Over the last couple of decades, learning has been improving annually due to new learning methods and strategies to cope up with the emerging revolution. For instance, in the 21st century, the field of education has seen new innovative learning techniques with the advent of new technologies being integrated into the school curricula to enable learners to grasp training swiftly. As a result, education-related apps have emerged to enhance skills not only in English but also in other subjects. In the same context, all areas of psychology address all aspects of learning since learning revolves around the environment of an individual (Ormrod, Anderman, & Anderman, 2016). On a regular education setting, the students are learners, the teachers are learning facilitators, and the schools become the learning environments. Many educationists have tried to come up with a comprehensive definition of learning; however, to some degree, learning is an indescribable process because it is very complex and individual (Schunk, 2016). Although understanding what learning is, theorists have simplified the process by coming up with theories or perspectives which explain learning. For instance, theorists introduced constructivism, cognitivism, and behaviorism theory to explain the psychological aspects of learning (Kay & Kibble, 2016).
Learning perspectives are organized collection of principles that describe how learners acquire, retain, and recall different skills and knowledge which they have been studying. According to Boghossian (2016), behaviorism theorists believe that the interaction or association between the stimuli and response among individuals changes in their behavior or instill new behaviors in them. Moreover, this perspective is linked to the concept of operant conditioning and the work of B.F. Skinner, whereby a learner is viewed to be blank until they are exposed to new experiences (Al-Jarrah, Mansor, Talafhah, & Al-Jarrah, 2019). On the other hand, cognitivism theorists contradict with the behaviorism theorists by affirming that individuals not only learn through responding to stimuli but also through processing the information they receive. Generally, the cognitivist perspective plays a vital role in the behavior of an individual. In this case, the learners’ minds reflect on the knowledge and skills they are exposed to. On the contrary, constructivism theorists assert that learning is based on how individuals interpret their internal knowledge, as well as their personal experiences (Suhendi, 2018). Moreover, this perspective views learning as unique and different for each individual since every person has different perceptions and experiences.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Consequently, all these perspectives (constructivism, behaviorism, and cognitivism) apply to understand the learning process of different learning communities. In a learning setting, the learning community is described as a group of individuals who collaborate to achieve a common learning goal within a prescribed duration of time. The time can be a semester, year, or a couple of years. For example, a learning community might be Autistic learners or Black students in the United States. Recent surveys explain that black American college students experience harsh learning environments compared to their white counterparts despite the measure put by the government to stop discrimination not only in the institutions of higher learning but also in all educational institutions (Guney, 2017). Most of the black American students experience racial discrimination, which negatively influences their learning process. Besides, autistic learners are a group of leaners who experience impaired social, emotional, and cognitive functions. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 1 out of 59 children in the United States have autism spectrum disorder (ASD); however, the ratio in multiple of the educational institution in the U.S. decreases as learning continues (Ozonoff, South & Miller, 2019).
Learning focuses on both the internal aspects of an individual, such as behavior and cognition and external elements such as the learning environment. Psychologists affirm that for an individual to acquire, retain, and recall different skills and knowledge, they ought to undergo some experiences. David Kolb created a model to help in understanding experiential learning, which incorporates the three perspectives of learning. Moreover, he bought ideas from Dewey (a constructivism theorist), Piaget and Lewin (both cognitivism theorists), and Skinner (a behaviorism theorist). In his model, he based his research on testing new experiences, observation, and reflection, the formation of abstract concepts and concrete knowledge. Kolb explains that learning is a continuous experience that can start from the four points. He describes experiences as sensations that must be viewed as acts of consciousness to encounter the signals from the senses. Kolb integrated the ideologies of cognitive researchers who believe that experiences are a pathway of making sense of the process of learning at the same time incorporating the society. According to him, standard modes of learning connected with the reflections on the minds of learners. Besides, these reflections spark a mental activity that determines the behavior of a learner and how they relate to other individuals in the learning environments.
Additionally, the learning process is determined by how the brain grasps different lessons and changes accordingly (Pritchard, 2017). Neuroplasticity is the process by which the brain rewires or expands its neural networks (Boghossian, 2016). Acquisition of skills and knowledge enters the mind as electrical impulses which team up to form neural networks. As the learning process is done continuously, the neural networks become numerous and stronger; hence the higher chances of learning. However, autistic learners experience problems in their cognitive functioning, which makes their brains to explore and generate alternatives slower than non-autistic learners (Ozonoff et al. , 2019). The cognitive effect is due to more gradual and less flexible neural connections within their brain. Alan Rodgers simplified the approaches of learning into two categories, namely; acquisition learning and formalized learning. Acquisition learning is a progressive learning approach whereby the learner focuses on the consciousness of the task at hand while formalized learning learners already know the task but engage the task focusing on the consciousness of learning.
