Analysis Of Behaviorism Theories Of Learning And Cognitive Learning Theories

Abstract

In this paper we will look at many different aspects of behavioral learning and cognitive learning. First, we will explore the historical development of each theory and talk about prominent persons who played a role in the development of each theory. We’ll go on to list the key concepts of each theory and how each one is unique from the other. Educational implications are also talked about. How each theory is used in the classroom and how each theory can help students with gaining and storing new knowledge. Lastly, we talk about the Biblical worldview as it pertains to learning and I give my opinion on which theory I find to be most effective.

Historical Development

Pavlov, Thorndike, Watson, and Skinner are four names you will hear frequently when it comes to behavioral learning. Beginning in the second decade of the 20th century, John B. Watson argued against both structuralism and functionalism. He argued that neither was effective as a science and that the time had come for psychology to take its place as a legitimate natural science (Moore, 2017). In 1913, he proposed classical stimulus-response behaviorism. According to Watson, behavior was an important subject matter to be studied by the observational methods common to all sciences. In Watson's view, psychology should embrace behavior as its subject matter and rely on experimental observation of that subject matter as its method. He called his viewpoint behaviorism. It was objective as opposed to subjective. Today we call Watson's viewpoint classical S-R behaviorism. Skinner's views were slightly less extreme than those of Watson. Skinner believed that we do have such a thing as a mind, but that it is simply more productive to study observable behavior rather than internal mental events. Skinner believed that the best way to understand behavior is to look at the causes of an action and its consequences. He called this approach operant conditioning. Skinner's theory of operant conditioning was based on the work of Thorndike. Edward Thorndike studied learning in animals using a puzzle box to propose the theory known as the 'Law of Effect'. Skinner introduced a new term into the Law of Effect - Reinforcement. Behavior which is reinforced tends to be repeated or strengthened; behavior which is not reinforced tends to die out-or be extinguished. Skinner studied operant conditioning by conducting experiments using animals which he placed in a “Skinner Box” which was similar to Thorndike’s puzzle box. The shift from behaviorism to cognitivism stemmed from the behaviorist tradition’s failure to explain why and how individuals make sense of and process information (Yilmaz, 2001). Edward Tolman was a prominent learning theorist during the days of behaviorism, yet his work had a distinctly cognitive flair. In tune with behaviorist views, Tolman valued the importance of objectivity in research and used nonhuman species as the subjects of his research. Unlike his contemporaries, however, Tolman included internal mental phenomena in his explanations of how learning occurs. German psychologists developed a view of learning and cognition that was quite different from the behaviorist theories dominating North American psychology during the early decades of the twentieth century. This perspective, known as Gestalt psychology, emphasized the importance of organizational processes in perception, learning, and problem solving. Piaget and Vygotsky also played a large role in developing cognitive learning theories. They both offered groundbreaking insights into the nature of children’s learning and thinking, and both have had a profound influence on contemporary views of learning, cognition, and cognitive development. Now that we know a little more about the history if each theory lets look at their key concepts.

Key Concepts

Behaviorists have not always agreed on specific processes of learning. They did agree that, principles of learning should apply equally to different behaviors and to a variety of animal species, learning processes can be studied most objectively when the focus of study is on stimuli and responses, internal processes tend to be excluded or minimized in theoretical explanations, learning involves a behavior change, organisms are born as blank slates, and learning is largely the result of environmental events. Classical conditioning is a key concept of behaviorism introduced by Pavlov. Classical conditioning provides one possible explanation of how human beings acquire certain physiological responses, emotional responses, and attitudes toward particular stimuli. Edward Thorndike focused on the acquisition of voluntary behaviors, proposing that responses that lead to satisfying consequences are strengthened and thus more likely to occur again. In follow-up, B. F. Skinner coined the term operant conditioning for this phenomenon and replaced the word reward with the word reinforcement — a word that avoids the implication that a behavior-increasing consequence necessarily involves a pleasant, desired stimulus (Ormrod, 2016). General principles of cognitive learning theory include the following; Some learning processes may be unique to human beings. Learning involves the formation of mental representations or associations that aren’t necessarily reflected in overt behavior changes. People are actively involved in their own learning. Knowledge is organized. The focus of scientific inquiry must be on objective, systematic observations of people’s behaviors, but behaviors often allow reasonable inferences about unobservable mental processes. Contemporary cognitive theorists have taken somewhat different approaches in their attempts to portray how learning occurs, these include Information processing theory, constructivism, and contextual theories. Many contemporary theories focus on the specific ways in which people think about the information they receive from the environment; this is the information processing theory. Many cognitive theorists now portray learning more as constructing knowledge rather than as directly acquiring it from the outside world. Some (but not all) theorists refer to this perspective as constructivism. Underlying many contextual theories is the idea that people’s thinking and learning are inextricably intertwined with their physical bodies or with their immediate physical, social, and cultural environments. Many of them also propose that people’s environments provide various support systems that can enhance people’s thinking and learning. Some environmental supports for learning and performance are concrete and easily observable.

