{"id":188,"date":"2017-10-03T16:25:39","date_gmt":"2017-10-03T23:25:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0030\/?p=188"},"modified":"2017-10-03T16:25:39","modified_gmt":"2017-10-03T23:25:39","slug":"reflections-my-theoretical-pedagogical-stance","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0030\/reflections-my-theoretical-pedagogical-stance\/","title":{"rendered":"Reflections: My Theoretical Pedagogical Stance."},"content":{"rendered":"

For the 5th<\/sup> Activity of LRNT 523, we are asked to take a stance of alignment with one of the theoretical positions presented in the two readings. While the paper by Ertmer and Newby, \u201cBehaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing Critical Features From an Instructional Design Perspective\u201d<\/strong>, offered me valuable insights on the raw theories contained within, I felt that the paper was descriptive rather than instructive. As a result, from a professional perspective, I found it offered me less value. Being in the business of pilot training, I have a strong bias toward pedagogical tools adapted for what are largely skill based training events. As a result, when I see something that will help me in that area, I gravitate to it. Sadly, with time being one of the resources I find scarce these days, it seems as though if it can\u2019t help me immediately, I don\u2019t have much time for it. Since many of the competencies required in my workplace, eg. Completing an \u2018engine fire\u2019 drill and checklist, require performance of a specified series of tasks; in order and to completion, this was aligned best with the behaviorist approach: \u201cThe goal of instruction\u2028for the behaviorist is to elicit the desired response from the learner who is presented with a target stimulus.\u201d (Ertmer and Newby, 2013, p. 47). Were I employed in a more conceptual field of education, or one that stressed knowledge over critical task performance, I would likely be more intrigued by the cognitive and constructivist components of this paper.<\/p>\n

In contrast, I have a strong affinity for the concept presented by Merril in \u201cFirst Principles of Instruction\u201d. It offers me a structured path for application in my workplace, and I appreciate a heuristic approach to simplification in a field that seems to be continually expanding in complexity as new data and perspectives are uncovered.While I accept that collaboration is a necessary area for focus in pedagogy, and plays an important role in aviation, I believe it has limited applicability in the flight simulator beyond normal Crew Resource Management (CRM), and agree with the author \u201cI am not yet convinced that collaboration is a first principle.\u201d (Merril, 2002, p.57)<\/p>\n

Using the First Principles described in Merrill’s paper, I was able to develop a checklist for content creation in the instructional design I am tasked with in my job, and can continually refer to it throughout the various phases of development:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Is the lesson related to an actual problem a pilot will face?<\/li>\n
  2. Has the pre-existing level of knowledge been factored into the lesson?<\/li>\n
  3. Are there demonstrations of worked solution or techniques, from various perspectives?<\/li>\n
  4. Is there opportunity for the student to practice the technique or solution in a simplified or scaffolded environment?<\/li>\n
  5. Is the student able to perform the technique or solution fully, in a realistic scenario, with the ability to understand and reflect of their standard of performance?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    In summary, I appreciated the information in both papers. I feel they afforded me a greater perspective on the work being done, and completed, in the field we are studying. Ultimately however, I felt that Merril offered me more immediate resources professionally, as well as a convenient reference of how his First Principles accommodate a number of other theories.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    For the 5th Activity of LRNT 523, we are asked to take a stance of alignment with one of the theoretical positions presented in the two readings. While the paper by Ertmer and Newby, \u201cBehaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing Critical Features… Continue Reading →<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":74,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-188","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0030\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/188","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0030\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0030\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0030\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/74"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0030\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=188"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0030\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/188\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":189,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0030\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/188\/revisions\/189"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0030\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=188"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0030\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=188"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0030\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=188"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}