The Behaviorist Perspective
The behaviorist perspective describes learning as embracing new behaviors based on the learning environment. Behaviorism focuses on observable behaviors while discrediting any independent activities in the mind of an individual. The theory asserts that a learning process is initiated when a stimulus or cue is exposed to the learner, and the learner reacts to the stimulus with some response (Ferreira, 2018). The stimulus is presented to the learner repeatedly to reinforce the desired behavior. In this case, learning is signified when a change in the learner’s behavior is detected. In most learning institutions, this perspective is used by teachers to reward or punish students’ behaviors. However, this perspective only prepares learners to automatically respond in a defined way whenever the stimulus is exposed to them but fails to take the initiative of training the learners to improve their responses in case of any different magnitude of the relative stimulus (Pavlov, 2018). Unfortunately, the behaviorism perspective fails to train the learner on creative thinking and problem-solving skills.
Behaviorists argue that the response of an individual to any stimulus is linked to either classical conditioning or operant conditioning. The conditioning that initiates specific responses in learners when a particular stimulus is exposed to them is termed as classical conditioning. For instance, in a learning environment, classical conditioning can be shown by irrational anxieties and fears such as general school phobia as a response to bullying, fear of public speaking when a learner stands before an audience, or fear of failure when learners are sitting for their exams, Guney (2017) discusses. O the other hand, operant conditioning occurs when a stimulus is reinforced repeatedly. By doing so, the response becomes more predictable and probable in the future of an individual.
According to Ferreira (2018), the teaching methods that use behavioral perspectives include direct instruction and mastery learning approaches. These approaches mostly rely on operant conditioning whereby an individual’s behavior is a result of two environmental stimuli; that is, consequences and antecedents. According to Pavlov (2018), the direct instruction approach aims at maximizing the time learners spend on learning tasks by emphasizing on their completion while minimizing the amount of time spend on off-learning tasks such as games or non-academic tasks. The approach creates an excellent platform for the teachers to monitor the progress of their students as well as controlling the learning environment. According to the direct instruction approach, students learn best when their teachers structure the learning environment in a way that only accurate information is presented to the learner at small chunks through the introduction of multiple opportunities of practicing the submitted information. For instance, during lessons, the teacher is in charge of controlling the presentation and pace of introducing new content to the learners.
Additionally, teachers may decide to present the content through modeling, pictorials, or reexplaining the problematic concepts to ensure that the learners acquire and master the concepts being taught. Since operant conditioning requires repeated reinforcement of stimuli, teachers are encouraged to review the previous lessons to identify errors that need corrections. Besides, behaviorists first asses the learners to figure out where to start the lessons, as well as to determine the areas which need reinforcements. The following contents are related to the previous ones; therefore, at long last, students will have reviewed the previous contents over and over again.
Structuring of the behaviorism perspective in learning requires continuous assessment of the progress of a learner. As a result, the learning structure can be subdivided into four types of practice to improve the current instructional design technique (Baruque & Melo, 2016). The four types of practice include controlled practice, guided practice, independent practice, and, finally, the distributed practice. In the first phase of practice, controlled practice, the teacher introduces new concepts to the learners by providing examples and immediate corrective feedback at the same time. This phase requires keenness and constant monitoring of the learners to prevent them from grasping incorrect concepts.
The second phase, guided practice, involves students practicing the new concepts on their own while the teacher checks their progress and providing the necessary corrective feedback. For instance, the teachers may give relative assignments and move around the classroom, assessing the progress of learners. The third phase, independent practice, is initiated once the learners have grasped more than 85% of the content and can do the assignments on their own. To assess such progress, the learners are given homework to practice the new concepts on their own. The last phase involves distributed practice whereby the concepts are learned over a range of time, weekly or monthly. Such practice may be distributed individually or per group of fewer people. In this case, the student is given more time to integrate the new content with their peers as a form of reinforcement.
Moreover, the behaviorism model can incorporate the use of shaping, prompts, cues, and other related practices to ensure a robust stimulus-response association. By doing so, both learners and teachers will have an easy time when changing from simple to complex concepts. Also, teachers ought to focus on behavioral objects and task analysis to produce observable and measurable outcomes in students. Undoubtedly, Al-Jarrah et al . (2019) affirm that direct instruction is best for teaching complex knowledge and skills; for instance, algebra, calculus, geometry, and computer programming.
On the contrary, mastery learning explains that if all learners are provided with sufficient learning time, they can understand the content of the curriculum. In this case, teachers specify a certain mastery level, such as 80%, and all the students who fail to reach the pass mark repeat the unit. Mastery learning involves developing significant objectives of the unit and dividing them further into smaller units, each having specific objectives (Boghossian, 2016). Afterward, a formative assessment is conducted, individual working for students, feedback of progress, and then a summative assessment. This mode of learning works perfectly for students with varying mastery abilities whereby the slow learners gain confidence in learning, thus improved achievement. However, in this method, the achievement gap between students is widened rather than being narrowed.
