Section 2

Wow---it took a long time for my brain to start functioning and give these questions a shot! :)

 

1. Epistemology (the study of what and how we come to know) is discussed in multiple chapters in this section. Distinguish epistemology from instructional methods or theories. What are the differences between theories, methods, or models of learning and epistemologies or underlying beliefs about ways of knowing?

When looking at the definition of epistemology we learn that is very basically: how we know things and what things we know.  Instructional methods and theories become a part of epistemology. Using the theories and various methods we see the how we learn portion.  The book states that some of these design practices "should be inextricably linked."   We learn that some of the methods have to do with observations and how students learn more than how they are taught.

2. Chapters in this section present two contrasting epistemic stances: positivist and relativist. However, a third stance, the contextualist or hermeneutical, is also widely recognized. This stance falls somewhere between the strictly objectivist/positivist beliefs about knowing and the purely subjectivist/relativist stance. While designers and educators with a positivist stance generally apply behaviorist principles to the design and development of instruction, those with either a contextualist or relativist epistemological framework employ constructivist theories and methods. However, relativists ascribe to radical constructivist approaches, while contextualists draw upon social constructivist theories and models. Based on what you’ve read about positivist and relativist epistemologies, as well as behaviorist and constructivist approaches, try to more fully describe a contextualist epistemology. How might it differ from either a relativist or positivist stance, and how might social constructivism differ from either behaviorist or radical constructivist approached to learning and instruction?

A contextualist epistemology can be defined as ones position about theories of knowledge

attributions. A relativist stance is when the truth is considered contextual.  Constructivism says that knowledge is internally constructed. 
 
 

3. Differing epistemic stances lead to differing approaches to learning and instruction, and ultimately to problem-solving. Explain differences in problem-solving when approached from behaviorist and constructivist perspectives. How do the approaches differ in both the nature of the problem to be solved and in facilitating the problem solving process? Finally, what effect might these differences have on learner motivation?

 

Behaviorist problem solving is based off of the idea that learning is based off of what the learner is observing and the environment that it is being learned in.

Constructivist problem solving encourages learners to construct their own knowledge.

A difference between the behaviorist and constructivist theory is the value placed on feedback.  The book states that in the behaviorists theory "feedback is...equivalent to reinforcement." (Reiser, 38).I recently watched a webinar on 'gamification' that would closely follow the behaviorists theory where students recieve immediate feedback and gratification.    In a constuctivisty theory it is believed that a child will want to seek an answer and will/want to build knowledge internally.  This type of learning is self motivated and is satisfied by reaching a goal.