1,160
7
Essay, 6 pages (1400 words)

Theories and principles of planning and enabling learning

Unit 4Assignment 1? ) S?®ci? l f? ct?®rs ?®f l??? rning ? nd ?? duc? ti?®n Th?? t?? rm ? int?? ll?? ctu? l t?®?®l? is g?? n?? r? lly ? ttribut?? d t?® Vyg?®tsky (W?? rtsch, 2003).

H?? n?®t?? d th? t n? tur?? c?®ntribut?? s hum? ns with c?? rt? in ?? l?? m?? nt? ry m?? nt? l functi?®ns such ? s m?? m?®ry, ? tt?? nti?®n ? nd th?? c? p? city t?® m? k?? ? ss?®ci? ti?®ns b? s?? d ?®n c?®ntiguity. W?? us?? th?? s?? b? sic functi?®ns t?® m? k?? s?? ns?? ?®f ?®ur ?? nvir?®nm?? nt. ?? n?? ?®f th?? m?®st imp?®rt? nt t? sks t?® ? n ?? duc? ti?®n? l syst?? m is t?® ? uth?®riz?? th?? y?®ung with th?? int?? ll?? ctu? l t?®?®ls ?®f th?? cultur??. Childr?? n ? r?? quit?? c? p? bl?? ?®f incid?? nt? l l??? rning b? s?? d ?®n th?? n? tur? l m?? nt? l functi?®ns. Th?? ? cquisiti?®n ?®f m?®r?? ? dv? nc?? d f?®rms ?®f th?? t?®?®l us??, h?®w?? v?? r it must b?? d?? lib?? r? t?? ? nd must pr?®c???? d in th?? full und?? rst? nding ?®f th?? p?®w?? r ?®f th?? t?®?®l, ?®f its g?? n?? r? tiv?? p?®t?? nti? l ? nd ?®f th?? d?? m? nds m? d?? ?®n th?? us?? r during th?? p?? ri?®d ?®f l??? rning (D? vis, N., ?? t ? l. 1997).

S?®ci? l f? ct?®rs ?®f ?? duc? ti?®n Th?? r?? ? r?? s?®m?? ? ccus? ti?®ns ? b?®ut th?? l? ck ?®f c?®nn?? cti?®n b?? tw???? n th?? sch?®?®l ?? nvir?®nm?? nt ? nd th?? r??? l liv?? ?? xp?? ri?? nc??. F?®rm? l ?? duc? ti?®n c?®nfr?®nts childr?? n with m? ny d?? m? nds th? t ? r?? n?®t ?  r?? gul? r ?®r fr?? qu?? nt ch? r? ct?? ristic ?®f th?? ir ?? v?? ryd? y ?? xp?? ri?? nc?? ?®utsid?? th?? cl? ssr?®?®m. Th?? pr? ctic?? ?®f ?? duc? ti?®n c?®nfr?®nts childr?? n with m??? ningful ? nd n?? c?? ss? ry disc?®ntinuiti?? s in th?? ir int?? ll?? ctu? l, s?®ci? l ? nd linguistic ?? xp?? ri?? nc?? s (W?®?®d, D., 1995). But ? cc?®rding t?® B?? rnst?? in childr?? n fr?®m ? th?? middl?? cl? ss? s?®ci? l b? ckgr?®und find it ??? si?? r t?® ? cc?®mm?®d? t?? t?® th?? sch?®?®l syst?? m th? n ? th?? w?®rking cl? ss? ?®n??, b?? c? us?? ?®f th?? l? ngu? g?? ? nd s?®ci? l n?®rm ?®f th?? sch?®?®l s?? rv?? b?? tt?? r th?? ir c?®mpr?? h?? nsi?®n. D? vid W?®?®d (1995) d?®?? s n?®t ? gr???? with B?? rnst?? in in this r?? sp?? ct h?? s? ys: ???.. it is ?  mist? k?? t?® think ?®f sch?®?®ling simply ?  pr?? s?? rv?? ?®f ?®n?? s?®ci? l gr?®up.