Teachers have a significant role to play in encouraging behaviorism in a learning environment. For instance, they should acquire knowledge and the necessary skills required to set behaviorally defined objectives before they start teaching their learners. Such objectives are significant in formulating the scope of work, which focuses on actualizing the learners’ performance achievement (Ferreira, 2018). Moreover, teachers should acknowledge that different students have different degrees of understanding new concepts. Therefore, they should teach at an average pace, which is conducive for every learner and provide continuous monitoring and feedback. Additionally, to encourage the behaviorism model, teachers should embrace constant reinforcement to improve the learning behaviors of the students by introducing new ones through depressing the other negative learning behaviors. For instance, teachers should incorporate the four types of reinforcements, which include positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, punishment, and extinction. The positive reinforcement refers to the introduction of a new magnitude of a specific stimulus to increase response, while negative reinforcement involves the removal of a negative stimulus to increase the response of an individual. On the other hand, extinction consists of the removal of a stimulus in order to decrease a particular response, while punishment involves the introduction of an aversive stimulus to reduce a specific behavior.
According to the behaviorist perspective, a learner is an individual who acquires new learning behaviors after being exposed to new stimuli present in a certain learning environment. In this perspective, learners might experience learning through ‘skill and drill’ exercises, which lead to effective reinforcement of response patterns through consistent repetition of concepts, Ferreira (2018) explains. Additionally, learners might be introduced to question and answer frameworks whereby the questions have a gradual increase in difficulty. In this case, the questions act as the stimulus, while the answers act the responses. Also, learners are exposed continuously to the target stimulus and provided with the relevant opportunities for better response. For instance, the teachers determine the appropriate cues that can help the learner to achieve the desired responses, arrange practical situations that are linked to the target stimuli, and arrange conducive environmental conditions that will assist the students in making the desired responses whenever the target stimuli are presented (Thurlings & Diggelen, 2019).
Due to the rapid increase of autistic learners in the United States, the education system is motivating teachers to train for special education. Such education is based on behavioral learning, which is compatible with educating learners with an autism spectrum disorder. The learning approach focuses on increasing positive and socially acceptable behaviors through applied behavioral analysis (Furneaux & Roberts, 2018). According to Pritchard (2017), the behaviorism approach works for all learners in different learning environments; however, it is best suitable for autistic learners since they have mild or severe delays in brain development, which makes both their learning process and social interaction difficult. The learning is somehow difficult for autistic learners due to their impaired communication skills, preference of non-social stimuli, stereotyped behaviors, poor prediction ability, hypo or hyper sensation to stimuli, different generalized patterns in motor learning, perceptual learning, and memory-task learning, and superior pitch judgment (Rukavina & Foxworth, 2017).
Behavioral learning inspires the acquisition of positive changes in the learning behaviors of autistic learners through the utilization of different behavioral teaching techniques. In this type of learning, Furneaux and Roberts (2018) affirm that the positive reinforcements such as favorable rewards are integrated into the learning process to motivate the learners to acquire and maintain the appropriate learning behavior. Recent surveys conducted in the United States indicate that students who receive immediate positive reinforcement are highly capable of having frequent, reliable, and appropriate behaviors (Klein & Kemper, 2016). Among the multiple strategies used by special education teachers to teach autistic learners is modeling (Furneaux & Roberts, 2018). In this case, learners are directed to imitate a certain learning behavior demonstrated by their teachers. Their response is monitored closely by the teachers until they absorb it fully, such that whenever a relevant stimulus is presented, they can respond accordingly. Incorporating the behaviorism perspective to teach autistic students has tremendous benefits to their learning process. For instance, autistic learners develop quality learning skills, which help them to participate in general education classrooms independently (Klein & Kemper, 2016). Moreover, Rukavina and Foxworth (2017) explain that such learning techniques improve their social language not only within the learning environment but also in the outside world, communication skills, increased class participation, enhanced motor development, and excellent academic focus.
Additionally, most schools across the United States have diversification in a social and cultural context. Therefore, a comprehensive learning approach that applies to all the diverse groups should be synthesized. According to Kay and Kibble (2016), the assessment procedures in schools are designed according to the behaviorist theory, whereby the level of achievement of the learners is measured according to their ability to perform according to the intended learning outcomes and other program objectives. The student’s conduct and attitudes construct a thriving learning environment. In the same context, behavioral patterns within the classrooms, and overall behavioral expectations are critical in productive education. Educators and psychologists affirm that low test scores are linked to the learning behavior of a student, as well as the effect of the learning environment.
Over the past decades, racial disparities in student discipline have been documented by a lot of publishers. For instance, in 2013, forty percent of the students who had enrolled in high schools and universities were suspended from their learning institutions. The incidence led to public intervention since the black community thought that public learning institutions were administering discipline based on race (Trindade, Marques, Piveta, Favarin, Telocken, & Trevisan, 2018). Moreover, the institutions’ administration was enforcing discipline through unacceptable behavioral techniques for black students. Unfortunately, Trindade et al. (2018) explain that the learning environments in the United States fail to recognize self-directed moves that affect cooperation, discipline, respect, interpersonal space, and vocal usage. The cultural background of low-income students of color is different from most of the institutions’ norms. According to Hollins (2015), the learning of learning institutions should acknowledge the connection between the culture and behaviors of black students since their behavior is acquired and defined differently from the white culture. By doing so, teachers will be encouraged to modify their practices so as to be comprehensive and avoid culturally-based learning actions. Moreover, the learning environment ought to be modified in such a way that it integrates the cultural orientation of the black community (Trindade et al. , 2018). Understanding the Black American culture will help the teachers to provide less harmful stimuli to the black students and, in turn, respond positively to the learning environment (Hollins, 2015). The absence of cultural synchronization within most of the United States learning environments reveals that most of the disciplinary sanctions among the black students are as a result of misinterpretation of the student’s learning behavior.
The Cognitivism Perspective
On the contrary, learning theories experienced a change in the late 1950s whereby educators, psychologists, and cognitivists contradicted with the behaviorists by urging that learning was more about complex cognitive processes such as language, problem-solving, critical thinking and information processing (Schunk, 2015). Over the past decade, Mergel (2016) affirms that researchers in the field of instructional design of learning have openly rejected the assumptions of the behaviorist perspective in favor of psychological assumptions from the cognitivism perspective. Cognitivism affirms that learning is not only based on stimuli and overt behavior but a comprehensive approach to psychoanalysis and developmental thinking (Clark, 2018). Besides, cognitive learning theories conceptualize the learning processes of a learner and address how they receive information, organize and store it in the brain, and retrieve the information when required. Cognitivism asserts that learning is linked to the acquisition of knowledge and the internal mental structures which synthesis the information. Cognitivist theorists such as Jerome Burner and Robert Gagne linked the mental process of a learner to teaching and came up with eight forms of cognitive learning according to human cognition capabilities.
According to Clark (2018), the cognitive learning theory explains the different thinking and mental processes which are influenced by both internal and external factor to provide learning among individuals. Cognitive learning theorists believe that the learning process includes the internal processing of information by learners. In this case, cognitivism differs from behaviorism since information processing among learners is dependent on the internal process rather than the external forces surrounding the learner. For instance, cognitivists affirm that the ability of a learner to grasp the learning content depends on the mental process within the brain of the learner rather than the observable behaviors surrounding the learner. In the same context, learning is assessed through the change in knowledge within the brain of the learner and not just the changes in behavior. Unlike behaviorism, which can only be used to teach verbal reinforcement and repetitive practice, cognitivism can be used in teaching problem solving and real-world concepts (Deubel, 2015).
Learning methods in the cognitive learning perspective are student-centered since they focus on mental processes used in knowledge construction within the learners rather than the exposure of external stimuli used in behaviorism perspectives. Among the learning approaches used by cognitivists is meaningful learning whereby the relevant information is selected, the information is organized in a logical and consistent structure, and finally, the information is integrated with the previous knowledge. From a cognitive learning perspective, meaningful learning can be fostered using two distinct approaches; expository learning and discovery learning (Clark, 2018). Discovery learning includes pure discovery and guided discovery learning. Pure discovery learning involves encouraging learners to internalize and discover a principle or concept through the exploration of information that will be taught ahead. For instance, students might be provided with experimental materials and apparatus to discover some physics or chemistry principles without assistance from their teacher. However, such a learning process is discouraged since students require sufficient knowledge about different concepts before they are exposed to new principles. Also, this technique might activate inappropriate knowledge to the learners, which might interfere with the learning process.
Instead, guided discovery learning is advised due to its efficiency in facilitating the integration and transfer of new knowledge. In this case, teachers provide their students with the appropriate guidelines to ensure that the brains of the learners deeply synthesize the principles to be taught ahead. Such a structure is favorable for the learning process since students are given the platform to focus on the cognition required to reorganize and integrate knowledge rather than figuring out how to commence and run the discovery processes. Similarly to the behaviorism perspective, teachers are required to consider the individual learning abilities of the learners to determine how much guidance they need for an effective learning process.
On the contrary, the expository learning approach involves meaningful verbal learning, whereby the teacher ensures that the new knowledge is embedded in the learners’ memory effectively. Before going deep into the new content, the teacher emphasizes the interrelation of the new content and the already synthesized knowledge of the learners together with real-life situations. Such emphasis is done through the help of an advance organizer, which is not necessarily the outline of the new content but inform of visual presentations such as analogical flowchart. Advance organizers are well-known in facilitating learning processes and the effective transfer of knowledge. The relevant foundation on the new content is significant to the faster acquisition of new knowledge. Generally, during the structuring of the presentation of a new concept, cognitivism demand well-organized information, inherent structured information, perceptual features, revision of prior knowledge, and assessment of the learners through analysis of their cognitive feedback.
Consequently, while behaviorism focuses on the external stimuli which activate the required response on a learner, the cognitivism perspective emphasizes the schematic mind of a learner, which acknowledges the presence of the previous knowledge in synthesizing new concepts (Deubel, 2015). Besides, the behavioristic perspective associates learning with biological factors, which are based on the deterministic views of classical and operant conditioning, while the cognitivism perspective compares learning with a computer process that integrates multiple coding of the information in storage and retrieval processes (Brieger, Arghode, & McLean, 2020). Moreover, while the behaviorism learning process is based on the reinforcement and levels of maturation to acquire and maintain a learned behavior, cognitivism is based on sophisticated forms of information synthesis which recognize motivational learning and application of previous knowledge in new domains.
When the new wave of cognitivism was introduced in learning after the prolonged existence of behaviorism, many expectations were waited to revolutionize the learning process. However, despite the significant differences they have, they highlight some similarities too. For instance, in both behavioristic and cognitivist perspectives, learners rely on the introduction of a new condition, and their reaction can be predicted according to either the stimuli provided or the information presented to the learners. Besides, Deubel (2015) explains that both perspectives focus on learning environments. Cognitivism theory relies on a well-organized learning environment that introduces new concepts in a more defined way for the brain to internalize while behaviorism relies on the external stimuli from the learning environment to activate the required responses.
Cognitivism asserts that cognitive development is essential in the progressive acquisition of new skills and knowledge. According to Schopler and Mesibov (2018), despite their mental development challenges, teachers of autistic learners have compensatory strategies for their cognitive learning processes. Unquestionably, learners with ASD have unique patterns of development, such as strong non-verbal problem-solving skills, and visual-spatial skills, which assist them in their learning process, Happé (2019) explains. Autistic students tend to perform better on nonverbal tests than verbal tests since such tests require less motor and speed skills (Happé, 2019). Unlike the behaviorism perspective, in this case, teachers focus on cognitive concepts that boost the sensory memory, working memory, and long-term memory to improve different cognitive aspects within the learners. Besides, cognitivists affirm that autistic learners can benefit from using computer-assisted instruction (CAI) in reading, whereas the behaviorism approach cannot integrate CAI (Anderson, 2016). Educational research has proved that autistic learners who use CAI in learning have escalated performance than those who use the traditional approach. Similarly, to behaviorism, autistic learners can acquire reading skills through instructional activities. Moreover, the learning structures such as individual learning and assessment, group work, use of visual presentations, and frequent student-to-teacher interaction may be used as in the behavioral approach.
According to the cognitivism perspective, a learner is not a programmable being who responds in a certain way after being exposed to environmental stimuli, but a rational being who requires learning is dependent on their memory and thinking. Unlike behaviorism, cognitive learning involves the use of cognitive models that guide learners to actualize their cognitive processes for learning (Deubel, 2015). In the United States, black students’ experiences in their learning environments may have tremendous effects on how they perceive learning and its relationship to ethics. According to Brieger et al. (2020), cognitive learning theory aims at eradicating racial discrimination and prejudice, which has adversely affected the students of color in their learning environments. Prejudice and discrimination prevail in learning institutions whereby they are perceived to be a norm. In the case of discipline, all students (black or white) are taught diversification of race and its benefits to actualize their thinking towards embracing each other rather than harming each other. Such cognitive aspects encourage every student to acknowledge the cultural differences within the learning institutions. Unlike behaviorism, which promotes interaction among learners to reinforce the intended responses, cognitivism promotes such interactions to reduce prejudice and create closer connections between learners of different cultures.
The Constructivist Perspective
In another context, Magoon (2017) argues that constructivism or social constructivism views learning as a philosophical and psychological process. However, constructivism is considered as a branch of cognitivism since they have more similarities. On the other hand, the behaviorism perspective is more distinct concerning both the cognitivism and constructivism perspectives. For instance, behaviorism is focused only on the external stimuli, which, when presented to a learner, actuates certain responses; however, constructivism and cognitivism rely on the independent knowledge and thinking capacity of a learner. Constructivist theorists believe that the learning process depends on the ability of a learner to construct new ideas and concepts based on previous experiences or knowledge (Alt, 2017). Similarly to the cognitivism perspective, constructivism encourages problem-solving techniques and critical thinking whereby the learner relies on them to interpret the prior knowledge to create new ideologies. On the contrary, Cetin-Dindar (2016) affirms that constructivism learning theory differs from behaviorism learning theory since its outcomes are not predictable because information synthesis is independent. Social constructivism theory can be integrated into discovery learning, problem-based learning, brainstorming, case studies, and research projects.
Constructivists differ from cognitivists and behaviorists because knowledge cannot be mapped onto a student. For instance, in this case, learners do not necessarily acquire the meaning of learning experiences but create their own concerning real-life situations. Also, knowledge is not constant but open to change since the memory of a learner evolves as new activities, experiences, and situations recast in different forms (Harfitt & Chan, 2017). The constructivist perspective of learning emphasizes on creation of diverse situation understanding through critical thinking rather than concentrating on the retrieval of information from the mind. Besides, the constructivism perspective assists learners in exploring complex content through the construction of their knowledge and understanding (Fernando & Marikar, 2017). Just like cognitivism, constructivist such as John Dewey, Lev Vygotsky, and Jean Piaget, assert that constructivism learning is based on cognition framework. The situated cognition framework involves working on authentic content whereby teachers teach step by step to enable the learners to acquire the necessary problem-solving skills essential for maneuvering across the real world.
In a learning environment, constructivism learning can be incorporated in the form of cognitive apprenticeships for students to develop both constructive and cognitive skills. Similarly to behaviorism and cognitivism, constructivism engages systematic leaning whereby the teacher teaches according to the pace of the students for the whole class to grasp the intended concept, Jack (2017) explains. Apparently, constructivism learning may be structured in a way that is easily integrated into the minds of the learners — for instance, modeling, explanation, coaching, Scaffolding, exploration, and reflection (Cetin-Dindar, 2016). Modeling refers to the form in which the teachers introduce new concepts, and explanation is the process in which learners discuss their reasoning. Coaching involves constant monitoring and offering correctional feedback. Kerr (2019) asserts that scaffolding refers to offering the last assistance for the learners to accomplish specific tasks, exploration consists of the creation of testing hypothesis when finding new concepts, and lastly, reflection is the assessment of learners’ performance.
Additionally, Fernando and Marikar (2017) explain that the constructivist perspective can be integrated into a learning environment through two approaches; inquiry learning and cooperative learning. Inquiry learning involves formulating and testing a hypothesis for students to have ease in constructing knowledge and develop problem-solving skills (Patil & Kudte, 2017). For instance, a teacher can introduce a complicated situation that triggers the learners to find the appropriate solution, thus acquiring new knowledge in the process. However, this approach cannot be applied in low education levels since the cognitive functioning of the brain has not fully developed (Harfitt & Chan, 2017). Inquiry learning is conducted by first formulating the research questions, then collecting and organizing data, evaluating and analyzing data, and finally presenting the search results. Furthermore, this learning approach requires teachers to create inquiry groups to embrace teamwork and collective construction of knowledge (Jack, 2017). Well-structured inquiry learning leads to better acquisition of knowledge and skills rather than the traditional lectures.
On the other hand, cooperative learning emphasizes on achieving shared goals through collectively working together. Such a learning approach can best work for elementary and high school students. Moreover, cooperative learning is inclusive of five elements, which should be actualized hand in hand for better results (Ertmer, & Newby, 2016). These elements include positive interdependence, both individual and group accountability, face-to-face interaction, group processing, and interpersonal skills. Group processing involves a comprehensive reflection on how the group is functioning and the detection of areas where it requires improvement for cooperative learning. Positive interdependence enables members of the group to depend on one another for the group’s success. Interpersonal skills are necessary for cooperative learning to include conflict resolution, leadership skills, trust, communication, and decision-making skills (Patil & Kudte, 2017). Individual and group accountability ensures that the contribution of every member is essential to the group’s success. Significantly, research clarifies the cooperative benefits learning has over any other learning approach. The great pros of this approach include improved intrinsic motivation in a learning environment, improved social interaction, increased self-esteem, and higher levels of critical thinking.
