Constructivist approach departs from the premise that learners can construct and reconstruct knowledge while behaviourist approach is more about the change of learner behaviour to inculcate learning.
I believe the relationship between facilitator and learner is reciprocal.
Behaviorist Theory
The behaviorist theory surrounds fundamentally grounded forms of positive and negative feedback. Pavlov exemplified this stimulus-result theory through his experiments. When repeated stimuli are presented, learning is cemented however; learning is not achieved by the stimulus-result alone but through repetition. This is known as Classical Conditioning. Skinner developed his theory of Operant Conditioning (Gredler, 2006). Learning which is associative comes from the relationship is contingent on the presentation of the reinforcement and the response. The Skinner box exemplifies the relationship of pressing a button that releases food; therefore learning how to press the button becomes the stimulus, and the response is food (Ormond, 2006). Both Skinner’s and Pavlov’s theories are very similar and both illustrate behavioral changes, resulting in learning based on reward and punishment systems (Gredler, 2006). According to Hean (2009), behaviorist theory foundations substantiate learning has not occurred if the learning is not measurable, learning is achieved through trial and error and furthermore is observable. Thorndike’s Primary Law theory often referred to as Connectionism is behaviorally based (Ormond, 2006). Repeated positive reinforcement of good behaviors eventually results in those behaviors becoming habitual. Human beings and animal creatures alike usually react in ways that bring positive results (Ormond, 2006). Good behaviors are reinforced and less desired behaviors corrected through understanding consequences of behavior.
Constructivist Theory
Constructivism is often associated with pedagogic approaches that promote learning by active performance, and is supported by social infrastructures; learning which is developmentally appropriate, individually supported and actively directed by the learner. (Gredler, 2009). Theorists exemplifying this theory include Piaget, Vygotsky, Bruner, Dewey and Kuhn. Constructivism is based on appropriate developmental, teacher supported self learning.Piaget supported constructivist views through accommodation and assimilation: individuals derive new knowledge from their experiences in the outside world.The basic theories of constructivism in education finally emerged for a few reasons: the overuse of computers and technology in education, the decreased use of basic human functions effectively to facilitate learning, the lack of critical thinking among student populations, and more task-oriented thinking and the inability to apply learned skills to real world situations ( Gredler,2009).
Gredler, M. (2006). Learning and Instruction: theory into practice (6 th. Ed.) Pearson Education
Hean, S. (2009).Learning theories and interprofessional education: a user’s guide. Learning in Health and Social Care (8) (4) p. 250-262
Ormrod, J.E. (2008). Human learning (5th. Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merril: Prentice-Hall
learner behavior to inculcate learning.
in the constructivist approach, we recognize that understanding is something that does not spread and can only take place through the central participation of the learner. teacher, mediator, intervenes in a way that regulations on intellectual functioning students to better succeed overcoming learning obstacles.
So, Khyati, this means that our approach is constructivist when learner-centred and that discovery learning style is crucial as it allows learners to learn their own way at their own pace.
I guess with behaviourist approach the facilitation of teaching and learning are teacher centered and learners have little freedom to choose how and at what pace they learn
That is an inaccurate characterization of the "behaviourist" approach. For example, take a look at how B.F. Skinner, the preeminent American behaviorist, treats education in his utopian novel "Walden Two" (it looks very much like "discovery learning"). Furthermore, self-pacing is a hallmark of the Personalized System of Instruction (and other behavioral approaches to instruction). See the attached for more information.
http://ericfox.com/sites/default/files/publications/Fox2004.pdf
Article Constructing A Pragmatic Science of Learning and Instruction...
Thank you for clarification Eric, much appreciated just to share some of the sources that influenced my thinking around the two learning theories
www.g-casa.com/conferences/manila/papers/Weegar.pdf
I believe the relationship between facilitator and learner is reciprocal.
Behaviorist Theory
The behaviorist theory surrounds fundamentally grounded forms of positive and negative feedback. Pavlov exemplified this stimulus-result theory through his experiments. When repeated stimuli are presented, learning is cemented however; learning is not achieved by the stimulus-result alone but through repetition. This is known as Classical Conditioning. Skinner developed his theory of Operant Conditioning (Gredler, 2006). Learning which is associative comes from the relationship is contingent on the presentation of the reinforcement and the response. The Skinner box exemplifies the relationship of pressing a button that releases food; therefore learning how to press the button becomes the stimulus, and the response is food (Ormond, 2006). Both Skinner’s and Pavlov’s theories are very similar and both illustrate behavioral changes, resulting in learning based on reward and punishment systems (Gredler, 2006). According to Hean (2009), behaviorist theory foundations substantiate learning has not occurred if the learning is not measurable, learning is achieved through trial and error and furthermore is observable. Thorndike’s Primary Law theory often referred to as Connectionism is behaviorally based (Ormond, 2006). Repeated positive reinforcement of good behaviors eventually results in those behaviors becoming habitual. Human beings and animal creatures alike usually react in ways that bring positive results (Ormond, 2006). Good behaviors are reinforced and less desired behaviors corrected through understanding consequences of behavior.
