Automatically I found myself drawn to the ideas that surround the theory of Constructivism. Having trained apprentices, and having gone through an apprenticeship myself, I saw the importance of learning how to construct knowledge based on previous experiences. An apprenticeship in the trades means having to learn and build upon earlier concepts while being involved in the construction of something. Trades apprenticeships lend themselves nicely to Constructivism, as Ertmer and Newby (2013) cite Brown et al. (1989), \u201cTo be successful, meaningful, and lasting, learning must include all three of these crucial factors: activity (practice), concept (knowledge), and culture (context)\u201d (p. 56). The basis of an apprenticeship is practice, knowledge and context.<\/span><\/p>\n Before you think that this post is going to be my love letter to constructivism you need to know that while constructivism will always hold a special place in my heart, I am beginning to see that there is also a place in my practice for Behaviourism and Cognitivism. I was challenged after reading and reflecting on Merrill’s (2002) \u201cFirst principles of Instructions\u201d and Ertmer and Newby\u2019s (2013) \u201cBehaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing Critical Features From an Instructional Design Perspective\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\n I teach an electrical foundation program. These students come to me having no experience in the industry, no prior knowledge of electrical theory, and most of them have never touched a tool. The first part of the course is a review of basic math principles. We start with the very basics (adding whole numbers, multiplication, fractions) and take them to the point where they can do simple trigonometry. In this part of the course, many are nervous. Math is scary for them, and some have been out of school for a considerable amount of time and are quite intimidated. By adopting a behaviorial model, we can begin to build the necessary skills and confidence needed with flashcards, worksheets, practice quizzes, and the like. We can also increase their confidence by praising and rewarding them for their responses. As Ertmer and Newby (2013) state, “To facilitate the linking of stimulus-response pairs, instruction frequently uses cues and reinforcement” (p.50).<\/span><\/p>\n As the students progress into the circuit analysis portion of the course, the focus becomes more complicated. The students learn how to analyze circuits and apply principles of physics. At this point, the methods move from a behavioural approach to more of a cognitive nature. It is no longer just necessary for the students to recite formulas or know the names of tools. They have to learn how to problem solve, build upon previous lessons and make more complex connections. As an instructor it is essential that my methods help the students organize the information I give them, attach some meaning to it and relate it to what they have already learned (Ertmer and Newby, 2013, pg.53)<\/span><\/p>\n And now back to my first true love, constructivism. The practical part of the course lends itself to this theory. Up to this point, the class has been working through the theory of electricity and the electrical code. Once the practical part of the program starts, the students leave the classroom and head to the shop to apply the concepts they have learned to real-life scenarios. It now becomes my job to instruct the students on how to create meaning out of what they have learned and to design the shop projects so that real-life scenarios can be experienced (Ertmer and Newby, 2013, p.59). As the students become more familiar with working on the tools, and by working in partnerships with others, the students start assessing and critiquing each other’s work. This process is what Ertmer and Newby refer to as \u201cthe collaborate phase\u201d (p.59).<\/span><\/p>\n It is hard for me to say that I align myself with just one specific theory as I see particular methods as being necessary for different aspects of the courses I teach. Ertmer and Newby (2013) make the case,<\/span><\/p>\n We believe that a critical question instructional designers must ask is not \u201cwhich is the best theory?\u201d but \u201cwhich theory is the most effective in fostering mastery of specific tasks by specific learners. (p.61)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n As I read through the articles, I was challenged to be much more intentional with my instructional design. While I may have unintentionally aligned with specific theories, it could make my practice much more effective if I start to understand how to use the tools that are at my disposal with each approach. For example in Merrill\u2019s article, he mentions different models that use what he describes as the first principles of instructional design. Using the model of Star Legacy (p.51) I could design a shop project that would present a challenge, have the students generate ideas for solutions, try out and evaluate their theories and reflect on their learnings.\u00a0 This excites me.<\/span><\/p>\n By becoming more intentional with my instructional design, I can help the students build the experiences and lessons that will help them become better electricians in the industry.<\/span><\/p>\n References<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Ertmer, P., & Newby, T. (2013). <\/span>Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43-71.<\/span><\/p>\n Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43-59.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" I am an Electrician by trade and teach at a Polytechnic institute.\u00a0\u00a0Nine years ago I left the tools to begin my career as an instructor. One of the requirements of the new position was that I complete my Provincial… Continue Reading →<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":96,"featured_media":330,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[62,61,63,60],"class_list":["post-327","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-lrnt523","tag-behaviorism","tag-behavioursim","tag-cognitivism","tag-constructivism"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0054\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/327","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0054\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0054\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0054\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/96"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0054\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=327"}],"version-history":[{"count":16,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0054\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/327\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":360,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0054\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/327\/revisions\/360"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0054\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/330"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0054\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=327"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0054\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=327"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0054\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=327"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"\"](\"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0054\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/96\/2018\/09\/Star-legacy-model-300x169.png\")
<\/p>\n