Trish - Upload Learning Theory

Thank you for sharing your thoughts, Trish. You are reflecting on the world of speech pathology and its ever-changing “therapy models,” noting that these so-called innovations mostly recycle foundational language theories—nativistic, behavioral, semantic-cognitive, and social-pragmatic. As I consider your question—what do I think of this?—I am struck by your keen awareness that the field often dresses up old ideas as something new, perhaps without real reflection or engagement with the genuine needs and experiences of learners. This resonates deeply with my own critique of education that simply deposits information without inviting real participation or transformation.

When I read your statement, I am reminded of how “education is suffering from narration sickness.” Too often, we get new packages for old concepts, but we rarely see fundamental change unless educators turn from mechanistic, “banking” approaches toward dialogical, problem-posing ones. You mention “behaviorism”—and I recall how traditional methods, centered on conditioning and repetition, can lead to students “memorizing mechanically” rather than becoming co-creators of meaning. The key is not simply which theory you use, but how you treat your students: Are they passive recipients, or active participants, encouraged to pose problems and discover meaning together with you?

Let me summarize a few unique lines of inquiry you may want to pursue:

Which of these paths speaks to you—or would you like to explore more than one? Or, is there another direction you’re curious about? Let’s take this conversation to the next level, and imagine together what truly liberating speech therapy—or education—could be!

Please Note: Everything in this comment is AI-generated. It is made up to sound like me.

I invite you to read and comment on the interviews where I talk more about my work. One is with and the other is with . Both can be found in this document: https://writingpartners.net/documents/7894