Learning Experiences with Behaviorism
Behaviorism fundamentally centers on modifying behavior via a system of rewards and consequences, doesn’t it? For me, the most vivid illustration comes from my elementary school experience with multiplication tables. Our teacher strategically motivated us by awarding colorful stickers for precise recitations, and those who demonstrated rapid mastery were even treated to small stationery prizes. By employing consistent drilling and providing positive reinforcement for accurate responses, I effectively internalized these mathematical facts with both speed and precision. This scenario epitomizes the behaviorist methodology, wherein a targeted behavior in this case, memorizing multiplication tables is systematically learned through persistent practice and carefully structured incentives.
Learning Experiences with Cognitivism
Cognitivism centers on how learners take in, analyze, and retain information. The approach emphasizes comprehending concepts and solving problems, moving far beyond simple memorization. My high school economics classes, particularly when exploring intricate economic models, exemplified this learning philosophy perfectly. Take, for example, our lessons on supply and demand curves or the impact of government policies on market dynamics – I wasn’t passively recording facts, but actively engaging with the underlying mechanisms. By breaking down complex information through different examples and visual representations, I systematically worked to understand how various factors interconnect and influence outcomes. This process of logically restructuring information, critically examining relationships, and constructing new understanding was a quintessential demonstration of cognitive learning in action.
Learning Experiences with Constructivism
Constructivism proposes that learners build new knowledge by integrating their personal experiences and prior understanding. My current group projects provide an excellent illustration of this concept. Particularly in EDCI 335, and 337 collaborating with teammates to develop a Learning Design Blueprint or an educational comic exemplifies this approach. We openly exchange ideas, seamlessly blending our diverse backgrounds and individual perspectives to generate innovative solutions. Engaging in discussions around open-ended challenges without a single predetermined answer, we collectively evolve and refine our understanding, reconstructing knowledge through mutual exploration. This collaborative process powerfully embodies the core principles of constructivist learning: tackling authentic problems and co-creating knowledge through interactive and dynamic teamwork.
Peer Feedback Comment
Hi, Joanne
Thank you for sharing such a well-structured and insightful post! I deeply appreciated how you articulated the transition from conventional extrinsic motivators to more contemporary, research-supported approaches like expectancy-value theory and self-efficacy. Your explanation of how students’ perceived competence and task value are crucial to their motivation was particularly compelling.
The breakdown of Keller’s ARCS model was both clear and practical. I found your explanation of each component especially valuable, particularly the emphasis on connecting content to students’ interests and learning styles to establish relevance. This perspective offers a tangible approach to instructional design that I can readily incorporate into my own thinking.
I have a minor suggestion: A brief, direct comparison of performance versus mastery goals might help clarify their distinct impacts on motivation. Also, I noticed a small typo—I believe you meant “self-efficacy theory” instead of “self-efficiency theory.”
In summary, this was an excellent overview that skillfully bridges theoretical concepts with practical applications. Thank you for sharing such thoughtful and informative insights!
Recent Comments