George,
To be honest I don't know much about these theories to feel comfortable
to compare them, but thanks for bringing them up! I think Gal'perin's
and Bedny's are worth exploring in the context of what we are
discussing. Landa's theory though seems to me a very information
processing approach (increasing complexity, taxonomies of knowledge,
etc,) that I would find hard to conciliate with CHAT... He even refers
to it as not being a theory of learning, but more a method, an
instructional design theory (Chapter 15 in Reigeluth, C. M. (1999)
Instructional-design theories and models: An new paradigm of
instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 425-454). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.)
Right now I am exploring how Dweck (1983, 1986, 1988) stuff on goal
orientation brings light to the issues of self regulation in distance
education. This recent article has been helpful for me to update on her
work (Grant, H., & Dweck, C. S. (2003). Clarifying achievement goals and
their impact. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3),
541-553.) Although the focus of the goals literature is also more on the
individual I think they have an interesting fit on the activity analysis
triangle... Isn't at the end the triangle totally permeated by goals?
Rodrigo
-----Original Message-----
From: George [mailto:researcher@SAFe-mail.net]
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 9:10 PM
To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
Subject: Re: Self-Determination theory versus SCT and AT
Hello Rodrigo
thank you for your posting! Yes, I feel the same. I like your challenge.
What do you think of Gal'perin's stage-by-stage formation, Landa's
algo-heuristic theory of learning and instruction, and Bedny's
self-regulation theory of learning in comparison with SDT? I myself
simply don't know when contrasting the former three theories with SDT.
So, I am interested in your opinion.
cheers and best regards,
George
On Feb 4, 2005, at 10:40 PM, del Valle, Rodrigo Tomas wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am Rodrigo, from Chile, but currently working in my PhD in education
> at Indiana University... I have been silently participating and
> enjoying this list for several months now, but haven't posted much...
> Although I don't know much about SDT the contextual approaches
> learners take while working online is one of my research interests,
> and I am struggling with a similar tension, so here I go :-)
>
> It seems to me that quite often what happens in e-learning is that the
> learner is essentially working by himself, of course situated in a
> specific learning context, culture, probably with other learners or at
> least a facilitator, etc, but in the absence of a "campus" or
> classroom other contexts such as work, family, personal needs, etc.
> could affect how learners self regulate their learning more than in a
> face to face environment... In fact those that choose online learning
> probably do it because that personal context does not allow him to
> learn in a face to face environment.
>
> High dropout rates in online learning suggest that the learning
> demands that come with the freedom and flexibility of online learning
> challenge individuals to manage their time and the learning process in
> a unique way... Usually students must keep the learning demands in the
> foreground as they manage their work and home life, there is no fixed
> time to be in class or other cues to say, "time to learn"... In this
> sense I do think that in the context of online learning, theories that
> are more focused on the individual, such as SDT, can illuminate an
> activity analysis approach and vice versa.
>
> Rodrigo
> ====================
> Rodrigo del Valle - rdelvall@indiana.edu IST Doctoral Student Center
> for Research on Learning and Technology LTTS Staff
> http://ltts.indiana.edu School of Education Indiana University
> www.iub.edu ====================
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: George [mailto:researcher@SAFe-mail.net]
> Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 2:14 PM
> To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> Subject: Self-Determination theory versus SCT and AT
>
> Dear all,
>
> I have recently come across self-determination theory (SDT; cf. [1])
> and am wondering about your opinion of how you think if we can collate
> SDT with socio-cultural theory and systemic-structural activity theory
> (SSTA)? or, does SDT contradict with SCT and SSTA? I am presently
> working on a paper on e-Learning where I am pointing out that we need
> a paradigm shift to think in terms of a "Weltanstauung" (whole world
> view) . the origin of my opinion stems from the difficulties of
> learning and teaching activities (cf. [2]) and liaises with
> descriptive and prescriptive systems. Hence, on this ground, I believe
> that activity theory opens a range of new perspectives because it
> contains motivational assets of learning and teaching. But, since I am
> not familiar with SDT, I would appreciate to hear your critical
> opinion.
> Thank you very much.
>
> George
> (Hansjoerg von Brevern)
>
> Reference:
>
> [1] E. L. Deci and R. M. Ryan, "The "What" and "Why" of Goal
> Pursuits:
> Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior", Psychological
> Inquiry, 11 (2000) 4, pp. 227-268.
>
> [2] H. Giest and J. Lompscher, "Formation of Learning Activity and
> Theoretical Thinking in Science Teaching", in Vyogotsky's Educational
> Theory in Cultural Context, Learning in Doing: Social, Cognitive, and
> Computational Perspectives, A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. Ageyev, and S.
M.
> Miller (Eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003, pp.
> 267-288.
>
> -------------------------------------
>
> Research in e-Learning Objects, e-Learning meta data standards,
> didactical activity, Systemic-Structural Activity Theory, and
> Socio-cultural Theory
>
>
>
George
(Hansjoerg von Brevern)
-------------------------------------
Research in e-Learning Objects, e-Learning meta data standards,
didactical activity, Systemic-Structural Activity Theory, and
Socio-cultural Theory
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 01 2005 - 01:00:04 PST