-
原文:
Gagne's Theory of
Instruction
Michael Corry
Dr. Donald Cunningham
P540 - Spring 1996
Robert Gagne's theory of instruction
has provided a great number of valuable ideas to
instructional designers, trainers, and
teachers. But is it really useful to everyone at
all
times? During this paper, I will
assume the position of a teacher educator
(something I
have done formally for
several years now) while examining the strengths
and
weaknesses of Gagne's theory of
instruction. Driscoll (1994) breaks Gagne's theory
into three major areas - the taxonomy
of learning outcomes, the conditions of learning,
and the events of instruction. I will
focus on each of these three areas while briefly
describing the theory of instruction.
Once this brief introduction of the theory is
completed, I will attempt to turn this
theory
strengths and weaknesses of it's
various assumptions.
Gagne's Theory of
Instruction
As previously
explained Gagne's theory of instruction is
commonly broken into three
areas. The
first of these areas that I will discuss is the
taxonomy of learning outcomes.
Gagne's
taxonomy of learning outcomes is somewhat similar
to Bloom's taxonomies
of cognitive,
affective, and psychomotor outcomes (some of these
taxonomies were
proposed by Bloom, but
actually completed by others). Both Bloom and
Gagne
believed that it was important to
break down humans' learned capabilities into
categories or domains. Gagne's taxonomy
consists of five categories of learning
outcomes - verbal information,
intellectual skills, cognitive strategies,
attitudes, and
motor skills. Gagne,
Briggs, and Wager (1992) explain that each of the
categories
leads to a different class
of human performance.
Essential to
Gagne's ideas of instruction are what he calls
breaks these down into internal and
external conditions. The internal conditions deal
with previously learned capabilities of
the learner. Or in other words, what the learner
knows prior to the instruction. The
external conditions deal with the stimuli (a
purely
behaviorist term) that is
presented externally to the learner. For example,
what
instruction is provided to the
learner.
To tie Gagne's theory of
instruction together, he formulated nine events of
instruction.
When followed, these
events are intended to promote the transfer of
knowledge or
1
information from perception through the
stages of memory. Gagne bases his events of
instruction on the cognitive
information processing learning theory.
The way Gagne's theory is put into
practice is as follows. First of all, the
instructor
determines the objectives of
the instruction. These objectives must then be
categorized into one of the five
domains of learning outcomes. Each of the
objectives
must be stated in
performance terms using one of the standard verbs
(i.e. states,
discriminates,
classifies, etc.) associated with the particular
learning outcome. The
instructor then
uses the conditions of learning for the particular
learning outcome to
determine the
conditions necessary for learning. And finally,
the events of instruction
necessary to
promote the internal process of learning are
chosen and put into the
lesson plan.
The events in essence become the framework for the
lesson plan or steps
of instruction.
Strengths and Weaknesses of
the Theory and it's Assumptions
As a teacher educator who has employed
Gagne's theory into real life, I have some
unique insights into the strengths and
weaknesses of the theory and it's assumptions. I
will again structure my comments
following the three areas of the theory as
described
by Driscoll (1994). I will
first examine the domains of learning outcomes. As
a
teacher the domains of learning have
helped me to better organize my thoughts and
the objectives of the instructional
lesson. This proved to be very beneficial to me as
a
teacher, because I was always looking
for a good way to put more structure into the
objectives of my lesson plans.
Additionally, the domains of learning helped me to
better understand what types of
learning I was expecting to see from my students.
One of the greatest
weakness that I experienced with Gagne's theory
was taking the
goals I had for my
students, putting them into the correct learning
outcome category,
and then creating
objectives using Gagne's standard verbs. I would
like to break this
problem into two
parts. First, as I began to use the theory, it
quickly became apparent
that some goals
were easy to classify into the learning outcome
categories, but that
many were not as
easy to categorize. As a teacher, I spent a great
deal of time reading
and studying
Gagne's categories in an attempt to better
understand how certain goals
fit in the
different categories. This was good in the sense
that it forced me to really
understand
what I wanted my students to do. But, on the other
hand, it always caused
me a great deal
of uneasiness about whether or not I was fouling
up the whole process
by putting the
goal into the wrong learning outcome category.
The second half of this weakness has to
do with creating objectives using Gagne's
standard verbs. After the experience
with categorizing the goal into the proper
learning outcome, I was faced with
changing my goal into a performance objective
using one of the standard verbs. This
always bothered me as a teacher because I felt
like I couldn't always force my
objectives into the form that the theory needed. I
do
believe that writing down objectives
is very important, but the standard verbs made
the process so rigid that I felt like I
was filling in the blanks. I always felt like I
had no
2
creativity in writing the objectives -
I felt pigeonholed. Along with this feeling came
the fact that all objectives had to be
written in performance terms. This also made me
feel a little uneasy because I felt
that some of the overriding objectives I had for
my
students could not be expressed in
performance terms. This objectives were more
process oriented than product oriented.
It was always very difficult to put these
processes into performance terms using
the standard verbs.
As a teacher
educator I found that the conditions of learning
proposed by Gagne were
very beneficial.
I saw them as guidelines to follow. I didn't take
them to be
algorithmic in nature but
more heuristic. They seemed to make logical sense
and in
fact I think they helped me
better structure my lesson plans and my teaching.
Once
again however, even though I
viewed the conditions as heuristics, I did feel
that I was
somewhat of a robot carrying
out commands. I always felt as though I was being
driven by the conditions.
This leads directly to a discussion of
the events of instruction. I felt that the events
of
instruction really helped me the
most as a teacher. The events gave me the skeleton
on
which I could hang my lesson. The
events not only provided me with a road map to
follow, but also a way to look at my
lesson plans in a more holistic nature. I was able
to see how the parts of the lesson fit
together to achieve the ultimate goal.
This part of Gagne's theory seemed to
be the least rigid to me because you did not
have to follow it as rigorously as
other parts of the theory. For example, Gagne
explains that most lessons should
follow the sequence of the events of instruction,
but
that the order is not absolute.
While I appreciated the fact that this was less
rigid than
other parts of the theory, I
always had one important question. If the events
of
instruction follow the cognitive
learning process, then why would it be advisable
to
change the sequence of the events or
to leave events out? Wouldn't this have a great
impact of the learning process? Would
learning still take place?
This leads
me to the learning theory upon which Gagne bases
his instructional theory.
As a teacher
early in my career who was very enamored with
computers, cognitive
information
processing theory seemed like a great explanation
of the learning process
(I am not sure
I still feel the same way). However, those who do
not understand or
agree with cognitive
information processing theory might not feel the
same. For those
people, I believe that
Gagne's theory might not work very well for them.
Conclusion
In conclusion, I would like to
summarize the points I have tried to cover in this
paper.
First of all, Gagne's theory
does provide a great deal of valuable information
to
teachers like myself. I believe it
is mostly appealing to those teachers who may be
early in their teaching careers and are
in need of structure for their lesson plans and a
holistic view of their teaching. The
theory is very systematic and rigid at most
points.
It is almost like a cookbook
recipe to ensure successful teaching and
ultimately
3
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
上一篇:泰语常用3000个单词中英翻译
下一篇:投资大家芒格