In general, ‘theory’ gets overshadowed by ‘practice’. For obvious reasons!
It’s something like my theorizing about how to paint a landscape vis-a-vis the very action of painting the landscape. Practice takes over theory, in that sense.
But, in effect, it’s theory from which action springs forth. Put it another way, theory is the foundation over which I construct my action. It better be that way, as otherwise, my action becomes loose without a solid base supporting it.
My respect for theory comes from this angle. I’ve come to realize the importance of my having to internalize the theory especially in extremely critical contexts as that of Learning Design! Because, for me, learning design is not a frivolous occupation anymore. Not that it ever was, but, yeah… am beginning to appreciate the value and depth of this noble profession all the more now.
Now, putting a magnifying glass over the pedagogical expertise route I was reflecting on in my last post, I see ‘learning theories’ zooming in much closer to get my attention.
Behaviorism, Cognitivism and Constructivism.
They do sound like something alright, but as a learning designer, I need to understand what these theories stand for… so, I can consciously apply them in due contexts. Applying my understanding this way, I know what I am doing instead of just ‘shooting in the dark’… which is what invariably happens when I stay on the ‘surface’.
I intend reflecting on each of these learning theories in my subsequent blog outings among so many other exciting discussions I’m queuing up after them.
The earlier posts connected to this topic are here: