I'd really like to get a response from Stephen Downes on this question, and that's why I'm actually making this post. With this way of looking at the concept of learning styles it makes sense that somebody could become a specialist in learning based on observation skills, literacies and more. Of course, what else there is in that is another thing I'd like to hear/read his opinion on. Perhaps comprehension, critical thinking and speed compatibility should be added to the list.
Personally, while I may have style preferences, I can learn pretty well in any of the traditional methods. However, this is something I've been working on specifically as skills for most of my life. As a more logic and thinking oriented person, I seek accurate information to work with. If the information is wrong, my conclusions are likely to be as well. Audio, visual and kinesthetic modes of learning all work pretty well, but they also have their own strengths and weaknesses.
While I would like to put my thoughts on the pros and cons of each mode into words, I find that the organization really doesn't fit with my thoughts and observations. Linguistics, both audio and visual, seems to be grouped together for their benefits in communication, but lake in robustness. The color, tone and other relative aspects of the language symbols used also have their place in this.
After looking some of this up, it appears to me that the above is in line with the Fleming's VARK model, based on the Wikipedia page for Learning Styles. Since I am trying to get the attention of Stephen Downes, it seems prudent to mention this, as otherwise he's likely to do so. Another note to make about this is that it is also the one that was shared with me in school as early as fourth grade, so there may be some influence there.
Having looked into the methods of creating video games for several kinds of physical disabilities, by working with a physically disabled artist and game designer, this seems closely tied to media literacies. For instance, surround sound and conditional noises together might be too much for somebody with sight to filter through in a game. However, that may be just fine for somebody who is blind and has to rely on their hearing far more than somebody with sight. In this way it seems like physical abilities mix with media comprehension type skills to allow a person to understand their surroundings, which could include content in media. Understanding this could help in all types of media and experience design as they are all forms of communication.
So, what do you think is needed to learn?
Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan
View Blog Reactions
2 comments:
Interesting you would take this turn. It won't help you much with the learning styles critics, though, because the same people (mostly) also argue that critical thinking or critical literacies can't be taught either. The refrain is that you have to learn content first, that you can't have critical thinking without content. So either way - learning styles, or critical thinking - they're going to say you have to start with content, not with these other (so-called) fictions.
For my own part, if pressed to find a distinction between a 'learning style' and a 'media literacy' I'd be hard pressed. It's really a matter of perspective. There is a sense in which you can draw a distinction by saying that learning styles are innate, but I am not an innatist, beyond very broad strokes. So both of them reflect personal growth and development.
Learning styles represent, in my mind, aptitudes with modalities. That's why there's so many 'theories' - everyone who things he or she is a 'theorist' carves up the domain in slightly different ways (the filed of education is filled with taxonomers). Literacties, on the other hand, have to do with capacities or abilities.
Obviously there's a relation between the two. It's like the relation between 'hammer' and 'hammering'. 'Visual aptitude' and 'thinking visually'.
I guess that means it's close enough to explore in more depth then. In math, you can rewrite the same thing in different ways to use it different ways, and look at them from different view points. That is a part of my aim with this, to explore another way of looking at this concept. Perhaps that will then give some useful results.
As for the critics, that's their problem. I'm more interested in coming up with the mental models that I can use in designing interactive experiences and media. If it works, it works. If it doesn't, it doesn't. That's life, and they are entitled to their own opinions.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, and I spelled your name right this time. :P
Post a Comment