Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Cognitivism

Kerr (2007) raises a valid question about the suffix –ism. We can't deny that --isms have contributed to the English language and every culture includes them. My recent concern with –ism usage began to pique after reading Kerr’s blog. It was intensified through a connection of summaries from various authors, as I amassed  articles from  databases dealing with cognitivism and memory. I have concluded that –isms should not be dismissed as irrelevant to “cognitivism” (Kerr, 2007). Research shows that suffix contribute to learning by providing visual cues for enhancing categorization (St. Clair, Monaghan, and Ramscar, 2009). Acarlar and Johnston (2011) discovered in a study involving children with autism, they found that suffixes in the Turkish dialect enhanced their ability to create mental maps between form and content. Likewise, Kapp (2007) raises an interesting question:
"What is the best, how do we know what makes sense or what doesn’t?"


In response,I think it is not so much the best learning, but what is appropriate for the situation. I
think what make sense has a lot to do with the question asked. Often,the asker failed to recognized
their answer. Perhaps this is why we have so many learning theories. What do you think?
Acarlar,F. & Johnston, J.R. (2011). Acquisition of Turkish grammatical morphology by children with developmental disorders. Int J Lang Commn Disord, 46 (6), 728-738. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-6984.2011.00035.x

St. Clair,M.C., Monaghan, P., & Ramscar, M. (2009). Relationships between language structure and language learning: The suffixing preference and grammatical categorization. Cognitive Science, 33, 1317–1329. doi: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01065.x
Kerr, B. (2007, January 1). _isms as filter, not blinker [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html
Kapp, K. (2007, January 2). Out and about: Discussion on educational schools of thought [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.kaplaneduneering.com/kappnotes/index.php/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational/


BANDURA'S SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY: AN INTRODUCTION ( DAVIDSON FILMS )
I thought this clip offered an insightful perspective on the topic.



Comments posted to colleague Blogs
Anwar 3/31/12

http://anwar-mohammad.blogspot.com/2012/03/module-2.html#!/2012/03/module-2.html

Johnson
http://anethaj.blogspot.com/2012/03/johnson-module-2-blog.html?showComment=1333237793341#c1066511023695631861


3 comments:

  1. When reviewing Kappa & Kerr's blogs, it reminded me that theories are just that: a theory. I lean toward your idea that learning should be based on specific situations and examining what theories work best and what do not in connection to those manifestations. In analyzing the "asker failed to recognize their answer" would suit a backward design approach, don't you think?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey David,

    I feal learning theory is all about what is "appropriate for the situation" as well. The difficult hump to get over is the context of the learning situation. To me, this explains why LTs often overlap each other in learning situations and rarely work alone. If we didn't have all of these theories to consider, we sure would have a hard time explaining it don't you think. Interesting post.

    Tim Weaver

    ReplyDelete
  3. David, an enlightening clip with a solid message; I find that each period of development brings with it new challenges for coping efficacy. It seems that as adolescents approach the demands of adulthood, they must learn to assume full responsibility for themselves in almost every dimension of life. This requires mastering many new skills and the ways of adult society. Learning how to deal with sexual relationships and partnerships becomes
    a matter of considerable importance. The task of choosing what lifework to pursue also looms large during this period. Self-judged capabilities influence the range of career options seriously considered, the degree of interest shown in them, and the vocational paths that are pursued. Noted by Bandura (1986), “These theories differ in the conceptions of human nature they adopt and in what they regard to be the basic causes and mechanisms of human motivation and behavior.”

    Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
    Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Hall, Inc.

    David Miller

    ReplyDelete