Looking back on this course, I'd have to say that one of the biggest shifts for me over the past thirteen weeks has been how much more complex and broadened my understanding of how learning takes place has become. There are simply many different aspects to consider when looking at instructional settings. The words of an old friend come to mind: “Learning theories are like onions. Onions have layers. Learning theories have layers.”
The more I think about it, the more fitting this analogy starts to feel. Many people outside the trade might look at teaching and learning as something simple, but once you start getting into the thick of it and peel back a few layers, every instructional setting reveals something different. Each layer offers a new perspective on how learners make meaning through their environments, experiences, and interactions. I suppose many of us educators are kind of like chefs in our own kitchens. Start with a scoop of principled eclecticism, add in one half-cup of constructivism, a bit of technology to taste, sprinkle a little social cognitive theory on top and voila. (If only it were that easy.)
Ogre’ing it up with this onion analogy a little more, I suppose that if we as educators become too intertwined in the learning process we might just end up crying from those very onions. But maybe that is part of learning process for us too; sitting with the discomfort, sorting through the confusion, and waiting for something meaningful to take shape.
Let me move beyond the onion analogy for a minute though. Through the weeks, reading how others approached the same ideas from their own contexts and perspectives was invaluable because it demonstrated learning through social interaction, dialogue, and shared meaning making, much like what we were learning with Vygotsky. Experiencing others’ thinking and perspectives on the modules (all the while determining my own stance on those concepts) was helpful in extending and reshaping my own understanding of how learning takes place through the ZPD in a way that had me returning to my own ideas with a different lens. ETEC 512 was a great demonstration that learning is not a solo activity even if it might feel like one at times.
The concept map was also interesting exercise as it helped put all of these pieces of the puzzle together, showing that the theories we explored do not stand apart from one another. Piaget and Vygotsky, along with both cognitive and social perspectives, and the role of technology and instructional theory, all come together in ways that shape how people learn in real settings.
Overall, what impacted me most in this course was the realization that meaning making happens through the interaction between people, ideas, tools, and experiences over time. It is a living process that develops, changes, grows, and sometimes even flowers. Layer upon layer. Just like an onion.