Diana’s Revised Personal Learning Theory: a complex, reflective and continuous process

What’s more important: the chicken or the egg? Doesn’t it depend on what you want to cook? I believe that it is the same with learning theories: it depends what you are learning. I originally defined learning as ‘a combination of cognitive, emotional, and environmental factors and influences that enable a person to enhance or alter their knowledge and/or skills’. Therefore, it made sense to me that combining what is good from all the learning theories to suit the desired learning at hand would be the most effective methodology. As a result, I believe that my PLT framework embodies a blended learning approach fashioned with these basic tenets:
1. Learners need to feel safe and supported,
2. Learners must think critically and
3. Learners should be able to communicate through motivational, challenging learning opportunities.
Because humans have access to seemingly infinite information, it is also paramount that learners are able to be objective, to have the inherent ability to evaluate the reliability of this information. Learning should involve questioning and delving deep for empirical evidence to authenticate opinions. Consequently, the ideal learning scenario will be truly blended involving:
 the use of advance organizers (activity, meaningful, CIP),
 inquiry and problem solving (discovery, meaningful, distributed cognition, situated cognition),
 modelling (social cognitive, situated cognition, sociocultural)
 scaffolding (CIP, socio-cultural)
 a supported and connected community of technologically responsible learners (constructivism, connectivism).
I agree with Anderson who hypothesizes that online learning must focus on the community, the learner, knowledge and assessment as these criteria exemplify all quality learning (2008). Constructivism epitomises these priorities while promoting discovery through collaboration, social interaction and individual cognition where learners construct meaning out of content and experiences. However, with the colossal impact that technology can have on learning in the 21st century, I believe a Connectivist perspective is more beneficial for digital age, multi-cultural, multi-contextual, global learners (Siemens, 2004).
Although, all of the learning theories can incorporate elements of technology, I believe the pedagogical framework of the future will manifest intensely under the diverse, networked Connectivist umbrella. Personally, I embrace the Connectivist paradigm because learners can interact in a safe and supported environment where they will be encouraged to think critically and to communicate through the affordances of the semantic web. For me, this embodies quality, progressive and interactive learning that increases knowledge building capacity. To conclude, I imagine I could brand myself as an ‘apprentice of Social Constructivism with Developmental tendencies functioning under a Connectivist umbrella’!

References
Anderson, T. (2008). Toward a theory of online learning. In T. Anderson & F. Elloumi (Eds.) Theory and Practice of Online Learning, Chapter 2 (pp. 45-74). Available online at: http://www.aupress.ca/books/120146/ebook/02_Anderson_2008_Anderson-Online_Learning.pdf

Davydov, V. V. (1995). The influence of L. S. Vygotsky on education theory, research, and practice. Educational Researcher, 24, 12-21.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0013-189X%28199504%2924%3A3%3C12%3ATIOLSV%3E2.0.CO%3B2-2

Pratt, D.D. (2002). Good teaching: One size fits all? In Jovita Gordon (Ed.), An Update on Teaching Theory. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. Retrieved September 22, 2010, from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm