Reading this post I could relate to the frustrations the writer must of felt when taking a class with lack of intrinsic motivation that utilized behaviourist theories of learning. I know that my learning experiences also greatly depend on my motivation. If I am unable to observe the relevance of a class’s content to real life applications or to my future goals, I can quickly lose interest in keeping up with the class. How this author created their own motivation through goal setting and organizing the class schedule, although this may create mostly extrinsic motivation, it is something I have not yet done but will try the next time I am unable to find the motivation in a class.
After reading this post it made me wonder what are the reasons why behaviourist theories should still be included when teaching. From prior learning experience I agree that cognitive and constructivism theories create more enjoyable and meaningful learning experiences. However I don’t think that this means that behaviourist theories should be taken out completely, as the prior writer said, behaviourist “type of learning has its place” in the classroom. Behaviourist theories has its faults, the biggest one being the lack of adaptability to an individuals needs, however this theory is still often used and is essential for some subjects. The repetition and frequent feedback with behaviourist learning makes it helpful for students to reflect on the strengths and weaknesses on a topic.
For example, when learning a new language many say the best way to reach fluency is through immersion, a constructivism learning. Nonetheless to reach fluency behaviourist practices must be applied, such as using flashcards for vocabulary, to compensate for all the immersion hours learners have not experienced that native speakers have. Supplementing constructivism learning with behaviourist learning allows for learning of new vocabulary then correlating their meanings through experiences.