It is n?®t, I sugg?? st, pr?®fit? bly s???? n ? s ?  ? middl??-cl? ss? instituti?®n, f?®r ?? x? mpl??. It m? y w?? ll b?? p?®pul? t?? d by ? dults fr?®m such s?®ci? l b? ckgr?®unds, but simply vi?? wing sch?®?®l ? s ?  c?®ntinu? ti?®n ?®f ?? xp?? ri?? nc?? s th? t ? r?? typic? l ?®f ?®n?? s?®ci? l gr?®up is, I b?? li?? v??, ?  gr?®ss ?®v?? rsimplific? ti?®n. Such ?  vi?? w ign?®r?? s ? nd b?? li?? s th?? m? ny sp?? cific d?? m? nds th? t ? r?? ? sp?? ci? l? t?® sch?®?®ling.

Put it ? n?®th?? r w? y, sch?®?®ls h? v?? ?  cultur?? ?®f th?? ir ?®wn??? (p. 213). ?? t diff?? r?? nt tim?? ? nd in diff?? r?? nt p? rt ?®f th?? w?®rld t??? ch?? rs h? v?? h? d th?? r?®l?? ?®f b?? ing diss?? min? t?®rs ?®f lit?? r? cy, gu? rdi? ns ?®f cultur??, vic? rs ?®f m?®r? lity, ? rchit?? cts ?®f th?? ? g?®?®d citiz?? n? ? nd ? g?? nts ?®f th?? G?®ds. In m?®r?? r?? c?? nt tim?? s, sch?®?®ls h? v?? b???? n ? ll?®c? t?? d th?? t? sk ?®f ? chi?? ving s?®ci? l ?? qu? lity, ?®v?? rc?®ming m? t?? ri? l dis? dv? nt? g?? ? nd ?? r? dic? ting pr?? judic??. T??? ch?? rs ? nd instructi?®n? l d?? sign?? r n???? d t?® b?? c? p? bl?? ?®f di? gn?®sing th?? n???? ds ?®f th?? individu? l l??? rn?? r ? nd kn?®w h?®w t?® m???? t th?? s?? wh?? n disc?®v?? r?? d (W?®?®d, D., 1995). Th?? t?? chn?®l?®gic? l d?? v?? l?®pm?? nts in r?? c?? nt y??? rs h? v?? ?? quipp?? d t??? ch?? r ? nd instructi?®n? l d?? sign?? rs with m?®r?? v? ri?? ty ?®f t?®?®ls t?® m???? t this n?? w ?? r? , but th?? und?? rlying th???®ri?? s ?®f instructi?®ns must b?? ? n ? dditi?®n t?® th?? us?? ?®f th?? t?®?®ls. ICTs ? nd lit?? r? cy skills ?? n ??? rly insight int?® th?? r?? l? ti?®nship b?? tw???? n th?? us?? ?®f ICTs ? nd skills c? n b?? ?®bt? in?? d by c?®mp? ring th?? lit?? r? cy skills ?®f ICT us?? rs v?? rsus n?®n-us?? rs.

Fr?®m th?? discussi?®n ?®f c?®mput?? r us? g?? ? b?®v??, th?®s?? wh?® did ?? xpr?? ss ? n int?? r?? st in using ?  c?®mput?? r ?®v?? r th?? n?? xt y??? r did n?®t diff?? r subst? nti? lly in th?? ir lit?? r? cy skills fr?®m th?®s?? wh?® indic? t?? d n?® such int?? r?? st. ?? k?? y qu?? sti?®n ?? m?? rging fr?®m th?? ??? rli?? r Int?? rn? ti?®n? l ?? dult Lit?? r? cy Surv?? y (I?? LS 1994) w? s th?? r?? l? ti?®nship b?? tw???? n b? sic lit?? r? cy skills ? nd ?®th?? r skills th?®ught t?® b?? imp?®rt? nt t?® w?®rkpl? c?? pr?®ductivity ? nd l? b?®ur m? rk?? t succ?? ss (???…CD ? nd St? tistics C? n? d?  2000, Mc?? ul?? y ? nd L?®w?? 1999). In pr? ctic??, ICT us?? is link?? d t?® lit?? r? cy skills in ?  numb?? r ?®f w? ys.

B?? ing skill?? d with m?®st ICTs r?? quir?? s, t?® s?®m?? d?? gr????, h? ving lit?? r? cy skills. By th?? ir v?? ry n? tur??, ICTs b?®th d?? p?? nd ?®n ? nd ?? nh? nc?? c?®mmunic? ti?®n ? biliti?? s. Lit?? r? cy skills ? r?? th?? r?? f?®r?? ?? ss?? nti? l t?® th?? d?? v?? l?®pm?? nt ?®f digit? l lit?? r? cy (M? sse ?? t ? l.

