In reviewing the blog by Kerr (2007), the learning debate is defended by soldiers in opposing camps. Is learning completed through behaviorism or cognitivism? In my opinion, learning occurs fundamentally from a behaviorist perspective and proceeds through the use of cognitivism. Foremost, learners must first be motivated to learn (Behavioral). The task of learning requires the learner to be motivated to accomplish the task of learning. How do we motivate learners? Testing is a – tradition. Is it an accurate account of true learning? True learning is a developmental process in which the learner builds readily on basic concepts, ultimately acquiring the ability to be able to think critically, and problem solve (Driscoll, 2005). Demonstrating the use of critical thinking and problem solving is a much more reliable method of measuring learning acquisition.
Orey (2001) posits that learning is a cognitive process in which learning occurs through stages. Sensory input transfers information to short term memory. Elaboration moves this information into long term memory. Links are created for information retrieval. When one has difficulty recalling information, it is due to a faulty recall link. Rehearsal through application may improve the link, making recall more readily available.
References
Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.).Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
Kerr, B. (2007, January 1). _isms as filter, not blinker [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html
Orey, M. (2001). Information processing. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Information_processing
Reflections 
Tonya,
Kerr’s blog disagrees with the notion that in the cognitive theory, our brains are like computers. Although he may disagree with this thought, I find myself agreeing with this theory. Ertmer and Newby (1993) indicate that learning is formed is the same way as a processor of information as with a computer. When it happens, information is received by way of environment, it is processed and stowed in memory, and output is in the outline of some learned. What is your opinion?
Reference:
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognition, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50-72. doi:10.1111/j.1937-8327.1993.b00605.x
Kerr, B. (2007, January 1). _isms as filter, not blinker [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html
Jackie
LikeLike
The more I learn about learning theories, the more I understand that there is not one perfect theory that I subscribe to. I guess I am eclectic, in that I like specific attributes from the various learning theories. In looking at the “big picture,” I feel that it is necessary to consider not only the theory, but the learner and the information to be learned as well. With these considerations in mind, various aspects from the respective theories can be applied. Take a look at the video I uploaded by Teaching and learning theories related to behaviorism, cognitivism, and social constructivism and give me your thoughts.
Teaching and learning theories https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gkzLAz25KPI
LikeLike
Tonya,
While you recognize the relevance of both Cognitivism and behaviorism in learning, you tend to separate the two in that one is applicable when the other one has succeeded. In your case –Cognitivism is applied after behaviorism in learning continuum has succeeded (correct me if I’m wrong). Both theories differ chiefly in their opinions on behavior. However, they both view human reaction -action, mental and so on, as dogged by physical laws. As I have mentioned before, all learning movements have their inherent wealth and it is necessary to combine them in appropriate measures, depending on different circumstances under consideration. I believe they all are applied concurrently with or without knowing. As Atkisson (2012) put it, Cognitivism can try to explicate the behavior such as giving explanation on how humans reason, make decisions, why they make errors, and how they remember and forget things.
Atkisson, M. (2010, October 12). Behaviorism vs. Cognitivism [Web blog]. Retrieved from https://woknowing.wordpress.com/2010/10/12/behaviorism-vs-cognitivisim/
LikeLike
Jackson,
Thanks for sharing your opinions about learning theories and seeking clarification. I understand why you think I consider cognitivism and behaviorism to separate entities. I do not however. I agree with you that they are intermeshed and have their own unique qualities important for both theorists and learners alike. My view is probably more social constructivist (Driscoll, 2005). I think it is important to look at the “big picture” concerning learners, how they learn, and the learning theories that we have to choose from.
Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.).Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
LikeLike
I have to add on to your blog site Tonya! I am enjoying reading your comments and your site looks great! While I was studying today I read an article by Nogowah, L. & Nagowah, S. that I truly enjoyed. What I liked most about the article is that it was written toward the role of the instructor. The authors provide examples of what they call the three main types of learning theory:
*Behaviorism-which they view as passive on the part of the learner and without regard for mental activity
*Cognitivism-which they view as an active role by the learner as they discuss the processing of information in the mind
*Constructivism- which is centered around the learner adjusting our own mental model around the learning experience (Nogowah, L. & Nogowah, S., 2009).
The authors also list clear strengths and weaknesses of each of the three learning theories. Their emphasis is that as an instructor the role is to understand the strengths and weaknesses of each of the three (which they provide in detail) and understand how those can be used to the advantage of the instructor in the particular situation, even perhaps alternating during the class schedule. This seems like a wonderful way to plan for education! I have to say though without pre-planning and education on these very concepts, how can an educator be successful? With many of our educators being BSN or MSN prepared, is this information readily available? How do we incorporate this vital information into the education provided to all instructors? Tammy
Nagowah, L., & Nagowah, S. (2009). A Reflection on the Dominant Learning Theories: Behaviourism, Cognitivism and Constructivism. International Journal Of Learning, 16(2), 279-285.
LikeLike
Thank you. I loved the article that you provided by Nagowah & Nagowah (2009). I agree that it is crucial to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the existing theories as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the learner. In doing so, we can enhance learning by increasing the learners weaknesses, with the use of appropriate interventions derived from the theoretical process.
Nagowah, L., & Nagowah, S. (2009). A Reflection on the Dominant Learning Theories: Behaviorism, Cognitivism and Constructivism. International Journal Of Learning, 16(2), 279-285.
LikeLike