Raskin (2015) narrates that constructivist learning in a learning environment, which includes autistic learners, strategizes its cognitive-based practices to ensure comprehensive learning. By doing so, Cotter (2017) assets that conventional and naturalized ways are introduced to create a balance for intellectual understanding among the learners. Moreover, social constructivism acknowledges the presence of diversity within a leaning environment by defining learning problems encountered by autistic learners and integrating their solutions through the curriculum (Walker & Berthelsen, 2018). Undoubtedly, such behavior constructs a comprehensive social learning environment, which boosts the academic performance of autistic learners. Unlike behaviorism and cognitivism, constructivism perspective shifts the self-perception of autistic learners from negative to positive through understanding the social constructs and altering the learning process for improved outcomes (Cotter, 2017). Within a learning environment, negative self-perception is influenced by the presence of discrimination and isolation of autistic learners.
The gap between the achievement of school literacy among students from diverse cultural backgrounds in the United States is the core reason behind the discrimination of students of color in most of the educational institutions in the U.S. the social constructivism perspective argues that the success or failure of learning is linked to the internal aspects of a learning environment (Danforth & Smith, 2018). Moreover, it is associated with the historical and political background trends that influence the persistent cultural context within the area. Similarly, Vygotsky's cognitivism theory affirms that the cognitive learning process is affected by social, political, and cultural factors. The literacy gap between white students and black students in the United States is due to the lack of a comprehensive social constructivist learning process in most of the schools across its boundaries (Jack, 2017). For instance, in many schools, black students and learners from other marginalized groups are labeled as non-performers who have poor learning skills and are requested to have regular remedial teaching. Moreover, Danforth & Smith (2018) argue that such schools fail to acknowledge cultural differences, rationales of schooling, and linguistic differences. In such scenarios, students of color experience discrimination and inferior education. Also, most of the urban schools with a high population of African American students have outdated books, deteriorating buildings, multiple inexperienced teachers, and violent society.
Similarly to cognitivism, teachers encourage inner mental growth and development through interpersonal empowerment. Although some autistic learners experience radical individualism, they have hyper intentions of connecting with other individuals within the learning community, especially those with hyper-social skills. Unlike behaviorism, which emphasizes specific learning outcomes, constructivism affirms that connectedness with the learning environment disintegrates the feeling of isolation within autistic learners, which produces low performance to the reconstruction of their identity, which leads to improved academic performance (Brieger et al. , 2020).
In conclusion, the constructivist perspective differs from the behaviorist perspective through how the two perspectives are implemented in a learning environment (Scheurman, 2017). Constructivism implements the learning concepts through actions while cognitivism implements the learning concepts through presentations (Suhendi, 2018). On the other hand, Weegar and Pacis (2018) affirm that behaviorism learning views learning as a reaction to a specific learning environment stimulus, cognitivism views learning as an active process within the learner while constructivism views learning as an individual interpretation of real-world experiences. The behaviorist perspective teaches the learner generalization, illustration, and chaining skills, whereas the constructivist perspective builds the personal experiences of learners to act according to their individual experiences (Ertmer, & Newby, 2016). On the other hand, the cognitivism perspective emphasizes an independent mindset.
Consequently, all the three approaches explain their significance in analyzing the two learning communities, that is the autistic learners in the United States and the students of color within the same social setting. Although the behaviorist perspective is somehow distinct from the cognitivism and constructivism perspectives, they have some similarities too. For instance, all of them emphasize on continuous monitoring of the autistic learners in the different learning structural techniques. Moreover, they explain that discrimination of the students of color is due to the lack of understanding of their cultural backgrounds. Learning institutions should embrace the cognitivism and constructivist approach in the learning process more than the behaviorist approach because the two approaches teach critical thinking and problem-solving skills, which are essential not only in academic performance but also in general performance of the students.
References
Alt, D. (2017). Constructivist learning and openness to diversity and challenge in higher education environments. Learning Environments Research , 20 (1), 99-119.
Al-Jarrah, T. M., Mansor, N., Talafhah, R. H., & Al-Jarrah, J. M. (2019). The application of metacognition, cognitivism, and constructivism in teaching writing skills. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching .
Anderson, T. (2016). Theories for learning with emerging technologies. Emergence and innovation in digital learning: Foundations and applications , 35-50.
Baruque, L. B., & Melo, R. N. (2016). Learning theory and instruction design using learning objects. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia , 13 (4), 343-370.
Boghossian, P. (2016). Behaviorism, constructivism, and Socratic pedagogy. Educational Philosophy and Theory , 38 (6), 713-722.
Brieger, E., Arghode, V., & McLean, G. (2020). Connecting theory and practice: reviewing six learning theories to inform instructions. European Journal of Training and Development .
Cetin-Dindar, A. (2016). Student Motivation in Constructivist Learning Environment. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education , 12 (2).
Clark, K. R. (2018). Learning theories: Cognitivism.
Cotter, J. A. (2017). Reading comprehension strategies in children with high-functioning autism: A social constructivist perspective .
Danforth, S., & Smith, T. J. (2018). Engaging troubling students: A constructivist approach . Corwin Press.