1998). ?? n?? ?®f th?? r??? s?®ns is th? t ICT lit?? r? cy includ?? s n?®t ?®nly t?? chn?®l?®gic? l pr?®fici?? ncy, but ? ls?® r?? quir?? s c?®gnitiv?? skills, such ? s th?®s?? und?? rlying r??? ding ? nd pr?®bl?? m s?®lving, which ? r?? critic? l t?® using ICTs ?? ff?? ctiv?? ly (Int?? rn? ti?®n? l ICT Lit?? r? cy P? n?? l 2002). Much ?®f th?? c?®nt?? nt ?®f ICTs, n?®t? bly ?®f th?? Int?? rn?? t, r?? m? ins t?? xt-b? s?? d (St?? w? rt 2000), ? nd th?? f?®rm? t ? nd c?®nt?? nt ?®f w?? b p? g?? s s?®m?? tim?? s d?? m? nds skills simil? r t?® th?®s?? ?®f d?®cum?? nt lit?? r? cy. Furth?? r, it is lik?? ly th? t b? sic r??? ding ? nd writing lit?? r? cy b?? c?®m?? m?®r?? imp?®rt? nt ? s m?®r?? inf?®rm? ti?®n is tr? nsmitt?? d ? nd sh? r?? d thr?®ugh ICTs th? n ?? v?? r b?? f?®r?? (L?? u Jr. 2000). Unit 4Assignment 1b) Key theory and principles of Learning Cl? rk ? nd C? ff? r?? ll?  (1999) ?? xpl? in th? t ? dult l??? rning c? n b?? d?? fin?? d in num?? r?®us w? ys, but th? t ?  wid?? ly ? cc?? pt?? d d?? finiti?®n r?? f?? rs t?® th?®s?? l??? rn?? rs ? s h? ving c?®mpl?? t?? d m? nd? t?®ry public sch?®?®ling, usu? lly ? r?®und ? g?? ?? ight???? n. Whil?? th? t m? y b?? ?  c?®mm?®n c?®nv?? nti?®n ? m?®ng ?? duc? ti?®n? l th???®rists, th?? r?? ? r?? v? ri?®us d?? finiti?®ns in us?? ? nd this m? nuscript will r?? f?? r t?® th?? ? dult l??? rn?? r ? s (? t ?  minimum) h? ving finish?? d m? nd? t?®ry sch?®?®ling in ? dditi?®n t?® h? ving g? in?? d ?? xp?? ri?? nc?? in th?? w?®rk f?®rc?? pri?®r t?® ?? ng? ging in ? dditi?®n? l ?? duc? ti?®n.

C?®ns?? qu?? ntly, th?? f?®cus h?? r?? is ?®n th?? ? dult th? t h? s h? d lif?? ?? xp?? ri?? nc?? s ? nd h? s ?®ft?? n b???? n r?? f?? rr?? d t?® ? s ?  n?®n-tr? diti?®n? l stud?? nt in th?? high?? r ?? duc? ti?®n s?? tting. Th?? ? g?? r? ng?? f?®r this typ?? ?®f stud?? nt is ?? xtr?? m?? ly wid?? ? nd, f?®r th?? m?®st p? rt, includ?? s ? dults ?®v?? r ? g?? 25. B?®k (2004) h? s n?®t?? d th?? imp?®rt? nc?? ?®f th?? ? dult l??? rn?? r by ? ss?? rting th? t th?? c?®ll?? g?? ?®r univ?? rsity is ?  c?? ntr? l instituti?®n ?®f th?? curr?? nt p?®st-industri? l s?®ci?? ty. Th?? r?? f?®r??, th?? ?? ff?? ct ?®f ? ging ?®n th?? ? dult l??? rn?? r ? nd implic? ti?®ns f?®r ?? duc? t?®rs will b?? ?? x? min?? d in th? t c?®nt?? xt. M?®st th???®rist b?? li?? v?? th? t int?? llig?? nc?? c?®nsists ?®f s?? v?? r? l f? ct?®rs. Th?? s?? f? ct?®rs c? n b?? s?? p? r? t?? d int?® prim? ry m?? nt? l ? biliti?? s ? nd s?? c?®nd? ry m?? nt? l ? biliti?? s (C? v? n? ugh ? nd Bl? nch? rd-Fi?? lds, 2002). ?? c?®mm?®n subs?? t ?®f th?? prim? ry m?? nt? l ? biliti?? s is m? d?? up ?®f num?? ric f? cility, w?®rd flu?? ncy, v?? rb? l m??? ning, inductiv?? r??? s?®ning, ? nd sp? ti? l ?®ri?? nt? ti?®n. Using ?  l?®ngitudin? l study ?®v?? r ?  p?? ri?®d ?®f s?? v?? r? l d?? c? d?? s, Sch? i?? (1994) n?®t?? d th? t sc?®r?? s ?®n prim? ry m?? nt? l ? biliti?? s impr?®v?? d gr? du? lly until ? b?®ut ? g?? f?®rty ? t which tim?? th?? ? biliti?? s t?? nd t?® st? biliz?? until ? ppr?®xim? t?? ly ? g?? sixty.

