Article Critique
In the article “Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing Critical Features from an Instructional Design Perspective”, Ertmer and Newby attempt to provide instructional designers with an over of three learning theories: behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism. Their hope is that providing a foundation in the three learning theories, instructional designers may better equipped to plan and implement instructional activities (Ertmer & Newby, 1993). Although their approach may have been relevant in 1993 when the article was published, changes in education must be considered when reviewing the article today.
In the article, Ertmer and Newby use seven questions to review each of the learning theories presented. These questions include:
- How does learning occur?
- Which factors influence learning?
- What is the role of memory?
- How does transfer occur?
- What types of learning are best explained by this position?
- What basic assumptions/principles of this theory are relevant to instructional design?
- How should instruction be structured?
Changes in technology have altered the way students learn. With information readily available through computers and smartphones, it is not necessary for learners to memorize facts and details. Information can be accessed from almost anywhere at any given time. Therefore, it is no longer necessary that learners store the information internally. The ability to access information has changed the way people learn. Learners now need to know where to find information and how-to better access from the internet and other resources. Asking about the role of memory may not be an appropriate question today. Instead, instructional designers may need to consider the role of practice and refining process skills rather than simply knowing.
Since 1993, learning has evolved to a personalized, social activity. Although collaboration has been a part of learning for many years, the connection between people created by the internet and social media has taken away the constraints of time and place when working with others. Students are more likely to watch a YouTube video or ask a question on social media, than to pick a textbook or ask a teacher a question. The majority of students learn by doing, making the process and experience more important than the knowledge itself.
These changes in how students learn and interact with information make me question whether or not behaviorism is still a relevant learning theory for instructional designers. “Behavioral principles cannot adequately explain the acquisition of higher-level skills or those that require a greater depth of processing” such as problem solving and critical thinking (Ertmer & Newby, 2016). Perhaps it would be better to focus on learning theories and relevant strategies that meet the needs of today’s learners. Learning theories and strategies that provide high levels of interaction and activity as well as problem solving, critical thinking, and creativity. Perhaps behaviorism could be replaced with humanism or connectivism.
Humanism is closely related to constructivism and focuses on the idea of self-actualization (“The Five Educational Learning Theories”, 2020). Humanism takes into account the social and emotional needs of students. Given the opportunity for students to learn outside the classroom, a foundation in humanism may provide instructional designers with information and strategies to motivate learners and provide a more personal, collaborative approach to learning. This approach allows students to play an active role in their own learning.
Connectivism is a relatively new learning theory. This theory “focuses on the idea that people learn and grow when they form connections” (“The Five Educational Learning Theories”, 2020). A foundation in connectivism supplies instructional designers with tools to connect students with hobbies, goals, and people that help them learn. This learning theory pairs nicely with the interconnectivity of the world created by advancements in technology.
As previously stated, the world and how we learn has changed since this article was written in 1993. It is still important for instructional designers to understand various learning theories and apply their knowledge to learning activities and practice. However, as the world changes, it is important that we look to learning theories that better meet the needs of today’s learners.
References:
Ertmer, P.A., & Newby, T.J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50-72.
The five educational learning theories. (2020, May 30). WGU Texas. Retrieved 31 August 2020, from https://www.wgu.edu/blog/five-educational-learning-theories2005.html
Reflection
I found this week’s learning activity to be a challenge. Although I have been in education for over twenty years, I feel as though I am somewhat out of touch with learning theories that influence how I teach. The article, “Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing Critical Features from an Instructional Design Perspective”, was a good reminder of the learning theories that shaped education over the last century. I felt the article was well-written and that the thoughts and ideas were well communicated. Therefore, I found it somewhat difficult to find fault with the article. For this reason, I choose to focus on the changes in education and learning that might affect the role of an instructional designer, and therefore, the article. Although there are applications for almost every learning theory in the world of education, some are more relevant to today’s learner than others. For me, constructivism is a no-brainer in its relevance to education today. However, I wasn’t certain of what other learning theories were available. Therefore, I had to look for additional information to support my learning needs. Of course, that has been true of almost every course I have taken in the doctoral program.