Deubel, P. (2015). An investigation of behaviorist and cognitive approaches to instructional multimedia design. Journal of educational multimedia and hypermedia , 12 (1), 63-90.
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2016). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance improvement quarterly , 6 (4), 50-72.
Fernando, S. Y., & Marikar, F. M. (2017). Constructivist Teaching/Learning Theory and Participatory Teaching Methods. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching , 6 (1), 110-122.
Ferreira, H. Y. (2018). How Do Children and Teens Learn? Part One: Traditional Learning Theories. For Youth , 67.
Furneaux, B., & Roberts, B. (2018). Autistic Children: teaching, community and research approaches . Routledge.
Galitsky, B., & Shpitsberg, I. (2016). Autistic learning and cognition. In Computational Autism (pp. 245-293). Springer, Cham.
Guney, A. (2017). Effective learning environments in relation to different learning theories. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences , 46 , 2334-2338.
Happé, F. (2019). Autism: cognitive deficit or cognitive style?. Trends in cognitive sciences , 3 (6), 216-222.
Harfitt, G. J., & Chan, C. (2017). Constructivist learning theories in teacher education programmes: A pedagogical perspective. International handbook of research on teacher education , 545-561.
Hollins, E. R. (2015). Culture in school learning: Revealing the deep meaning . Routledge.
Jack, G. U. (2017). The Effect of Learning Cycle Constructivist-Based Approach on Students' Academic Achievement and Attitude towards Chemistry in Secondary Schools. Educational Research and Reviews , 12 (7), 456-466.
Kay, D., & Kibble, J. (2016). Learning theories 101: application to everyday teaching and scholarship. Advances in physiology education , 40 (1), 17-25.
Kerr, S. J. (2019). Scaffolding: design issues in single & collaborative virtual environments for social skills learning. In Proceedings of the workshop on Virtual environments (pp. 81-91). Eurographics Association.
Klein, N., & Kemper, K. J. (2016). Integrative approaches to caring for children with autism. Current problems in pediatric and adolescent health care , 46 (6), 195-201.
Magoon, A. J. (2017). Constructivist approaches in educational research. Review of educational research , 47 (4), 651-693.
Mergel, B. (2016). Instructional design and learning theory.
Ormrod, J. E., Anderman, E. M., & Anderman, L. H. (2016). Educational psychology: Developing learners.
Ozonoff, S., South, M., & Miller, J. N. (2019). DSM-IV-defined Asperger syndrome: Cognitive, behavioral and early history differentiation from high-functioning autism. Autism , 4 (1), 29-46.
Patil, A. M., & Kudte, S. S. (2017). Teaching Learning with Constructivist Approach. International Journal of Engineering Development and Research , 5 (4), 308- 312.
Pavlov, I. (2018). Burrhus Skinner and Behaviourists. Learning Theories for Early Years Practice , 48.
Pritchard, A. (2017). Ways of learning: Learning theories for the classroom . Routledge.
Raskin, J. D. (2015). Constructivism in psychology: Personal construct psychology, radical constructivism, and social constructionism. American communication journal , 5 (3), 1-25.
Rukavina, P. B., & Foxworth, R. K. (2015). Using motor-learning theory to design more effective instruction. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance , 80 (3), 17-37.
Scheurman, G. (2017). From behaviorist to constructivist teaching. Social education , 62 (1), 6-9.
Schopler, E., & Mesibov, G. B. (Eds.). (2018). Learning and cognition in autism . Springer Science & Business Media.
Schunk, D. H. (2016). Learning theories: an educational perspective Greensboro. North Carolina: Pearson .
Schunk, D. H. (2015). Learning theories. Printice Hall Inc., New Jersey , 53 .
Suhendi, A. (2018). Constructivist Learning Theory: The Contribution to Foreign Language Learning and Teaching. KnE Social Sciences , 87-95.
Thurlings, M., & van Diggelen, M. (2019). Perceptions of practical knowledge of learning and feedback among academic teachers. European Journal of Engineering Education , 1-22.
Trindade, N. R., Marques, C. S., Piveta, M. N., Favarin, R. R., Telocken, S. G., & Trevisan, M. (2018). Education for sustainability and learning theories: A bibliometric study for the last 10 years. Revista de Administração da UFSM , 11 , 402-420.
Walker, S., & Berthelsen, D. (2018). Children with autistic spectrum disorder in early childhood education programs: A social constructivist perspective on inclusion. International Journal of Early Childhood , 40 (1), 33-51.
Weegar, M. A., & Pacis, D. (2018). A Comparison of two theories of learning-behaviorism and constructivism as applied to face-to-face and online learning. In Proceedings e-leader conference, Manila .
