For my first curriculum related blog post I will be exploring the topic of Learning, Motivation, and Theory. More specifically I will talk about which learning theory, behaviourist, cognitivism or constructivist, that I have used in my previous experience and which theories I preferred in my experiences as a learner.
Although my previous teaching experience differs from a typical classroom setting, I wanted to take this opportunity to reflect on what learning theories, if any, I have used in the past. My previous teaching experience is not in a typical classroom but instead outside, in a pool. I would say in this unusual learning setting, I utilized behaviourist theories the most with little use of cognitivism and constructivist theories. For swimming lessons, due to the substantial class size and short class duration (usually 30-60 minutes a day for 10 days), it is difficult to learn each individual’s learning style before the time together with the students comes to an end. That is why behaviourist theory is preferred as it incorporates lots of repetition which means students get lots of swimming practice keeping them busy, and happy (which also keeps the parents happy). However a common problem found in swimming lessons is students frequently becoming unfocused and unengaged. This may root from the behaviourist teaching style that only arouses extrinsic motivation which usually leads to “less productive learning behaviours” (Park, 2018). Despite the emphasis on behaviourist theory in my previous teaching experience, there were moments when the other theories were incorporated such as using analogies when explaining movements (cognitivism) or simulating aquatic experiences they may face in everyday life (constructivist).
Reflecting on my experiences as a learner, the most memorable and understandable classes were those that followed constructivist theories. For example, in my highschool law class a mock trial was held where students of the class acted as the roles of the various people within a courtroom. Not only did this experience improve our comprehension of the material we had learned previously in class, the memorable experience helps retain the information in our long-term memory. I believe one reason for my preference of constructivist teaching is that self-efficacy plays a big role for my learning motivation and real hands-on experiences helps build up my confidence on the learning topic while promoting other motivational factors such as utility value.
After reflecting on both my teaching and learning experiences, I am able to recognize the discrepancy between my most used teaching theory and my preferred learning theory. Despite my positive experiences learning in a constructivist setting, this theory was rarely incorporated in my previous teaching experience. However this isn’t to discredit the effectiveness of behaviourist theories but instead show the importance, as said by Ertmer and Newby (Ertmer & Newby, 2018), “the usefulness of being well versed in each”.
References:
Park, S. (2018). Motivation Theories and Instructional Design. In R. E. West (Ed.), Foundations of Learning and Instructional Design Technology. EdTech Books. https://edtechbooks.org/lidtfoundations/motivation_theories_and_instructional_design
Ertmer, P. A. & Newby, T. (2018). Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing Critical Features From an Instructional Design Perspective. In R. E. West (Ed.), Foundations of Learning and Instructional Design Technology. EdTech Books. https://edtechbooks.org/lidtfoundations/behaviorism_cognitivism_constructivism
