Today we discussed Social Learning Theory in class. Guess SLT must be true because I certainly didn't understand the text chapter accurately. The meaning I constructed was incorrect, and it took Tiffany's explanations and class discussions and group exercises for me to start to construct a more accurate and socially approved understanding of the theory. I still don't totally understand SLT, but maybe after I sleep on it things will click.
In class Tiffany used questions to engage the class in trying to develop a class consensus about the definitions of learning, and other SLT principles. She had us work in small groups to create definitions, then we discussed our discussions in the class. I doubt we all reached consensus, but apparently we offered enough satisfying definitions that Tiffany moved on other class topics. Or maybe it was a time issue: she had ground to cover and we'll review this stuff again next week. There I going constructing.
[I haven't used the verb "to construct" so much outside of working for Habitat for Humanity.]
What's causing me confusion? Hmmm....
First, figuring out how to apply the reciprocal causation concept. Specifically, being able to explain/think of examples of the reciprocity between each of the components P-B-E. Next is how framing cognitive terms in an SLT framework.
What little I do understand leaves me with the impression that controlling learning -- by either the student or teacher -- is difficult. There is so much internal and external noise that can impact the desired learning outcome. How do you control for this as a teacher if you believe in SLT? Right now I prefer cognitive learning theory because what little I understand seem to have mechanisms that allow student and teacher to have more control internal and external noise.
Well, I need to move on. More next time.
No comments:
Post a Comment