Post 1: Learning, Motivation, and Theory

Prompt: Describe an example from your life of when you were taught using each method described in this article: behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism.

I am very familiar with the behaviorism approach because it is frequently applied in my science classes before entering university. In middle school, my math teacher would ask us to preview the theories or formula required for the next lecture and she would go through plenty of classical examples which would explain the usage of each formula. If a lecture ends early, she might leave a few examples on the board to encourage us to practice. Additionally, she gave us several worksheets to practice. Although her class was intense, I had a solid understanding about fraction numbers, trigonometry, and quadratic functions. I applied the similar strategy to my physics and chemistry classes in high school. Working on practice worksheets and practice exams weekly or bi-weekly to become familiar with theories and formulas, and comparing my approach to the standard solutions. It was very helpful to actively spot the differences of different approaches and decide which approach is better for me. Ongoing practice like this has also helped me familiarize exam formats.

I discovered cognitivism during my first year programming classes. Programming is new to many first-year computer science and engineering students; as a result, professors often spend a lot of time explaining what each function does and the restrictions for them. After one or two weeks of lectures, professors post assignments which allow students to use any functions they prefer and reflect the reasoning of selected functions. I also found professors liked to design questions in midterms that require students to point out the mistakes in their examples or explain why the following programs output undesired results. Before a midterm or near the end of a chapter, I often review my assignments and past midterms to see what improvements I can make and reflect on what I have done incorrectly. 

Constructivism is a challenging approach and often requires learners to understand the subject very well and have passion about what they are going to design or construct. In my data mining class, the first project asks us to make analysis based on real life data (many databases created by data scientists and programmers to test their programs). Before the release of the first project, the professor has explained the structure of a database, data types, and common data transformation techniques. As long as students have shown understanding of databases, any programming language, analysis techniques are free to use. At first, I thought this was an easy project since there were very few restrictions. When I started the project, I countered many difficulties including the correct usage of specific functions, proper initialization of the environment, and importing the database. I had to attend office hours and look for official documentation to gain a sophisticated understanding of databases and certain language libraries, such as pandas. Near the completion of the project, I could comprehend most of the new theories he introduced in class. In addition, I have great interest in databases and data mining. From Rachel’s post (https://edci335rachelpowell.opened.ca/blog-post-1/), I also found that curiosity in a subject is a great way to motivate students to learn. Without my interest in data mining, I am not sure if I will learn as much or finish the course with enthusiasm.

One thought on “Post 1: Learning, Motivation, and Theory

  1. I’m really impressed with how thorough your experiences with each of the learning theories were! Below are some of my general thoughts and experiences with the learning theories.
    I’ve had very similar formal learning experiences with behaviourism as you. I remember how, as annoying as frequent assessments were in my STEM classes (I specifically remember having weekly quizzes for my gruelling organic chemistry course), they proved to be extremely helpful in the long-run. Reflecting on this also reminded me of how behaviourism is practiced in non-STEM courses as well. In my English class from last summer, for example, students were assigned a final paper worth a large percentage of our grade. However, rather than just handing in a final copy at the end worth the entirety of that percentage, we were to submit an outline and then a rough draft of our paper to be graded before we handed in the final copy. I found this to be helpful, as we gained not only feedback on our work, but also a better understanding of the professor’s grading style.
    In terms of cognitivism, the most prominent example I can think of in my learning journey was during my Introduction to Nutrition course (which I talked about in my blog post (https://edci335rachelpowell.opened.ca/blog-post-1/)). One of the major assignments students were to complete was a food log. Essentially, we were supposed to record what we ate for 3 days and then reflect on how our eating habits could better align with the Canada’s Food Guide recommendations. I found this to be helpful in grasping the material as we reflected on prior nutritional beliefs and how they should be adjusted accordingly.
    Lastly, I thought that your experience with constructivism was very interesting! I don’t have a prominent experience with this specific learning theory yet, but after hearing the success of your experience, I’ll be sure to keep an eye out for how it presents itself throughout my learning journey.
    Overall, great post!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *