the learning theories

Learning is described as the process of modifying and reinforcing old knowledge or gaining new skills, actions, and values. The learning process alters an individual's or a group of learners' conduct and character by changing their depth of knowledge about something, integration of facts, relative behavior, and even attitude (Boghossian, 2006). Learning, as it has been developed in certain animals and even plants, initiates a clear following curve in the human kingdom. Learning is a mechanism and experience is not gained instantly; rather, the learner accumulates insight over time and again. Because knowledge is impactful, learning changes behavior, although the impact produced is relatively permanent (Faryadi, 2007). On the other hand, learning has been defined as the recognition that learning is the new performance which results from us making sense of our experience (Boghossian, 2006). Different theories including Behaviorism, Cognitive Constructivism, Social Constructivism, Experiential Learning and Transformative Learning have been hypothesized to explain the meaning of learning. How people acquire, recall, and retain knowledge is described by these theories. Therefore, by critically studying various hypotheses, how the learning process is established can be realized (Faryadi, 2007). Eventually, the guidelines can be utilized to strategies techniques and tools for better learning. Therefore, other than understanding the meaning of knowledge, the applicability of learning theories to a teaching and training context is equally critical.

Behaviorism

B.F. Skinner is an iconic philosopher who hypothesized the theory of behaviourism in diverse proportions. The element of knowledge is believed to be independent and concerning every individual, and that it cannot be influenced from external quarters according to the behavioral learning theory. As such, learners are perceived to be inexperienced, and that learning begins a new so that they can be provided with the knowledge (Boghossian, 2006). Both stimuli and response are two factors held as a core in this hypothesis, such that there must be a change in behavior, or an acquisition of skills that diversify the social personalities of individuals. In the behaviorism learning theory, the process of learning is initiated by the examining changes in the behavior of the subjects under question, having been regarded as the core objective. The acquisition of new knowledge, skills, and comportment or the change in associations defines what the behaviorism theory stands for in the context of learning. With some type of response, the learner responds to the elements causing stimuli in the environment in which the instructor or teacher sends the signal (Boghossian, 2006). The change in behavior is one of the core measures that give an indicator that learning has taken root. Consequently, in the learning environment, students would often receive punishment or rewards from their educators based on the behavior changes of the learners.

Some of the applications and examples of the behaviorist learning hypothesis include repetitive practice, rote work, provision of the participation points, establishing regulations and rules in forms of policies, verbal reinforcements, as well as bonus points. Nevertheless, the behaviorism theory has been discredited because it does not create a suitable platform for the creative thinking impetus or the problem-solving abilities of the learners (Faryadi, 2007). Moreover, a challenge arises when the learners fail to uphold an initiative to change what they are taught, even if they could behave in a manner likely to show that they have adopted the new policies. When the learning begins under the behavioral hypothesis, the conditioning processing is manifested when the natural stimulus and the environmental stimulus are connected. The acquired response is often strengthened in the learner in the initial stage of classical conditioning in behavioral theory. How fast the association is built and the learning is facilitated by many factors, the two of which entail the timing of the presentation and the prominence of the stimuli. Nevertheless, in some instances, the acquired behavior could easily vanish if the extinction process sets in, whereby the association between the stimuli and the learner disappears, hence weakening the behavior change. Among the many elements that could undermine the behavior include the feeble signal that acted as a response to the stimulation process (Faryadi, 2007). Furthermore, the duration of which the response was built matters, as the longer the exposure to the stimuli the more time it takes for the response to fade away. When it comes to the operant conditioning, punishment and reinforcement are considered to be two crucial elements that model the behavioral hypothesis. By relating a certain behavior to the expected consequences, either rewards or punishment, then expected conduct in the learners could be as well projected.

Cognitive Constructivism

The learning process in the cognitive constructivist hypothesis takes place through the information processing channels of the human mind. Unlike the external circumstances which regulate and guide the behaviorism theory of learning, cognitive constructivism among learners is applied internally, and its effects manifested after that external (Powell & Kalina, 2009). Therefore, as an educator, less attention should be given to the observable habits among the learners, rather, the internal schemes and the conscientious character of the student should be of primary interest. Moreover, the behavior is used as a secondary measure of what is internally evidenced among the learners. Either by changing old ones or acquiring new skills, the reorganization of experiences becomes a significant characteristic of cognitive constructivism theory (Powell & Kalina, 2009). Consequently, a mere change in behavior does not necessarily mean learning has taken place, rather, the change in knowledge as is exemplified in memory remains to be a critical outcome. The practical application of cognitive constructivism is founded in elements like; discussions, analogies, Mnemonics, providing structure, linking concepts, as well as the provision of images.

  The term constructivism is primarily philosophical, and hence the viewpoint is a mirror of the nature of knowledge upheld. About the learning processes, one Jean Piaget describes how the relationship between human beings helps then exchange ideas and hence the change in reason. The concept of being a genetic epistemologist is one of the core backgrounds after that Jean thrives to express how he was the genesis of knowledge (Gerstenmaier & Mandl, 2001). As such, the philosophical views on human nature is that the development of all human persons is more related to individual impact as opposed to the external influence for all persons as a whole. Other than psychology and sociology, the other discipline that has been consistently under the effect of Cognitive Constructivism is education. Furthermore, the schemes describing this hypothesis of learning has been founded on the behavior patterns of human interactions, and the experiences thereof. Indeed, the behavior is directly related to cognitive processing information, which is affected by the character of different personalities (Gerstenmaier & Mandl, 2001). It should be noted that just like other people in various environments, the students in the learning setting tend to criticize and analyze the information they receive apart from the direct response to the stimuli they receive. In fact, the cognitive constructivism theory is primary to the behavior hypothesis. This is because the change in behavior and manners is only a reflection of what is taking place in the mind and the thoughts of a person in question, in this case, the learners. Indeed, people think about what is happening in detail, before they eventually respond to what is expected of them. Therefore, as much changes can be seen and realized, it only serves as a reflection of what is going on in the internal being of an individual. Cognitive constructivism serves as a mirror to show exactly what is ongoing in the conscience of a person. The information processing, in a cognitive manner, is engaged when the learners, who are the people to be educated, in this case, students, have the willingness to solicit information and absorb content. The memory of the learner then stores that which is learned (Gerstenmaier & Mandl, 2001). As such, the cognitive learning theories are the cornerstone of the education systems for educators to apply while passing across knowledge to the learners.

