Running Head: LEARNING THEORY
1
My Learning Theory
Marwan Haddad
California State University-Monterey Bay
IST 520 Research Method
Professor Lockwood
April 17, 2012
Running Head: LEARNING THEORY
2
There are many ways to teach or as the saying goes there are many ways to peel the onion. My
way of teaching is based on almost 23 years of teaching and a synthesis of elements of the
various instructional theories such as Behaviorism, Constructivism, Humanism, and Cognitivism.
Barker (as cited by Weegar, & Pacis, 2012) states that “The three fundamental learning theories
that were found to be most important in the formulation of the learning design model were those
based upon behaviorism, cognition and constructivism (including both socio-constructivism and
communal constructivism)”(p. 12) .
This paper will briefly discuss these three theories while elaborating on the forth which is
the theory of conditions of learning by Robert Gagne as a cognitivist. Each of the theories views
the role of the teacher and the learner in different ways.
Behaviorists believe that students are just empty vessels and the job of the teacher is
filling them up with knowledge. According to behaviorists learning occurs when a change in
behavior happens. Kramsch & Throne (as cited in Xiangui, 2005) indicate that Behaviorism
focuses only on objectively observable behaviors and discounts mental activities (p. 121).
Behaviorism holds that all learning, whether verbal or non-verbal takes place through the
establishment of habits. According to Skinner and many of his contemporaries “ interpret all
learning is considered to be the result of habit formation through imitation, positive
reinforcement and practice.”( Xiangui, 2005, p. 121). Xiangui (2005) indicates that in
Behaviorism the learner is viewed as passively adapting to his environment. (p. 121)
Humanism according to Edwords (as cited by Huitt, 2009)” is a school of thought that
believes human beings are different from other species and possess capacities not found in
animals”(para. 1). Huitt (2009) believes that humanists, therefore, give primacy to the study of
human needs and interests. Kuchinke(1999) in his reports states that the person-centered notion
Running Head: LEARNING THEORY
3
of development is the discovery and unfolding of innate qualities, of the inner good and inborn
health of the human being, and the search for personal fulfillment and meaning. He adds that
performance, skills, achievements, tasks, and responsibilities and duties are not satisfying in
themselves, but important as means to inner growth, awareness, happiness, and health
Kuchinke(1999). There are many ways to implement the humanistic view in any educational
context. Huitt(2009) lists the following as some of them:
1. Allow the student to have a choice in the selection of tasks and activities whenever
possible.
2. Help students learn to set realistic goals.
3. Have students participate in group work, especially cooperative learning, in order to
develop social and affective skills.
4. Act as a facilitator for group discussions when appropriate.
5. Be a role model for the attitudes, beliefs and habits you wish to foster. Constantly work
on becoming a better person and then share yourself with your students.
Draper (as cited by Weegar, & Pacis, 2012) defines constructivism as the philosophy, or
belief, that the learners create their own knowledge based on interactions with their environment
including their interactions with other people. Weegar, & Pacis, (2012) argue that in contrast to
the belief of behaviorists, the constructivists viewed learning as a search for meaning. Besides,
they believed that knowledge is constructed by the learner and that the learner develops her/his
own understanding through experience. Similar to cognitivists, constructivists believe that
learners develop knowledge through active participation in their learning. According to Rummel
(as cited by Weegar, & Pacis, 2012) the primary role of the teacher should be to motivate the
Running Head: LEARNING THEORY
4
children to create their own knowledge through their personal experience. Weegar, & Pacis,
(2012) add that rather than a dispenser of knowledge ,the teacher is a guide, facilitator, and a coexplorer who encourages learners to question, challenge, and formulate their own ideas, opinions,
and conclusions. When comparing between behaviorism and constructivism Brown (as cited by
Weegar, & Pacis, 2012) indicates that constructivism has a point of view that is presently
considered more popular of the two in educational policies, models, and practices.
Cognitivists believe that the teacher needs to facilitate the learning for the students who
need to take part and control of their learning. Furthermore, the students must know where to
save the new knowledge in the schema in their brains. So, learning happens after linking the new
information with the old ones. According to Xiangui (2005), cognitive psychology places
emphasis on unobservable constructs, such as the mind, memory, attitude, motivation, thinking,
reflection, and other presumed internal processes. Additionally, the Xiangui (2005) study
indicates that the learner is viewed as an active participant in the knowledge acquisition process.
In fact, constructivists also believe that the learner should be active participant in constructing
his own knowledge in the learning process where he acquires it and then be able to use it out in
the real world.
The constructive theory that best reflects my style is Gagne’s "Conditions of Learning"
theory. Gagne’s theory can be divided into three major parts- the taxonomy of learning
outcomes, the conditions of learning, and the nine events of instruction. Robert Gagne is
considered to be a major contributor to the systematic approach to instructional design and
training.” A major contributor to instructional theory development in the 1960s was Gagne, who
theorized that the acquisition of knowledge is facilitated by the hierarchical sequencing of
content from elemental subordinate information to more complex skills (Gagne, 1962)”
Running Head: LEARNING THEORY
5
(Tennyson, 2010). Robert & Reiser (as cited by Faryadi, 2007) report that Gagne classifies
learning into five major categories or conditions of learning outcomes such as, verbal
information, intellectual skills , cognitive strategies, motor skills, and attitudes. In chapter four
Gagne lists the nine events of learning (Richey, R. (Ed). (2000)).The events are the following:
1.
Gain attention
2.
Inform learner of objectives
3.
Stimulate recall of prior learning
4.
Present stimulus material
5.
Provide learner guidance
6.
Elicit performance
7.
Provide feedback
8.
Assess performance
9.
