Download Learning Theories - IdealLearningEnvironmentKYoung

Learning Theories
Kimberly Young
September 18, 2014
Learning Theories
Table of Contents
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 2
Functionalism ............................................................................................................................................ 2
Behaviorism .............................................................................................................................................. 3
Cognitivism and Constructivism ............................................................................................................. 3
Comparisons ................................................................................................................................................. 3
Theorists........................................................................................................................................................ 3
Closing ........................................................................................................................................................... 5
Personal Thoughts ........................................................................................................................................ 5
Bringing this all together with TPACK ........................................................................................................... 5
References .................................................................................................................................................... 8
K. Young
Page 1
Learning Theories
Introduction
The concept of learning has long been a debated topic. Many theories have emerged
being both favored and disputed. In the field of education we rely heavily upon research that has
been conducted, in an effort to find the most reliable fit for the classroom. On a daily basis we
plan, deliver, and reflect on instruction. This instruction is heavily influenced by learning
theories. In addition, however, instruction often lies in the beliefs of the instructor as there are
many different theories that hold differing beliefs. In this paper I will discuss the three main
learning theories: Behaviorism, Cognitivism, and Constructivism. Additionally, I will discuss
the first, main theory on learning that emerged, Functionalism. This paper will define the
theories, look into their similarities and differences, showcase theorists that were essential to the
theory, and last, discuss the theories’ application to instructional technology today.
Functionalism
The first main theory of learning, Functionalism, was developed in the early 1900’s. This
theory held its focus in biology. It looked at a human’s interaction with its environment and
believed that learning was for the purpose of survival believing that individuals reacted with their
environment and had the ability to adapt in order to survive. The idea of Functionalism stayed
around for about twenty years until the idea of Behaviorism came around (Summaries of
Learning Theories and Models, 2014).
K. Young
Page 2
Learning Theories
Behaviorism
Behaviorism believes that learning is a science and that it can be - “seen” - through
observation and measurement of behavior. Behaviorists believe each individual is born with a
“clean slate” and that through interactions (stimuli) within the environment that it, in turn, elicits
behaviors. Behaviorism was a heavily studied theory and stayed around for about thirty years
until Cognitivism and Constructivism came to the forefront in the late 1950’s (McLeod, 2013).
Cognitivism and Constructivism
Cognitivism and Constructivism, though very similar have one very different viewpoint.
Cognitivism holds the theory that learning is gained through thinking and problem solving while
Constructivism holds the theory that learning is social (Johnson, 2014).
Comparisons
When comparing each theory in regard to education you can begin to really put the
theories into perspective. In the educational setting Functionalism looks at the society of school
and how it relates to the common good of all, the biological perspective. Those that believe in
Functionalism believe that schools teach values and societal norms (Functionalism and
Education, 2011). This is considered to be an interaction between the individual and its
environment. Similar to Functionalism, Behaviorism also looks at the interaction between
individuals and their environments but, focuses more on how environment affects behavior,
concluding that stimuli elicits certain behaviors (McLeod, 2013). In contrast to both
Functionalism and Behaviorism, Cognitivism and Constructivism both focus on learning from
the standpoint of the individual in terms of thinking and problem solving. Cognitivists believe
that learning occurs when the individual actively participates. Comparably, Constructivists
believe that learning occurs through collaboration, the - “building”- of knowledge (Johnson,
2014).
Theorists
Many theorists have contributed to the research of the above theories.
Considered to be the “Father of sociology” - Emile Durkheim was a
functionalist who focused on the norms of society and how they influenced
individuals. Emile Durkheim is credited for his many works that influenced
the field of sociology (Crossman, n.d.).
K. Young
Page 3
Learning Theories
In the field of Behaviorism, three main theorists are credited with their work in this area:
Watson, Skinner, and Pavlov. Watson is best known for his “Little Albert” experiment. In this
experiment he was able to train a young boy to fear a rat (Cherry, n.d.). Another Behaviorist,
Skinner, a more “mild” behaviorist than Watson, is known for his work with rats and his theory
of operant conditioning, a viewpoint that focused on action and consequences (McLeod, 2013).
Last, Pavlov, who is best known for his work with dogs and his theory of classical conditioning,
held the position that you can train someone or something to act in a particular way by
presenting a specific stimulus (McLeod, 2013).
The fields of Cognitivism and Constructivism were both developed by Piaget. Piaget is
best known for his creation of the developmental stages: Sensory Motor, Preoperational Stage,
Concrete Operational, and Formal Operational (Johnson, 2014). Two other major contributors in
the field of Constructivism were Bruner and Vygotsky. Bruner is best known for his three
modes of representation: Enactive, Iconic, and Symbolic. These modes deal with how an
individual stores and encodes memory. These representations differ from Piaget’s stages.
Bruner held the belief that school age children were often unable to progress in their studies
because teachers often held them within one of Piaget’s stages based upon their age (McLeod,
2008). Lastly, Vygotsky is known for his Social Development Theory, a theory which stressed
that learning, or “making meaning” is a social role (McLeod, 2014).
K. Young
Page 4
Learning Theories
Closing
Each of the showcased theories has a place in education today. When looking
specifically at instructional technology one can argue each of these theories. When taking a
Functionalists standpoint one could say that we need technology as a means of survival, not
necessarily basic survival but, survival in the “real” world. One could say that we’ve adapted
over time to the needs of our society and hence, technology has been created and continues to
evolve as a result of this need. Now, if you were to take a Behaviorists standpoint, you might
say that instructional technology is the stimuli within the environment and the individuals react
accordingly to it (whatever is being taught). Finally, if you held the viewpoint of a Cognitivist or
Constructivist you may argue that instructional technology is only fit for individuals at a specific
age or that technology allows for the interaction and collaboration among others which will, in
turn, enhance learning. Whatever the argument, facts can be found to support it.
