Skip to main content

Evaluating a theory

Criteria for evaluating theories of instruction (which mine is not, but the criteria are still relevant):

from Gordon (1968, as cited in Reigeluth, 1983, p. 24-25)
1) Internal consistency - the theory should not contradict itself
2) Explicit boundaries and limitations
3) Not contradicted by empirical data (caution: apparent contradictions may be overturned with a reanalysis of the data)

from Snelbecker (1974, as cited in Reigeluth, 1983, p. 24-25)
4) Parsimoney (i.e. simplicity)

from Snow (1971, as cited in Reigeluth, 1983, p. 24-25)
5) Usefulness "The primary criterion for the evaluation of theory is usefulness, not truthfulness [p. 103]." and Hebb (1969, as cited in Reigeluth, 1983, p. 24-25): "A good theory is one that holds together long enough to get you to a better theory [p. 27]." Snow also says that a theroy should be useful for organizing existing data meaningfully and for producing useful hypotheses. (George Kelly also said something to that effect).

from Reigeluth (1983, p. 25)
6) Comprehensiveness: "For how much of the total variance does it account?"
7) Optimality (related to usefulness): "It is not enough to be valid, is it better than anything else available? In the case of a prescriptive theory, does it present the best models for achieving desired outcomes under given conditions? In the case of descriptive theory, do the models have the best outcomes for the given conditions?"
8) Breadth of applicability (percent of conditions): "For what percent of conditions is it optimal?"

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Learning Environment

The learning environment can be one or both of the following: 1) Content providing: e.g. other skiers provide good and bad examples, mountain provides visual input to understand skiing (compared to talking about skiiing in a classroom, chalkboard drawings, pictures, video, etc...) 2) Performance enabling: e.g. the mountain, snow, a ski lift, provide a place to ski; skis, boots and poles provide equipment to ski. e.g. a harness can help a diver safely learn a new dive, e.g. a foam pit can help a gymnast safely learn a new move

Trait vs state

"A useful distinction in the discussion of student characteristics is trait versus state. Traits are student characteristics that are relatively constant over time...whereas states are student characteristics that tend to vary during individual learning experiences, such as level of content-specific knowledge." (Reigeluth, 1983, p. 32) Reigeluth also states that "many strategy components have been shown to help students with all kinds of traits to learn" [p. 32]. My position is that we do not know a priori which aspects of our instructional strategies, learning environment, motivator, etc... will generalize across many or all students. However, with a localized learning theory we can learn over time which do and which do not. At the same time, we will likely find ways of grouping students that we never would have before imagined.

James Paul Gee's 36 principls of learning from What Video Games Have to Teach Us about Learning and Literacy

In his book, What Video Games Have to Teach Us about Learning and Literacy , James Paul Gee identifies 36 principles of learning: Active, Critical Learning principle All aspects of the learning environment (including the ways in which the semiotic domain is designed and presented) are set up to encourage active and critical, not passive, learning. Design Principle Learning about and coming to appreciate design and design principles is core to the learning experience. Semiotic Principle Learning about and coming to appreciate interrelations within and across multiple sign systems (images, words, actions, symbols, artifacts, etc) as a complex system is core to the learning experience. Semiotic Domains Principle Learning involves mastering, at some level, semiotic domains, and being able to participate, at some level, in the affinity group or groups connected to them. Metalevel Thinking about Semiotic Domains Principle Learning involves active and cr...