Landa (1983) also claims that instructional theories may not be derived from learning theories (p. 65). This is because a given proposition of a descriptive learning theory (such as "if a person better understands a text, then he or she remembers it more easily" may not be true and complete when phrased as a prescriptive instructional rule such as "In order for a learner to better memorize the text, it is necessary (or sufficient) to teach him or her how to understand it (or bring him or her to understanding it)."
"Of course, in order to secure that a learner memorizes a text better, it is important to make sure that he or she understands it or to teach him or her how to understand it. But understanding is just one of the conditions leading to better memorizing, and to secure (or teach) the understanding is not sufficient for gaining the best results in memorization. Other factors not mentioned in these propositions of a learning theory (both descriptive and prescriptive) should be taken into account. They are stated in other propositions of a learning theory (if it is complete). But the learning theory does not tell anything about which of it's propositions should be taken into account and combined (and precisely how combined) in order to state an effective prescriptive instructional proposition." [p. 65-66]
This statement of Landa's strongly resonates with me. I believe that existing theories do not, as Landa says, include direction on which of their propositions should be accounted for and combined in order to state an effect prescriptive instructional proposition. This is precisely what I'm after in my work: a conceptual framework of learning and teaching, anchored with universal and fundamental principles of learning and complimented with a method for constructing domain-specific, individualized theories of instruction using that framework.
"Of course, in order to secure that a learner memorizes a text better, it is important to make sure that he or she understands it or to teach him or her how to understand it. But understanding is just one of the conditions leading to better memorizing, and to secure (or teach) the understanding is not sufficient for gaining the best results in memorization. Other factors not mentioned in these propositions of a learning theory (both descriptive and prescriptive) should be taken into account. They are stated in other propositions of a learning theory (if it is complete). But the learning theory does not tell anything about which of it's propositions should be taken into account and combined (and precisely how combined) in order to state an effective prescriptive instructional proposition." [p. 65-66]
This statement of Landa's strongly resonates with me. I believe that existing theories do not, as Landa says, include direction on which of their propositions should be accounted for and combined in order to state an effect prescriptive instructional proposition. This is precisely what I'm after in my work: a conceptual framework of learning and teaching, anchored with universal and fundamental principles of learning and complimented with a method for constructing domain-specific, individualized theories of instruction using that framework.
Comments