Personal Thoughts
It is my personal belief that each of these theories has a place in education. Although I
don’t agree with the Behaviorists viewpoint of being born with a clean slate, I do believe, and
have seen for myself in my classroom that environment affects behavior. In fact, as a special
education teacher, more specifically an emotional support teacher, I often have to keep in mind
with my students that it’s not the child I’m seeking to change but, the environment. In regard to
academics, I frequently find myself referring to the viewpoints of the Cognitivists and
Constructivists. I do believe that we, as humans, go through stages in our lives and that at
particular stages we are more “open” to learning certain content. More specifically, I believe in
the Constructivists viewpoint that curriculum should be designed around what children bring
with them to the table. As a teacher, I try to be very aware of what my students bring with them
– the good, the bad, and the ugly. For it is this that I believe has the biggest impact on their
education and continually impacts their education.
I believe that in further researching learning theories I have been able to pinpoint where I
fall as a learner. I am a social learner. I do best by seeing, trying, and collaborating. In knowing
this and knowing a bit more about the other theories I can better adapt, plan, and collaborate in
order to meet the varying needs of my students.
Bringing this all together with TPACK
TPACK is an acronym that stands for Technological Pedagogical and Content
Knowledge. The idea of TPACK is to bring together Technology, the use of technology such as
computer programs, Pedagogy, the skill or art of teaching, and Content, the information the
teacher wants the learner to know and be able to apply. The founders of TPACK believe that
you can have one or two without the other but, if this is so, then teaching has not come full
circle. The founders firmly believe that there needs to be a harmony among the three:
K. Young
Page 5
Learning Theories
Technology, Pedagogy, and Content in order to have successful use of technology that supports
learning (Koehler, 2012). In relation to learning theories, Pedagogy would be the main focus
here since pedagogy deals with the actual teaching whereas technology is a piece that enhances
the teaching and content is what is being taught. The teacher’s pedagogical knowledge would be
rooted in one or more of the theories of learning.
Just about anyone these days can turn on a computer and pull up a website. The actual
task of doing that is quite easy. However, when a teacher or someone who is using the website
to convey information on a particular topic pulls up a website, it should be done so in a manner
in which has thought and knowledge behind it. In other words, the person has knowledge of the
information they are about to display and is only pulling up something on a website to enhance
their teaching and will use the information in such a manner that was thought out prior to the
lesson so that it meshes with the lesson to create an overall learning experience, not a pieced
together lesson in which the use of the technology seems as though it’s an “add on” and doesn’t
quite fit into the puzzle. Lastly, the teacher needs to have knowledge of the technology and how
it is used. This means that they need to be familiar with the website or program in order to
effectively use the piece of technology to create a cohesive lesson.
I can directly relate to this theory. A number of years ago the school district that I work
for purchased Promethean Boards, or Smart Boards. These boards could be used simply as a
projector but, that would not have been using the board for its intended purpose. That would
K. Young
Page 6
Learning Theories
have demonstrated a lack of technological knowledge. Instead, through many trainings and
practice in using the board, I am now able to utilize the technology in order to enhance my
lessons. Students are highly motivated to interact with the board. I can create assessments using
the board. Lastly, the board serves as an alternative to the traditional chalkboard/whiteboard. I
feel that this is the perfect example of TPACK, where I have combined my content knowledge,
pedagogical knowledge, and now my technological knowledge together to provide my students
with a learning experience that involves the use of technology.
K. Young
Page 7
Learning Theories
References
Baerveldt, C. (2013). Constructivism contested: Implications of a genetic perspective in psychology.
Integr Psych Behav, 47, 156-166.
Cherry, K. John B. Watson Biography. Retrieved September 9, 2014 from
http://psychology.about.com/od/profilesofmajorthinkers/p/watson.htm
Crossman, A. Functionalist Theory. Retrieved September 9, 2014 from
http://sociology.about.com/od/Sociological-Theory/a/Functionalist-Theory.htm
Functionalism and Education. (2011). Retrieved September 9, 2014 from
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/functionalsim_education.htm
Huitt, W. (2009). Constructivism. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State
University. Retrieved September 9, 2014, from
http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/cognition/construct.html
Johnson, S. (2014). Difference Between Cognitive & Constructivist Theories. Retrieved September 9,
2014 from, http://www.ehow.com/info_11400433_difference-between-cognitive-constructivisttheories.html
Koehler, M. (2012). TPACK. Retrieved September 17, 2014 from http://www.tpack.org/
McLeod, S. (2007, updated 2013). Behaviorist Approach. Retrieved September 9, 2014 from
http://www.simplypsychology.org/behaviorism.html
McLeod, S. (2008). Bruner. Retrieved September 9, 2014 from
http://www.simplypsychology.org/bruner.html
McLeod, S (2007, updated 2014). Lev Vygotsky. Retrieved September 9, 2014 from
http://www.simplypsychology.org/vygotsky.html
K. Young
Page 8
Learning Theories
Overskeid, G. (2008). They should have thought about the consequences: The crisis of cognitivism
and a second chance for behavior analysis. The Psychological Record, 58, 131-151.
Summaries of Learning Theories and Models. Retrieved September 9, 2014 from
http://www.learning-theories.com/
K. Young
Page 9