Th?? d?? cr??? s?? s ? r?? sm? ll until th?? mid s?? v?? nti?? s ? t which tim?? sc?®r?? s ? r?? usu? lly m??? sur? bly l?®w?? r th? n th?? y w?? r?? in th?? mid tw?? nti?? s. Th?? r?? f?®r??, wh?? n ?  c?®mp?®sit?? m??? sur?? ?®f m?? nt? l ? biliti?? s is us?? d, l??? rning ? bility d?®?? s n?®t d?? cr??? s?? until th?? sixth ?®r ?? v?? n s?? v?? nth d?? c? d?? f?®r m?®st individu? ls. Th?? signific? nc?? ?®f this s?? min? l study s???? ms t?® b?? th? t n?®tic??? bl?? ?®v?? r? ll m?? nt? l d?? clin?? in th?? prim? ry ? biliti?? s d?®?? s n?®t g?? n?? r? lly ?®ccur until l? t?? r in lif??. H? vinghurst (? s cit?? d in Kn?®wl?? s, 2005) ? ss?? rts th? t p???®pl?? d?® n?®t simply p? ss int?® ? dulth?®?®d ? nd th?? n just c?®? st ? l?®ng t?® ?®ld ? g??. H?? cl? ims th? t ? dulth?®?®d h? s tr? nsiti?®n p?®ints ? nd d?? v?? l?®pm?? nt? l p?? ri?®ds ? s c?®mpl?? t?? ? s th? t ?®f childh?®?®d. ?? th?? r th???®rists such ? s ?…riks?®n ? nd L?? vins?®n ? ls?® pr?? s?? nt st? g?? ?®r ph? s?? th???®ri?? s s?®m?? tim?? s link?? d t?® lif?? ?? v?? nts ? nd tr? nsiti?®ns th? t ? dults ?? nc?®unt?? r ? nd p? ss thr?®ugh (Cl? rk ? nd C? ff? r?? ll? , 1999).

K?®hlb?? rgs (? s cit?? d in M?? rri? m ? nd C? ff? r?? ll? , 1991) 1973 th???®ry ?®f m?®r? l d?? v?? l?®pm?? nt pr?®m?®t?? s thr???? st? g?? s th? t individu? ls p? ss thr?®ugh fr?®m y?®uth t?® ? dulth?®?®d in r?? l? ti?®n t?® m?®r? l ? nd ?? thic? l judgm?? nts influ?? nc?? d by th?? r?? l? ti?®nship ?®f th?? individu? l t?® his ?®r h?? r s?®ci? l s?? tting. ?? ll ?®f th?? s?? th???®rists t?? nd t?® br??? k d?? v?? l?®pm?? nt int?® v? ri?®us st? g?? s ? nd r?? c?®gniz?? th? t ? lth?®ugh ? dults d?® n?®t ? lw? ys fit n??? tly int?® ??? ch ?®f th?? s?? c? t?? g?®ri?? s, by ? nd l? rg?? ??? ch ph? s?? h? s its ?®wn ch? ll?? ng?? s ? nd ? djustm?? nts th? t c?®uld b?? vi?? w?? d ? s d?? v?? l?®pm?? nt? l. R?? g? rdl?? ss ?®f which th???®ry is m?®st c?®rr?? ct, Kn?®wl?? s (2005) ? rgu?? s f?®r ?  dr? m? tic ch? ng?? t?® s?? lf-im? g?? wh?? n ?®n?? d?? fin?? s him ?®r h?? rs?? lf ? s ? n ? dult. Th?? switch is ? w? y fr?®m b?? ing ?  full-tim?? l??? rn?? r t?® ?®n?? th? t t? k?? s ?®n ?®th?? r r?? sp?®nsibiliti?? s ? nd thus cr??? t?? s m?®r?? ?®f ?  s?? lf-dir?? ct?? d p?? rs?®n? lity.

