves, forums, and chat tools. One of the benefits of common utilities is the ease and immediacy of communicating goals and receiving feedback, key factors in developing and maintaining motivation. Concept maps and graphic organizers can be shared to facilitate group interaction with content and promote task focus and provide a linear trajectory through the material.
All of these tools rest on course design competency in the instructor. Teachers need to be effective communicators, providing individualized and group direction to effectively scaffold learning. This includes the ability to promote learning and interaction strategies, provide specific and positive feedback, providing scripts and templates to guide collaborative activities and work products, and detailed rubrics and evaluation criteria to assist students in developing judgments of learning and self-efficacy (Dabbagh, 2000). Motivation and its expression in self-efficacy are characteristics of successful learners; we can leverage these states through the creatively structured use of multimedia in online learning environments.
References
ACTA. (2010). What Will They Learn? Washington, D.C: American Council of Trustees and Alumni.
Azevedo, R., Moos, D. C., Greene, J. A., Winters, F. I., & Cromley, J. C. (2008). Why is externally-regulated learning more effective than self-regulated learning with hypermedia? Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(1), pp. 45–72.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall.
Berge, Z.L. (1999, January-February). Interaction in postsecondary web-based learning. Educational Technology, pp. 5-11.
Chiu, C.A., Sun, S.Y., Sun, P.C., Teresa L. Ju, T.L. (2007). An empirical analysis of the antecedents of web-based learning continuance. Computers & Education, 49 , pp. 1224–1245
Dabbagh, N. (2000). Protocols and rubrics for conducting structured online discussion forums. [Online]. http://mason.gmu.edu/~ndabbagh/wblg/online-protocol.html
------------------ (2001). Concept mapping as a mindtool for critical thinking. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 17(2), pp. 16-23.
Dabbagh, N. & Kitsantis, A. (2004). Supporting Self-Regulation in Student Centered, Web-Based Learning Environments. International Journal on E-Learning, January-March, pp. 40-48.
Eccles, J. S., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., GoV, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J. L., et al. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and Achievement Motivation, pp. 75–146. San Francisco, CA: W.H. Freeman.
Gergen, K. (2003). Knowledge as Socially Constructed. In Mary Gergen and Kenneth Gergen (eds.), Social Construction: A Reader, pp. 15-17. London: Sage Publications.
Klein, P. (1999). Reopening Inquiry into Cognitive Process in Writing-to-Learn. Educational Psychology Review, 11(5), pp. 203-270.
Moos, D.C., & Azevedo, R. (2009). Self-efficacy and prior domain knowledge: to what extent does monitoring mediate their relationship with hypermedia learning? Metacognition Learning, 4, pp. 197–216
Ning, H.K. & Downling, K. (2010)The reciprocal relationship between motivation and self-regulation: A longitudinal
study on academic performance. Learning and Individual Differences 20, pp. 682–686
Pajares, F. (2008). Motivational Role of Self-Efficacy Beliefs in Self-Regulated Learning. In D.H. Schunk & B.J. Zimmerman (eds.), Motvation and Self-Regulated Learning: Theory, research and applications, pp. 111-139. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Pintrich, P. & De Groot, E. (1990). Motivational and Self-Regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, pp. 33-40.
Schwinger, M., Steinmay, R. & Spinath, B. (2009). How do motivational regulation strategies affect achievement: Mediated by effort management and moderated by intelligence. Learning and Individual Differences 19, pp. 621–627
Scott, B. M., & Schwartz, N. (2007). Navigational spatial displays: The role of metacognition as cognitive load. Learning and Instruction, 17, pp. 89–105.
Wertsch, J.V. (1985). Vygotsky and the Social Formation of the Mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2001). Theories of Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: An overview and analysis. In B.J. Zimmerman and Dale H. Schunk (eds.), Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: Theoretical Perspectives, pp. 1-37. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
----------------------- (1998). Developing Self-fulfilling Cycles of Academic Regulation: An analysis of exemplary instructional models. In D.H. Schunk and B.J. Zimmerman (eds.), Self-Regulated Learning: From teaching to
