Landamatics, or Algo-Heuristic Theory as it was originally called, was developed by Lev Landa in the early 1950’s. This instructional design theory “deals with the componential and systemic analysis of knowledge and cognitive operations involved in the acquisition and application of knowledge and the formation of cognitive and psycho-motor skills and abilities.” (Landa, 1983, pg. 164) There are several goals of the theory including teaching general methods of thinking, facilitating higher-order thinking skills and teaching learners to use the same mental processes, which may often be hidden, for situations that have similar “logical structures” (Landa, 1999) .
The goal of Landamatics is to teach learners to handle different content, that have similar logical structures, through general methods of thinking.
As with other ID theories, Landamatics introduces us to some key terms that distinguish and characterize the theory. Landa believes knowledge is made up of three elements: image – the mental picture of an object, concept – the knowledge of the characteristics of an object, and propositions – the relationships the object and it’s parts to other objects. In most current education situations, the development of content specific skills or the ability to apply knowledge is the main goal. Landamatics attempts to help learners internalize processes that will make it easier to understand these elements independent of the content itself but dependent on the logical structure of that content.
Landamatics includes two types of methods. One is a method as a system of mental operations (processes), MA, and another is a method as a system of instructions (prescriptions), MP (see figure 1). Through the steps of guided discovery, expository learning or a combination of the two, the two method systems are utilized to help learners internalize their thinking processes until they reach simultanization, the point where tasks can be carried out quickly, effortlessly, and simultaneously.
The first method, Guided Discovery, involves informing the learned of the task to be learner, having them, through their own efforts, figure out the task, having them formulate the cognitive steps they went through to complete the task, and then having them practice, internalize and automatize these steps (see figure 1). Then a more general task, using the same cognitive structure, is completed in the same way. The second method, Expository Learning, involves almost the same steps as guided discovery, only the presentation and the teaching of the task is left up to the teacher not the student. In either case, once the task has been learned the degree of generality of the task is increased. Unlike traditional teaching where the generalizations are presented in an attempt to exhaust all possible situations the learner may face that are similar to the original task, Landamatics generalizations are “reliable, scientific, concept-congruous (RSCC) generalizations”; using general methods of thinking for a type of concept so that the learner may recognize and understand all related concepts (Landa, 1999) .
Importance to Instructional Design
Landamatics is an important addition to instructional systems in that it can be an important tool that saves time once the learner has established the mental processes. It helps learners internalize his/her thought processes and understand the steps they should go through when learning something new. It helps learners develop general thinking processes for learning new knowledge so that they can better understand the knowledge and become expert-level learners and transfer the knowledge to other situations.
Landamatics has many major characteristics that plants it firmly in the new paradigm (Reigeluth, 1996, 1999) . The theory integrates instructional theory and curriculum seeing that how we think about the content is just as important as the content itself. Its teaching of general methods of thinking is more holistic than past instructional methods and in thinking about the mental operations the theory is also more process oriented.
As an ID theory, Landamatics is very appropriate for what it wants to accomplish. It focuses on the discovery, organization, internalization, and generalization of mental operations, the logical structure of content as content. The control of learning is the learner if independent discovery and a bit less learner-centered and more teacher-centered if expository learning with ready-made knowledge and methods. In either case, the goal is mastery and command of general methods of thinking & intelligence (Landa, 1983).
One problem with the theory is that it may be too time consuming at the start for K-12 curriculum. Teachers already have a tight schedule when it comes to completing state or district mandated content. Waiting for 25+ students to “discover” what they are supposed to learn is not feasible in a content driven, standardized testing K-12 environment. I believe that unless children are taught this process at an early age it would be a daunting task for a 10th grade Chemistry teacher to start asking this of his/her students.
Landa, L. N. (1983). The algo-heuristic theory of instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: An overview of their current status (Vol. 1). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Elrbaum Associates.
Landa, L. N. (1999). Landamatics instructional design theory and methodology for teaching general methods of thinking. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1996). A new paradigm of ISD? Educational Technology, 36(3), 13-20.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). What is instructional-design theory and how is it changing? In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. 2). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.