I think that the different _isms describe how learning occurs in different ways. Behaviorism describes learning using a response system. Desired behaviors occur when there is a reward to motivate the outcome. Cognitivism describes learning by attempting to explain how the brain works in comparison to the processing unit of a computer. Information is obtained through the senses, transferred to the working memory if it is sensible or recognizable and then transferred to the long term memory if the brain can connect it to information already stored. Constructivism describes learning in terms of making learning relevant through application. All of these _isms are useful when attempting to engage all learners.
Stephen Downe’s argument that suggests that behaviorism does not define the process of learning is true. Behaviorism does have its place in education because it is useful when teaching memorization and expectations; however, behaviorism simply explains learned behaviors based on a reward system. Propaganda depends on the accuracy of this theory. We are taught appropriate behaviors through the possibility of what an advertisement suggests will occur. These advertisements prey on our senses and our response to stimuli.
Kerr argues that each _ism has its place in describing the process of learning. “It seems to me that each _ism is offering something useful without any of them being complete or stand alone in their own right.” (Kerr, 2007) I emphatically agree with that statement. Each learning theory helps explain how learning occurs for a select purpose and on different levels. If we looked at how they are related, we would put behaviorism at the bottom level to address learning basic foundational information to achieve a particular response or the correct answer to a low level question. We would then use cognitivism to help the learner to store the information in their long term memory for later use. Constructivism would be used next to take the information and apply it to applicable situations or to construct new knowledge.
Resources
Kerr, B. (2007, January 1). _isms as filter, not blinker [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.htmlKapp, K. (2007, January 2). Out and about: Discussion on educational schools of thought [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.kaplaneduneering.com/kappnotes/index.php/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational/
Sabrina,
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you about your break-down for how we use each _ism to promote a different type of learning. I thought it was interesting that you suggested propaganda as a type of behaviorism. I hadn't thought of that but I can really see it now that you mention it.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSabrina,
ReplyDeleteI also agree with your review of the isms and the place or use for them. In addition, I agree that there is a place for behaviorism in the learning process. It seems that often comments are in oppisition to behaviorism, but the concern is over dependence.
Thank you. My last comment removed was a test.
Response to Sabrina
ReplyDeleteHi Sabrina, nice post! I agree with you about the use of the -isms. I like the use of propaganda to explain this. again, nice post.
Sabrina,
ReplyDeleteWell done! I agree with what you have said and how you have said it. Each "ism" does have a use as descibing learning that occurs at a specific level. How do you see connectivism fitting into the scheme of things with respect to digital learning for the 21st century?