Constructivist Theory
Constructivism is often associated with pedagogic approaches that promote learning by active performance, and is supported by social infrastructures; learning which is developmentally appropriate, individually supported and actively directed by the learner. (Gredler, 2009). Theorists exemplifying this theory include Piaget, Vygotsky, Bruner, Dewey and Kuhn. Constructivism is based on appropriate developmental, teacher supported self learning.Piaget supported constructivist views through accommodation and assimilation: individuals derive new knowledge from their experiences in the outside world.The basic theories of constructivism in education finally emerged for a few reasons: the overuse of computers and technology in education, the decreased use of basic human functions effectively to facilitate learning, the lack of critical thinking among student populations, and more task-oriented thinking and the inability to apply learned skills to real world situations ( Gredler,2009).
Gredler, M. (2006). Learning and Instruction: theory into practice (6 th. Ed.) Pearson Education
Hean, S. (2009).Learning theories and interprofessional education: a user’s guide. Learning in Health and Social Care (8) (4) p. 250-262
Ormrod, J.E. (2008). Human learning (5th. Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merril: Prentice-Hall
Thank you Caree, you answer is spot on and captures the essence of the difference between the two approaches
I would add to the above analysis that constructivism tends to be viewed from two different perspectives, one psychological and the other sociological, and each has different pedagogical implications. Psychological constructivism (the perspective highlighted by Caree) is a developmental learning theory that suggests that individuals actively construct their own knowledge based in part on their own background knowledge and experience. Social constructivism focuses on how bodies of knowledge (disciplines) are human constructs that have been determined by things like politics, ideologies, power relations, economics, etc., and these political and social factors affect how people come to know and understand the world. While both approaches share the view that knowledge is actively constructed, the former focuses on the development of knowledge within the individual mind and the latter on how formal knowledge itself has been shaped by the wider social and political forces of the society in which the individual is embedded.
I think it is important to realise that Constructivism and Behaviourism are psychological theories and not teaching practices. They describe psychological processes based on different "units of study". The behaviourist unit is of course behaviour, but units of study for constructivists can be radically different. Piaget's constructivism focussed on cognitive structures whereas Vygotsky unit of study was the social historical scenarios.
This distinction is necessary. Utilising these ideas to inform teaching is the challenge. In the 1960s the Plowden report in the UK caught the zeitgeist of the teaching profession and firmly established Piagetian theory as the basis of British Education. Unfortunately, no one had any idea how to put theory into classroom practice. Many radical experiments took place, some of which were absolute disasters. It led to an inevitable backlash from traditional education summarised in what was called the Black Papers. This conflict still reverberates in British Education. Anti constructivists still cite these failures of application as an indication of a flawed psychological theory. Pity.
You are absolutely correct, Dave. We have to be careful when trying to derive pedagogical principles from learning theories. And yet of the two, Behaviorism has had the most obvious and direct impact, at least in my own area, that of language teaching, with its emphasis on habit formation (and the "unlearning" of "bad" habits on the part of L2 learners), rote learning, memorization, repetition, the building-block approach to curriculum design (and to learning), etc. The behaviorist model was ideal for the Industrial Age, but to this day, we haven't really fully escaped its domination. Pity (as you say).
Hi Dave I believe you have great idealism here but we can't forget these theores because these support how and why we teach the way we do. Everyone is an individual and each person learns differently. I believe in Bandura's theory of Self Efficacy and constructivism. My students are mostly adult learners and they need enthusiasm to drive their learning. Constructivism is active learning with motivation and enthusiasm. Not all of my students learn this way.. as we are all probably aware here, the millenials are a difficult group to teach; self centered, entitled and demanding. These students are not typically self motivated or self guided motivated learners We need to remember the osychology of the audience. While I see your point, I believe we need to remember the basics of the human psyche..
In Adults at least from my experience:stimulate students to present the task as a problem to be solved together
( Shönn the reflexive practitioner)
And share personal competencies needed to find a good a solution ( Edgard Morain). Helps to construct klowledge among The class. Students learn from each other. And I get to be involved also, as a pair
I agree with both Caree and Denise. I did not intend to imply that we should not embrace these theories. In fact totally the opposite. I think it is vital that we inform practice from evidence and theory. The art of education is at least in part understanding how to put theory into practice. History shows us that it is not always that straightforward.
