Although behaviorism possesses numerous disadvantages in the teaching process, such as ignoring intrinsic motivation, ignoring individual differences, and limiting students’ autonomy. However, it is undeniable that this set of theories has a subversive efficiency in a short time. Most students, after knowing the basic framework of a set of theories, still lack the corresponding proficiency, resulting in unsatisfactory final results, especially for some assignments or tasks that require hands-on work. For example, I am currently taking a music course where students need to master the basic music theory of the piano in a short time, but there is a “distance” between the theory and the practical operation. For a good player, what is needed more is finger memory or muscle memory, because the time for the brain to think can lead to misplaced beats.
Therefore, I believe that behaviorism is the most indispensable of these three theories. Any lack of proficiency in learning or lack of memory is not valid. As an instructional designer, I would place more emphasis on behaviorism as well as constructivism to make idiosyncratic materials for as many different students as possible. The reason is that these two theories are realistic and pragmatic, and I care a lot about how proficient the student is in applying the knowledge, or if the student can’t apply it well, then that means he hasn’t learned it. And for Cognitivism, it’s nebulous. Because everyone knows that learning is a good thing, but more people fail because of laziness and other shortcomings. It is not the perception of learning that they need to overcome, but themselves.
Hi,
I really agree with that you said behaviorism is the most indispensable of these three theories. I think it is useless to memorize knowledge simply through the brain, only practice can really consolidate the knowledge.
I agree with your idea that behaviourism ignores intrinsic motivation and individual variations in learning preferences and styles. Although behaviourist strategies can be useful for quickly acquiring a particular skill or body of knowledge, they could not promote a deep understanding or long-term drive. For personalised and fulfilling learning experiences, it can be essential to acknowledge and address individual differences.
It could be useful to look into ways to incorporate components of constructivism and cognitive theories into instructional design in addition to behaviourism in light of the disadvantages Xuchang noted, such as the potential ignoring of intrinsic motivation, individual variations, and autonomy. Combining these theories can result in a more comprehensive strategy that takes into account both short- and long-term depth of understanding.
You can design learning experiences that let students actively interact with the subject matter, apply their knowledge to use in real-world situations, and collaborate with peers by embracing constructivist concepts. Additionally, including cognitive techniques like metacognition can aid students in creating efficient study habits, self-control techniques, and problem-solving skills.
It’s important to create a balance between evaluating performance and taking other forms of learning, such as conceptual understanding, critical thinking, and creativity, when it comes to your emphasis on competency and the practical application of knowledge. A thorough assessment strategy that includes a variety of metrics, such as hands-on activities, can give a more accurate picture of students’ learning results.
Additionally, it’s important to address the subject of learning challenges or setbacks with sympathy and encouragement. While external elements like effort and motivation can undoubtedly affect results, targeting the primary causes of difficulties and offering the right support and guidance can help overcome barriers and encourage fruitful learning experiences.