Enhance retention transfer
The role of the teacher has been changing dramatically over the last few decades. In my
early days of teaching about 23 years ago I had to do everything for my students since it was
assumed that the teacher is accountable for the learning teaching process from A to Z. Nowadays,
with role of the teacher changed to assume the role of the facilitator where the student is
responsible for his own education. It seems that in this age that educational thinking is leaning
more and more towards student-center education. According to Gagne’s nine events of
Running Head: LEARNING THEORY
6
instruction the accountability of the teacher is higher, although his role changed. In Gagne’s the
teacher is accountable for creating the most suitable circumstances for the students so the
learning would happen. I do agree that Gagne’s events of instruction hold the teacher in a higher
level of accountability in modern times.
As an educator who employed Gagne’s theory in his teaching practices in real life even
before reading about it since it seemed intuitive to me. Over the years, some strengths and
weaknesses were discovered while applying the theory. The theory helps the teachers organize
their teaching and make it more systematic and structured. It also helps in increasing the
motivation of the learner especially because it considers and caters for individual differences,
however, it still beneficial and effective for the masses. It breaks the learning into smaller
chunks which facilitates learning for the students. The theory is very flexible and easy to
implement by educators in almost all educational contexts. It also provides the teachers with a
theoretical base to help manage their teaching, particularly newly hired educators and trainers.
However, the efficiency and applicability of the theory has been questioned by many
educators and practitioners. Some teachers whom I met expressed their frustration and dislike of
the theory. They claimed it is rigid and liner which makes it hard to apply in all contexts. Some
of those teachers argued that the theory limits their creativity and creates robot-like teachers who
follow a manual without thinking. Some teachers complained it is very difficult to translate their
objectives into Gagne’s performance objectives using the standard verbs of the theory. Moreover,
another group commented that Gagne’s theory is time consuming and demanding on the part of
the teacher so they preferred utilizing that time in real teaching rather than preparing for it.
These are some resources to learn more about Gagne and other learning theories:
Running Head: LEARNING THEORY
7
Related Websites
1. http://minutebio.com/blog/2009/01/29/using-gagnes-9-events-of-learning-in-elearning/
2. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/simpleSearch.jsp?searchtype=advanc
ed&ERICExtSearch_FullText=true&pageSize=10&ERICExtSearch_SearchCount=1
&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=gagne&ERICExtSearch_Operator_1=and&ERIC
ExtSearch_SearchType_1=kw&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=kw&_pageLabel=E
RICSearchResult&_urlType=action&ERICExtSearch_Facet_0=facet_pds&ERICExt
Search_FacetValue_0=120
3. http://www.astd.org/Search?q=Gagne
4. http://www.e-learningguru.com/articles/art3_3.htm
5. http://www.my-ecoach.com/idtimeline/theory/gagne.html
6. http://www.ibstpi.org/Products/pdf/appendix_A-C.pdf
Other references/resources:
1. Gagne, R. (1962). Military training and principles of learning. American Psychologist,
17, 263-276.
2. Gagne, R. (1985). The Conditions of Learning (4th.). New York: Holt, Rinehart &
Winston.
3. Gagne, R. (1987). Instructional Technology Foundations. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Assoc.
4. Gagne, R. & Driscoll, M. (1988). Essentials of Learning for Instruction (2nd Ed.).
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Running Head: LEARNING THEORY
8
5. Gagne, R., Briggs, L. & Wager, W. (1992). Principles of Instructional Design (4th
Ed.). Fort Worth, TX: HBJ College Publishers
A study was done in Malaysia to assess the effects of using Gagne’s events of instruction
in a multimedia student-centered environment. According to the study “the aim of this project is
to incorporate Gagne‘s 9 Events of Instructions in a multimedia-mediated student-centered
learning environment to teach an animation course and to study its impact on student learning
(Neo et al., 2010, p. 20). In the research “The learning environment was designed and developed
using Gagne‘s theoretical framework which was based on the cognitive perspective of learning
and emphasized largely on the effectiveness of the instructional design” (Neo et al., 2010, p. 28).
In the study created by (Neo et al., 2010, p. 28) the researchers concluded that the results of the
study showed that the students were very motivated while learning in this environment and
understood the learning objectives of this learning environment. They found this learning
strategy to be engaging and useful.
Running Head: LEARNING THEORY
9
References
Richey, R. (Ed). (2000). The legacy of Robert M Gagne. Wayne State University: ERIC
Clearinghouse on Information and Technology, Syracuse, NY.
Neo, T., Neo, M., & Teoh, B. (2010). Assessing the effects of using Gagne’s events of
instructinon in a multimedia student-centered environment: a Malaysian experience.
Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, (11) 1302-6488. Retrieved from
https://tojde.anadolu.edu.tr/tojde37/notes_for_editor/notes_for_editor_3.htm
Weegar, M., & Pacis, D. (2012). A Comparison of two theories of learning -behaviorism
and constructivism as applied to face-to-face and online learning. E-Leader Manila 2012.
Retrieved from http://www.g-casa.com/conferences/manila/papers/Weegar.pdf
Faryadi, Q. (2007). Instructional design models: What a revaluation! Education Resources
Information Center. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED495711.pdf
Tennyson, R. (2010). Historical reflection on learning theories and instructional design.
Contemporary Educational technology, 2010, 1(1), 1-16
Xiangui, Zheng. (2005). Learning theories and second language learning. CELEA Jornal,28(5),
1-8 . Retrieved from http://www.celea.org.cn/teic/63/63-120.pdf
Huitt, W. (2009). Humanism and open education. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta,
GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved from
http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/affect/humed.html
Kuchink, P. (1999,12). Philosophical foundations of human resources. Paper presented at the
Annual Meeting of the Association for Career and Technical Education (Orlando, FL,
December 12-15, 1999). Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED438477.pdf