P???®pl?? r??? ching ? dulth?®?®d d?® n?®t just inh?? rit ?  chr?®n?®l?®gic? l pr?®gr?? ssi?®n ?®f ? ging but ? ls?® ?®ft?? n includ?? t? king ? n ? ttitud?? th? t is m?®r?? s?? lf-dir?? ct?? d ? l?®ng with ?  n???? d f?®r ?®th?? rs t?® vi?? w th?? m ? s such. ReferencesAslanian, C. B., Brickell, H.

M. (2005). Americans in transition: Life changes as reasons for adult Learning. New York: College Entrance Examination Board. Bok, D.

(2004). Universities and the future of America. London: Duke University Press. Cavanaugh, J.

C., Blanchard-Fields, F. (2002).

Adult development and aging. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning. D? vis, N., ?? t ? l, 1997. How to teach adults. Manhattan, KS: The Learning Resources Network.

King, J. E., Anderson, E. L.

, Corrigan, M. E. (Eds.

). (2003). Changing student attendance patterns. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Knowles, M. S.

(2005). The modern practice of adult education. Chicago: Follet Publishing Company. Long, H. B. (1972). The psychology of aging: How it affects learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

M? sse ?? t ? l. 1998. Aged to perfection. Training and Development. Oct. 2001. Retrieved July 4, 2004 from findarticles. com database.

W?? rtsch, 2003. Applying principles of adult learning: the key to more effective training programs. The FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. April, 2003. Retrieved June 25, 2004 from findarticles.

com database. W?®?®d, D., 1995. Adult learning: Research and practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Thank's for Your Vote!
Theories and principles of planning and enabling learning. Page 1
Theories and principles of planning and enabling learning. Page 2
Theories and principles of planning and enabling learning. Page 3
Theories and principles of planning and enabling learning. Page 4
Theories and principles of planning and enabling learning. Page 5
Theories and principles of planning and enabling learning. Page 6
Theories and principles of planning and enabling learning. Page 7
Theories and principles of planning and enabling learning. Page 8
Theories and principles of planning and enabling learning. Page 9

This work, titled "Theories and principles of planning and enabling learning" was written and willingly shared by a fellow student. This sample can be utilized as a research and reference resource to aid in the writing of your own work. Any use of the work that does not include an appropriate citation is banned.

If you are the owner of this work and don’t want it to be published on AssignBuster, request its removal.

Request Removal
Cite this Essay

References

AssignBuster. (2022) 'Theories and principles of planning and enabling learning'. 7 June.

Reference

AssignBuster. (2022, June 7). Theories and principles of planning and enabling learning. Retrieved from https://assignbuster.com/theories-and-principles-of-planning-and-enabling-learning/

References

AssignBuster. 2022. "Theories and principles of planning and enabling learning." June 7, 2022. https://assignbuster.com/theories-and-principles-of-planning-and-enabling-learning/.

1. AssignBuster. "Theories and principles of planning and enabling learning." June 7, 2022. https://assignbuster.com/theories-and-principles-of-planning-and-enabling-learning/.


Bibliography


AssignBuster. "Theories and principles of planning and enabling learning." June 7, 2022. https://assignbuster.com/theories-and-principles-of-planning-and-enabling-learning/.

Work Cited

"Theories and principles of planning and enabling learning." AssignBuster, 7 June 2022, assignbuster.com/theories-and-principles-of-planning-and-enabling-learning/.

Get in Touch

Please, let us know if you have any ideas on improving Theories and principles of planning and enabling learning, or our service. We will be happy to hear what you think: [email protected]