1

Laura Howard
OMDE 610 9040
Journal Entry 6 (Module 2)
3/6/16

Reviewing the objectives of this module as indicated in the course content and syllabus
(University of Maryland University College, 2016):
After learning more in-depth analysis and information on the behaviorist and cognitivist

theories, I have been able to focus on some new perspectives that I probably would have never
thought previously, especially from the Harasim (2012a; 2012b; 2012c) and the Kanuka (2008)
writings. After reading and exploring the class media and content from this module, I have
learned that the behaviorist and cognitivist theories have their own unique components.
Analyzing some of their advantages, disadvantages, resources and ideologies used, in regards to
this modules objective (University of Maryland University College, 2016), one of the interesting
parts was reading in the Kanuka (2008) writing about how the behaviorist approach revolves
around the content and that a course management tool would be the preferred resource choice
(Kanuka, 2008, pp. 105-106). This is interesting because I do not think I would have guessed that
would be a way to use this approach. However, I can see that this probably would be an ideal
way since a course management tool can advantageously provide access and availability to so
many resources. Although I think it is somewhat disadvantaging because as Kanuka (2008)
explains, that actual communication is not an essentially targeted (Kanuka, 2008, p. 106). The
cognitivist approach also has some components that could emphasize its advantages and
disadvantages. This approach as Harasim (2012c) explains, has the control and direction of the
teacher along with the courses structure and components (Harasim, 2012c, p. 58). However, as

Harasim (2012c) also states, the student still would be obligated to accept the information that
the teacher, along with the courses structure and components, is directing the student to learn
(Harasim, 2012c, p. 58). An advantage that appears to be for both theories is that they produce
approaches that assist in providing students with a more one-to-one opportunities to assist them
in learning (Harasim, 2012c, p. 58; Kanuka, 2008, p. 105). These appear to be some valuable
components that emphasize each theorys standards, concepts and approaches.
I have to say the rubric assignment was a good learning experience for me, especially
since I do not remember creating one previously on my own. Its interesting because I have used
them so many times before with assignments and now I have experienced a chance to create one
on my own. I thought it was good that Peirce (2006) specifically explained that, if you need to
evaluate in-depth thinking and analysis from the student, selecting multiple-choice evaluative
methods would be not beneficial, since it does not encompass the students own thoughts
(Peirce, 2006). The challenge for me, was deciding how the theories were going to be involved in
the whole assignment. I needed to make sure I was incorporating the theories appropriately and
logically. I have set up courses many times in my career, but I do not remember creating one like
with this assignment, so it was a valuable experience for me.

Questions remaining for this module and what would be the resolution(s)? (University of
Maryland University College, 2016)
If there are any remaining questions, for me, I would have to say that I am still in question

with what is my ideal philosophy on finding the best way to educate people, since as Kanuka
(2008) explains, we need to explore and incorporate our philosophies into education to
determine the best technology resources to use (Kanuka, 2008, pp. 92, 93 & 111). I would like to

say I should come back to this reflection when I come closer to completing the degree program,
but that may or may not be a good idea. I like to considered myself very open-minded, so I am
interested in hearing different perspective. Looking back on what I discussed in my previous
journal entry, I still think I prefer to be influenced by the Progressive philosophy (Kanuka,
2008) which Kanuka (2008) idealizes that, education should beneficially influence a persons
life and as a result should create an ideal society with the knowledge that is acquired (Kanuka,
2008, pp. 103-104). The only way I think that I can resolve this question is to continue learning
about new and various insights and perspectives as I move along in the Distance Education
degree program. I still consider this somewhat of the beginning of my degree pursuit, so I am
sure there is much more I have to learn and explore!

References
Kanuka, H. (2008). Understanding e-learning technologies-in-practice through philosophies-inpractice. In T. Anderson (Ed.), The theory and practice of online learning (pp. 91-118).
Edmonton, AB T5J 3S8: AU Press. Retrieved from
http://www.aupress.ca/books/120146/ebook/99Z_Anderson_2008Theory_and_Practice_of_Online_Learning.pdf
Harasim, L. (2012a). Introduction to learning theory and technology. Learning Theory and
Online Technologies. (pp. 1-14). New York: Routledge.
Harasim, L. (2012b). Behaviorist learning theory. Learning Theory and Online Technologies.
(pp. 30-45). New York: Routledge.
Harasim, L. (2012c). Cognitivist learning theory. Learning Theory and Online Technologies. (pp.
46-58). New York: Routledge.
Peirce, W. (2006, January). Designing rubrics for assessing higher order thinking [Text version].
Workshop presented at the AFACCT Howard Community College, Columbia, MD.
Retrieved from
http://academic.pgcc.edu/~wpeirce/MCCCTR/Designingrubricsassessingthinking.html
University of Maryland University College. (2016). OMDE 610 9040 Teaching and learning in
online distance education (2162) OMDE-610 [Course syllabus]. OMDE 610-9040,
Spring 2016, [Teaching and learning in online distance education (2162) OMDE-610].
Master of Distance Education and E-learning, University of Maryland University
College, Retrieved from
https://learn.umuc.edu/d2l/le/content/124340/viewContent/5442289/View