Educational Implications

Behaviorism as a teacher-centered instructional framework for a long time dominated educational settings, shaping every aspect of curriculum and instruction. From a behaviorist perspective, people are more likely to learn when they have a chance to talk, write, experiment, or demonstrate. Ideally, then, students should be active respondents throughout the learning process, rather than simply passive recipients of whatever information or skill is being taught. Instructional methods based on behaviorist concepts and principles can be beneficial for almost everyone at one time or another, especially when important behaviors and skills require considerable repetition and practice to master. Overall, however, behaviorist approaches are probably more appropriate for certain types of students than for others. Many children with significant developmental delays or learning disabilities, and students with chronic behavior problems fall into this category. Also, students with little motivation to engage in academic tasks can also profit from behaviorist techniques. Providing extrinsic reinforcers for academic accomplishments, like making material, social, or activity reinforcers contingent on completing assignments, can help motivate “uninterested” students to master essential skills. Students with chronically high levels of anxiety are another group who stand to benefit. Such students often need considerable structure to feel comfortable in the classroom and perform well on academic tasks. Effective teachers ensure that productive student behaviors are regularly followed by either extrinsic or intrinsic reinforcers. Using rewards as incentives for learners to work hard and behave and using punishments effectively and sparingly to change learners’ behaviors (Clark, 2018). rewards do not always lead to higher-quality work; however, using a behaviorist approach, rewards can result in the reinforcement of appropriate classroom behaviors, which can create a more orderly classroom environment that is conducive to learning and success for all. This stimulus-response theory makes no attempt to assess the mental processes necessary for learners to acquire, retain, and recall information. The change in behavior is simply achieved through a conditioning process using reinforcement and punishment. Unlike behavioral psychologists, cognitive psychologists do not consider humans to be programmed to merely respond to environmental stimuli; rather, they believe individuals are capable of rational thought and learn through active participation. Students control their own learning through the cognitive processes in which they engage. B. F. Skinner and other behaviorists have argued that if students are to learn anything, they must make active responses in the classroom. The cognitivist approach to learning places emphasis on what goes on inside a learner’s brain and focuses on mental processes rather than on observable behaviors. Cognitive theorists share this view; however, they emphasize mental activity rather than physical activity. Students who don’t pay attention to, make sense of, and in other ways cognitively process the subject matter at hand—learn very little. The cognitivist approach emphasizes making instruction meaningful and helping learners organize and relate new information to existing knowledge in memory. Learning, instruction, and memory all play vital roles in cognitivism. For those who do become mentally engaged with the subject matter, the nature of their cognitive processes will determine what they learn and how effectively they learn it. Thus, teachers must consider not only what students need to learn but also how students can best try to learn it. Students actively construct their knowledge. When learners attempt to make sense of the objects and events around them, they combine some of what they observe with their existing knowledge and beliefs to create ever-expanding and distinctly unique understandings of the world. Instructional practices can have a significant impact on how students mentally process classroom material and thus also on how effectively students learn it. Verbal learning theorists uncovered several factors that enhance learning, including the degrees to which new information is meaningful, concrete, and easy to organize.

Biblical Worldview

There are many verses in the Bible that speak about the importance of wisdom and gaining and seeking new knowledge. Ecclesiastes 7:12 says, “For the protection of wisdom is like the protection of money, and the advantage of knowledge is that wisdom preserves the life of him who has it. ” God is telling us here how important it is to protect the wisdom that we have because it is “life preserving”. I feel as though the school system can sometimes paint an unattractive picture of what learning is and can be. Many times, children become discouraged or uninterested in learning due to low testing scores or just the way the material is presented to them. It was not until I graduated and grew up that I really began to cherish the fact that obtaining knowledge on any topic was at my fingertips. I think having a Biblical worldview on learning can help people realize sooner than later just how important learning is.

Most Affective Theory of Learning

Behaviorism does not prepare learners for problem-solving or critical-thinking skills. I think there is room for behavioral learning in the classroom, but for temporarily learning. For example, if I needed to memorize a list of information for a test, or verbatim definitions, behavioral learning would aid me in that. With that being said, I believe that cognitive learning theory is most effective overall. The cognitivist approach to learning places emphasis on what goes on inside a learner’s brain and focuses on mental processes rather than on observable behaviors (Clark, 2018). With cognitive learning we can think critically which in turn helps us to store that information in long-term memory opposed to just in our working memory. It allows us to use previously stored knowledge to build on to gain more advanced knowledge.

Summary

Learning theories are essential for effective teaching in that they shed light on different aspects of the learning process. Whereas behaviorist theoretical framework characterizes the underpinning of teacher-centered instruction, cognitive perspectives come into play in shaping learner-centered instruction. School curriculums are now based more on cognitive learning in that teaching methods are encouraged to teach in a way that pays attention to the individual differences in their students’ cognitive skills in order to help them integrate new knowledge. This theory of learning has been most helpful in assisting teachers with their instruction as well as helping students learn how to better store information. This is not to say that the behaviorist framework is to be tossed away for good. Instructional methods based on behaviorist concepts and principles can be beneficial for almost everyone at one time or another, especially when important behaviors and skills require considerable repetition and practice to master. Both theories of learning can be implemented in the classroom depending on what the end goal of learning is.

References

1. Clark, K. (2018). Learning Theories: Behaviorism. Radiologic Technology. , 90(2), 172–175.
2. Kaya Yilmaz (2011) The Cognitive Perspective on Learning: Its Theoretical Underpinnings and Implications for Classroom Practices, The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 84:5, 204-212
3. McLeod, S. A. (2007). Skinner - Operant Conditioning. Retrieved from http://www. simplypsychology. org/operant-conditioning. html
4. Moore, J. (2011). BEHAVIORISM. The Psychological Record, 61(3), 449-463. doi:http://dx. doi. org. ezproxy. liberty. edu/10. 1007/BF03395771
5. Taylor & Francis. (2011). The Clearing House. 84(5)