https://www.mindomo.com/es/mindmap
I am a post-secondary instructor, and I also work on the development of online courses. As part of our fifth activity for the LRNT 523 course, we were asked to read the following two articles (1) Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective (Ertmer & Newby, 2013), and (2) First principles of instruction (Merrill, 2002). After that, we had to reflect on the articles and aligned ourselves with one of the learning theories presented in the articles, and described how the chosen theory could be used in our day-to-day work. The first article by Ertmer & Newby (2013) is focused on three learning methods which are: behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism from an instructional design. Merrill (2002) reviewed many instructional design theories and identified their respective principles.
Some aspects of all three methods: behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism are used in my teaching approaches. However, I align with constructivism more for most of my classes. As stated by Ertmer and Newby (2013), constructivism theory believes that learning cannot be mapped out in a human’s brain from the outside world. Instead, the human brain creates its own ideas through experiences and based on the analysis of the information received, learning occurs. I can relate to this theory, as in my classes I design hands-on activities for computer-based application courses. One example would be an activity in which students have to go to their accounts in Google and create an event, customize it and invite their instructor to the created event. They learn through this activity differently based on their individual experiences. The more they customize their event, the more details they will learn but their leaning will be based on their individual intake of the program and not a handout they’re received in class.
Merrill reviews many instructional design theories and identifies their respective principles. Again, even though I can relate to most of those theories, the one that stands out for me is Schank’s learn-by-doing model. As described by Merrill (2002), ““GBS [goal-based scenario] is a learn-by-doing simulation in which students pursue a goal by practicing target skills and using relevant content knowledge to help them achieve their goal”(P. 56). An example of the relevance of this design in my job is a project that I created for the students in one of our programs. They have to complete the project at the end of their program in order to graduate, which is again similar to the activity I mentioned in the previous paragraph, and the students will have hands-on experience on working online on their job seeking packages. They learn many editing skills through working on documents such as their resumes. The project requires them to work solely on Google Drive and access, edit, and share their documents online. The motivation of completing this project is to get their documents ready to enter the job market and achieve their goal which is graduation and finding a job. While they are working towards their goal, they learn how to use cloud computing which is part of the learning outcome of their course.
While I aligned my instructional design with constructivism and learn-by-doing, it was hard for me to eliminate the other methods since most of the mentioned learning theories in these two articles were used at some point in my classrooms, dependent on the topic and the type of delivery.
References
Ertmer, P., & Newby, T. (2013). Behaviorism,Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. erformance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43-71.
Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43-59.
September 24, 2017 at 8:27 am
Thank you, May for this reflective post! Merrill principles are the following:
“Learning is promoted when learners are engaged in solving real-world problems.
Learning is promoted when existing knowledge is activated as a foundation for new knowledge.
Learning is promoted when new knowledge is demonstrated to the learner.
Learning is promoted when new knowledge is applied by the learner.
Learning is promoted when new knowledge is integrated in the learner’s world.”
To what degree do you believe these align with all the three theories highlighted by Ertmer and Newby? Are some principles more consistent with one theory than others?
September 24, 2017 at 6:05 pm
Thanks George for your comment! I believe all five Merill principles support the three theories to some extent. For example, the first principle, “Learning is promoted when learners are engaged in solving real-world problems,” can align with Behaviorism since stimuli and responses are involved in learning and while solving problems. Moreover, Cognitivism is definitely aligned with this principle as learning can be done through the processing of information while seeking solutions to the presented real-life problems. On the other hand, the fourth principle, “Learning is promoted when new knowledge is integrated into the learner’s world,” can align more with constructivism because learners can apply new knowledge and learn through their own individual experiences based on this principle.