Post #1- Cognitivism, Behaviourism, & Constructivism

I decided to answer the following two application exercises to further my understanding of the 3 different learning approaches.

1. How would the instruction be designed differently by a behaviorist, a cognitivist, and a constructivist? Scenario: A high school social study teacher is planning a class on the Vietnam War.

A behaviorist would keep things simple yet repetitive. This teacher would use lectures, and videos to teach their students about the war and then would test their memory after. Quizzes are essential for these learners.

A cognitivist would make things more complex. The teacher would have stations set up about different parts of the war and have “brain games” or “cognitive exercises” set up. For example, “how did they get from point A to point B?”

A constructivist would allow their students to explore various parts of the war. They would ask their students to think of their own experiences and their previous knowledge of war to fit it into their new knowledge.

2. “Based on your reading, would you consider your current instruction style more behavioralist, cognitivist, or constructivist? Elaborate with your specific mindset and examples.”

As a future teacher, I understand the importance of each learning style. In an education philosophy class, I took during my program, we talked about the differences between behaviorism and constructivism and we were taught to see behaviorism in a negative way. In the text, it states, “behaviorism focuses on the importance of the consequences” (Ertmer & Newby, 2017) and we are taught to steer from consequences. In a few of my other education classes, we were taught how to teach as a constructivist and what it entails. Due to the classes, and the fact that I knew nothing up until reading this text about cognitivism, I more align with a constructivist instructional style. I think is important for students to have their own unique learning experiences and the best way to do that is by having them create meaning from their own individual experiences (Ertmer & Newby, 2017). I also believe the teacher is just as much of a learner as the students and vice versa. The students contribute to the classroom and their learning just as much as the teacher if we allow them to have autonomy over themselves. I am really interested in inquiry-based learning and through this, the students can bring their prior knowledge and understandings to make room for new knowledge with the teacher there to support and facilitate. I also believe the teacher using a constructivist instructional method is thought to be a part of the classroom as an equal. Group work and collaboration are also important in constructivism as children learn through other experiences as well.

I saw behaviorism growing up and still to this day in university classes but the times when my professors and teachers used a constructivist approach I was able to enjoy what I was learning and get more out of it because it was my choice and not based solely on memorizing something for a grade.

Cognitivism focuses on “processes such as thinking, problem solving, language, concept formation, and information processing” (Ertmer & Newby, 2017) which I also believe is important in learning especially for those who need extra help or adaptations.

Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. (2017). Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism Comparing Critical Features From an Instructional Design Perspective. Edtechbooks. Retrieved from https://edtechbooks.org/lidtfoundations/behaviorism_cognitivism_constructivism