Personal Philosophical Approach

Every researcher and practitioner brings a set of beliefs, values and philosophical assumptions to his or her research and/or practice. These are often deeply ingrained ways of viewing the world and often influence the manner in which we conduct research. Our particular philosophical worldview affects the types of problems we study, the questions we ask, and the ways we collect and analyze data. At an abstract level, our way of viewing knowledge and the world informs the theories we choose to guide our practice, research, and the theoretical and interpretive frameworks that situate those theories. Creswell (2013) notes that “A close tie does exist between the philosophy that one brings to the research act and how one proceeds to use a framework to shroud his or her inquiry.” (Creswell, 2013, p. 15).

Personally I subscribe to a rather eclectic approach to learning with influences from behaviorism, cognitivism, and social learning. Although I ideally prefer to design instruction that appeals to the intrinsic sensibilities and motivation of our learners, extrinsic motivation in individual and social contexts is also effective. As a learner myself, things like grades, teacher praise or embarrassing comments (behaviorist elements); using my preexisting mental models to build upon existing schema (cognitivism); and being able to provide support for team-members in collaborative group projects through collective pooling of knowledge (social learning/social constructivism) are all techniques that help me learn and are effective components of my design toolbox. All of these techniques stimulate people to learn – since they all occur within a particular stage of the learning process as well as throughout the entire learning process.

Even within a social learning situation, although learner response is triggered in reaction to what a peer learner has initiated (i.e., a stimulus) and may reflect collective learning, sometimes the response is simply a combined result of the stimulus and the potential feedback from one’s peers or instructor in the form of praise (or ridicule), bonus points (or deduction), or simply to show off existing, and not newly acquired, knowledge.

The choice to hold an eclectic approach to learning within my instructional design practice is reflected in the multiple examples in which a particular theory is successfully applied to the learning that occurs within a particular instructional design process, learning which could not successfully be explained through other learning theories. Some uses of each learning theory that I often use when designing instruction include:

  • Conducting behavioral task analyses, developing behavioral objectives, and designing practice and feedback elements (behaviorism).
  • Using cognitive learning elements within message design and sequencing (cognitivism).
  • Using instructional techniques like rehearsal, chunking and mnemonics for enhancing storage and retrieval of information (cognitivism).
  • Using live models in learning and performance, designing collaborative activities to promote greater self-efficacy, cognitive apprenticeships (social constructivism, social learning theory).
  • Developing goal-directed lessons that engage students in authentic situated learning scenarios, collaborative project-based learning activities, and active use of tools and “more knowledgeable others” to connect new information to existing knowledge (social constructivism and situated cognition).

Finally, I believe that instructional designers should identify and clearly “define their own theoretical foundations when engaging in the design of effective learning environments” (Tennyson, 2010). For me, it is preferable to design instruction from an eclectic perspective using elements from each learning theory that explain a given situation or learning concept best for the specific group of learners who need that instruction. I believe that no single learning theory corners the market on truth but each theory provides insight into part of it. So when combined eclectically, all three learning theories – and multiple others not mentioned – can enhance the learner’s understanding of the world.. through our instructional designs.