Reflection of theories of Learning and Behaviorism

There are many instructional design and performance improvement models and theories that help guide design, development, and implementation in learning. So is behaviorism dead? Well, to me, the answer is NO. During our readings, we learned that behaviorism is based on observable external changes in behavior. It focuses on a new behavioral pattern being repeated until it becomes automatic. This helps with focus and learning, which is how we develop. Rob Foshay, stated that Cognitive psychology and constructivism have focused almost exclusively on cognitive learning (Foshay, R, July 2001, p. 1). Personally, I feel; that HPT is a process that will continue to grow and evolve with understanding people, behavior, and learning. Theories provide a general explanation for observations made over time. Theories are supposed to explain and predict behavior. When it comes to education, there are three main theories, Behaviorism, Cognitivism, and Constructivism.

Well, behaviorists believe that learning should occur through reinforcement of desired feedback. My goal is to examine how the constructivist view of learning translates into a constructivist view of teaching (Mayer, R. E., 2004, p.14). You see Cognitivists think that learning involves storing new information with related prior knowledge. On the other hand, constructivists feel that expertise is individually built as learners try to make sense of the world around them. Those three learning theories are not always used equally, although most can understand that practical learning experiences should be built on learning events.

According to Learning-Theories.com, Discovery learning is an inquiry-based, constructivist learning theory that takes place in problem-solving situations where the learner draws on their own past experience and existing knowledge to discover facts and relationships and new truths to be learned (http://www.learning-theories.com/discovery-learning-bruner.html). Mayer, claims that the discovery learning school of thought is misinterpreting the meaning of constructivism. Referred to as the constructivist fallacy (Mayer, 2004, p.15), Mayer states that discovery learning experts believe that the only way to encourage active learning is through active teaching. I feel that we are always trying to compare and analyze learning and sometimes get lost in what we are trying to prove. Our focus should only be on making sure learners get the proper education. Debating to me over theories and beliefs seems like no one really ever wins.

Foshay, R (July 2001). Is Behaviorism dead? Should HPT care? ISPI News & Notes, 1-2.

Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist, 59(1), 14-19.

Video Lecture Supplement: Curt Bonk on Behaviorism (Ivan Pavlov, John Watson, and B. F. Skinner as well as Hermann Ebbinghaus and Edward Thorndike). Archive URL (45 minutes): https://youtu.be/KefAapQdAHs