In exploring the three theoretical frameworks, behaviourism, cognitivism and constructivism, described by Ertmer and Newby (2013), I found that the constructivism approach fits well within my current work. Although I value pieces of both behaviourism and cognitivism theories, what stood out for me in constructivism is that the learner’s mind “filters input from the world” (Ertmer & Newby, 2013, p. 55) and creates meaning and personal interpretation.
For this assignment, I decided to wear my “team lead” hat, wherein I coach and support team members to enjoy increased job satisfaction through a solid understanding of job tasks and expected deliverables, coupled with fulsome on-going training and support initiatives. With a constructivist approach, learners have increased control over their learning and are best supported when allowed to construct their own meaning and when encouraged to collaborate with others. In leading a team, I cannot be the solver of all problems, nor can I be available to all team members all of the time. I chose to further explore constructivist frameworks as they afford that instruction shifts from “teaching to learning” (Ertmer & Newby, 2013, p. 58) in environments where learning outcomes are not pre-designed.
Our team faces unique problems every day, but many of these problems contain core themes that recur. For example, a customer may need support in interpreting a rule around late charges. Team members who have successfully interpreted rules with customers in the past will have increased confidence in describing rules and in negotiating successful outcomes, built from past real-world experiences. From Ertmer and Newby (2013), because learners create meaning based on their individual experiences and validate them through negotiation, a constructivist framework to learning works when learners are encouraged to share their perspectives. As a team member interprets additional rules, especially when encouraged and supported to discuss the various cases with colleagues or leaders, they are able to use accrued knowledge to solve other problems on the job.
I was interested to read Merrill’s (2002) description of the five principles of instruction, including how they help to create effective learning environments and that they can be applied in all learning design types. After reading Merrill’s (2002) four instructional phases, I realize that I need to spend more time considering treatment of the Activation phase. For learners to be successful, it is important that instructional design lays a sufficient foundation for learners, so that they can activate prior knowledge and build off of it. This can be achieved through encouraging learners to recall and demonstrate previous experiences or by the provision of experience in learning design. In my own studies, I remember memorizing formulae for Newton’s laws of motion in first-year Physics. Although memorizing formulae was enough to get me through the course, it wasn’t until second-year Physics, when I began to understand how the variables in the formulae worked together, that I was able to effectively structure the learning into a mental model that I could use.
Moving forward, I must ensure that all team members have access to and support in understanding core business practices. Instead of providing a guide on how to handle specific problems, I should encourage collaboration and mentorship between novice and experienced team members, again encouraging the shift from teaching to learning, including demonstrations by experienced team members (Merrill, 2002), who model expected performance standards. In constructivist environments, learners are supported to monitor, evaluate and update their constructions based on new knowledge or perspectives presented (Ertmer & Newby, 2013). This partnership between novice and experienced team members will provide an on-going source of support for both.
Finally, one thing I must watch for was around the use of media, wherein the use of combinations of multimedia in a learning intervention can cause the learner to split their attention, resulting in increased cognitive load (Merrill, 2002). As always, there is a balance to be had and the challenge is to find that balance, while maintaining the ability to flex as environmental changes occur.
References
Ertmer, P., & Newby, T. (2013). Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43-71. Retrieved from: https://doi:10.1111/j.1937-8327.1993.tb00605.x
Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43-59. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02505022
Hi Karen!
I love that you have based your analysis of your pedagogical stance around leadership. I think you are absolutely correct that leadership involves setting people up for success and mentoring people (or setting up mentoring situations). I think that the mentors can learn a lot from the process of mentoring too as well as receive validation for their knowledge and skills. Great perspective and a good way to look at this assignment!
Lorri
Thanks, Lorri, for your comment.
In my last role I worked to support small teams in remote locations across Canada. After a few failed attempts at encouraging collaboration through rudimentary “communities of practice,” I wondered what I was doing that wasn’t supporting learners to successfully collaborate and support one another.
Upon reflection, I wonder if I should have, instead, partnered a novice team mate with an expert team mate, encouraging them to share experiences through case studies? I think I was jumping ahead of the readiness of learners and causing them to feel shy, causing them to hesitate in contributing to conversations.
Do you have any tips to share that encourages novice and expert team mates to mentor one another?
Karen.
Hi Karen,
Thanks for sharing, and for your in depth thoughts. I too have identified a lot with constructivism and Merrill’s 4 phases. Activation really is something that is overlooked a lot when getting into new topics in a classroom, as well as when considering what experiences employees have had with dealing with issues/conflict etc. Have you considered adding an element to team meetings where staff can present challenges they’re having, in order to give other staff the opportunity to give advice from experiences they’ve had? It may be an idea to ask new staff to speak at meetings to reflect verbally (or in written form) on how things are going as well.
Hi Stu.
Awesome ideas, thank you! We do have a section of each team meeting where individuals report out on challenges and triumphs that they’ve experienced since the last meeting. However, I find that most contributions focus on what is going well, as opposed to what needs further improvement.
I like the idea of having learners reflect in writing, either in the meeting or beforehand. Then, I could collect the contributions and read them aloud, leading into a group brainstorm. Perhaps introducing anonymity into the conversation topics will allow for more authentic observations and sharing? After all, we are a team and the effectiveness of each team member is important. Another reason that I love your idea, Stu, is that we have a few longer-term team members who have a wealth of experience to share, gained as they grew within the organization. I imagine that they have many great tactics and suggestions to add to the conversation.
Thanks again, Stu!