I am documenting a project that I was involved in in the late 90s. I think it provides an excellent example of the pitfalls of applying theory too literally. You will be able to see this project online in a couple weeks time. It took place in Fleet Primary School in Lincolnshire. The school had been chosen to participate in the Design Technology show in Birmingham. The idea was that could present visitors with examples of their work. The first I knew about it was when I got a call from the head, Trevor Thompson. They had decided to design and build automatons on the theme of a circus. Well the kids imaginations went wild. They were soon coming up with ideas that stumped Trevor. One idea was person A standing on the shoulders of person B. They would jump onto one end of a see-saw catapulting person C through the air who then end up doing a handstand on person B's shoulders. These kids were 11 years old. Trevor was not the kind of guy who would stifle the kids imaginations. He would find someone who could solve this problem. That was me.
The way to solve this is to design what is called a 4 bar mechanism. And the key to doing that was being able to bisect a line. Naively I said to Trevor, "Surely, the children are meant to be discovering these thngs for themselves?" Trevor, a committed constructionist, replied, "Just tell them how to do it". Well the kids loved it. They knew how to bisect lines, but had never had a reason to do so. They took ownership of the idea and went round incorporating these mechanisms and bisect lines whenever the opportunity arose.
The literal way constructionist theories, in some instances have been applied has produced poor results. Yet with practical approach a big difference was madde.
http://podcast.roamer-educational-robot.com/other-projects/ (give it a couple of weeks before you try and look at this stuff.
I agree!!!! To work in better way Pose the challenge of reflection in our practice as Educators between theoretical frameworks In order to transpose a concept from psychology to classroom and assume personal tasks and limits also.
Considering The multiple intelligences theory (H.Gardner) as one learning theory. We are also assuming. Sharing different possibilities and abilities to empowerment. Constructivism as a theory and as a practice also. It is possible to assume different skills only assuming share for construct an idea or concept.
To pose position, reflection, then argue and propose problem solving and start again. This is Dondald Shönn´s idea. (my English is really" on sale,70% off")I am sorry!
an approach constructiveness, teach by Astolfi:
1 - is to master contents to be taught,
2 - is to communicate,
3 - is changing his design of the learning,
4 - is to make the learning signifiants
5 - is managing devices
6 - is to live the values
to be contuned
Khyati, excellent response and reminder of the important nature of structure. These are important concepts for all to know. Thank you for this. I think its best to incorporate many theories into our professional selves, but I believe in most constructivist theories, and know the only real way to learn is to "own the learning". Communication, value and mastery are also very important. How can you effectively teach if you don't know the content? "Be the expert", is what my colleagues say..
An accurate proficiency, mean at least.
Precise Knowledge
Pertinent use
Corresponding ethical value
personal involvement in practice also.
The challenge: How to evaluate the whole and the part in each one!
I pose it hard, Just to learn more :)
Teaching strategies that embed the premise of social justice pedagogy strategies are justifiably inclusive. Ideologies of Dewey, Freire and Henry A. Giroux might be helpful leads. Comments by Updyke (above) lean toward social/life skills in real-time experiences, thus awarding the student with applicable self-efficacy and perseverance.
knowledge in action is embedding values.
And also as empower action in itself
Social justice is extremely important, but motivation is necessary to care about social justice. I have high self efficacy because I actually care about my personal learning. I am a teacher , so disseminating accurate information to my students is very important to me. I am a motivated active learning teacher. If I teach poorly, it is because I did not take the time to empower myself to review necessary materials, and arm myself with the knowledge necessary to give to my students. My students also reversely so, must be "present" when I teach. Presence means they are there to learn, and therefore, will listen actively which incorporates concepts of social justice, respect and motivation. The relationship is reciprocal.
“I believe that education is the civil rights issue of our generation. And if you care about promoting opportunity and reducing inequality, the classroom is the place to start. Great teaching is about so much more than education; it is a daily fight for social justice.”
~ Secretary Arne Duncan, October 9, 2009
http://www.ed.gov/blog/2011/08/education-is-social-justice/
What this discussion reveals, I think, is that there are (at least) three educational perspectives, rather than two (one based on behaviorism, one on constructivism). Miller and Seller (Curriculum Perspectives and Practice, 1985) refer to them as Transmission, Transaction and Transformation. The Transmission model is consistent with principles derived from behavioral psychology, as Caree outlined earlier. The Transaction model is consistent with Piaget’s constructivism (developmental psychology) and Dewey’s pragmatism. The third perspective, the Transformation model, is based on humanistic psychology (Maslow and Rogers), social constructivism (Vygotsky and others) and economic and social theory (critical pedagogy).
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology
- Mental Processes
- Learning