Social Constructivism

The hypothesis of social constructivism emphasizes that for every individual, they observe the world around them and become programmed with the knowledge and experiences they come by. Depending on how a person creates an experience with whatever he or she encounters, it becomes part of the learning process. Because learning is perceived differently among varied persons, the insight gained by personalities and different groups of learners is often dependent on the respective individuals (Ferguson, 2007). Therefore, in the social constructivist learning theory, both philosophers and researchers in this discipline believe that learning takes place when people construct new ideas in their minds, depending on which they hold as worth adopting or not. Certainly, it is believed by experts that every person generates models of knowledge, based on what they hold as understandable on their day to day’s experiences. Therefore, depending on the theoretical explanations that have been postured, it is often worth it when an educator listens to the ideas and examines the reflection of the learners on the insight delivered before making a judgment whether learning has taken place effectively or otherwise. Indeed, the general understanding is that learning happens when those being educated adjust their mental models to accommodate that which is termed as new to give room to the new experiences. The social constructivist theory is consequently very instrumental when it comes to the hypothesis that it helps people to develop problem-solving skills, after internal meditation. As such, for leaners to gain positively from this theory, the educator must create room for and establish a platform upon which the learners find ideas and interpret the hidden insight (Ferguson, 2007). Furthermore, it should be noted that learners are often unpredictable with social constructivism theory form of educating, because every individual is limited to their rationale, and hence the diverse nature of thinking, reasoning, and eventually acting. Indeed, when the expectations are hoped to be consistent, educators cannot anticipate consistent outcomes under this form of teaching. The application of this theory is evidenced in areas like; research projects, brainstorming, case studies, problem-based learning, simulations, group work and collaborative learning as well as discovery learning.

  While planning to engage the social constructivist theory, the educators should consider elements like; the thought processing demands, the category of knowledge of the learners, as well as the expected outcome, for instance, the generation of a single answer or new answers to a given problem. Moreover, the role of educators is quite involving, and hence the need for taking into consideration a couple of principles before they fully focus on the primary objective of disseminating knowledge to the learners (Jackson & Sorensen, 2007). Learning entails the sensory component of human mind. The learners will always directly engage their reason and thought to construct models of experiences and their respective understanding. Consequently, the learner ought to do certain things directly related to the programme process so they can gain fully from the established format of knowledge delivery. Secondly, educators should note that learners learn how to be good learners over time. Certainly, the systems of learning have to be realized, even if the learning process has to be constructed in the student`s mind as a primary cognitive requirement (Jackson & Sorensen, 2007). This builds the experience, and new ideas can easily be predicted to fit in a study framework, based on what was earlier on learning. Thirdly and finally, while dispensing the social constructivist theory, the educators ought to learn that the mind is central when it comes to constructing meaning, as the whole process is mental. While providing an environment which encourages physical work is critical, setting a platform that promotes the engagement of the mind too is essential for an effective learning process, especially if the target audience has not reached their early adulthood stage of maturity.

Experiential Learning

Also referred to as the learning through reflection on doing, experiential learning refers to the act of learning and building knowledge through experience. While it does not necessarily require learners to recall their products of the study, experiential learning critically calls for hands on learning, where insight is gained as founded on empirical outcomes. Moreover, experiential learning does not entail a passive form of learning, as is the case with didactic or rote learning, rather, this is an active format of going about the educational programs (Kolb & Kolb, 2005). Nevertheless, whereas experiential learning is an active form of passing across knowledge from the educators to the learners, it is not active per se, as is the case with service learning, cooperative learning, action learning, situated learning, and adventure learning. In most cases, the term experiential education is applied hand in hand with experiential learning. However, whereas the latter often refers to the learning process of an individual, the former categorically refers to the broader philosophy of the educational processes. Therefore, for all the concrete issues bordering the learning process and the learner as an individual, experiential learning is more applicable than the theme of experiential education. Experiential learning is very important because of a couple of reasons. One is that it creates an environment for motivating learners, and hence the increased potency of absorbing new ideas (Kolb & Kolb, 2005). Secondly is that this mode of approach by learners is significant because once learners are motivated, it then becomes the only and desirable way through which knowledge can be passed across, since the internal model of the mind of the respective learners would have opened the micro gateways for absorbing insight. Consequently, learners often have to be challenged to build interest in what is to be taught, while the educators have to bring on board such environment which is termed suitable by the target audience.

The humanistic and the psychotherapeutic approach to psychology all set precedence for the application of the experiential theory. Moreover, both the Cross and the Knowles hypotheses have been founded on this theory, considering that it normally works well with learners who are advancing in age. This is true because if a person wants to create wealth, for instance, they definitely would have a clear choice of which kind of knowledge they need. And this perhaps would call for the studies and books in economics, banking, literature about high financiers as well as on investment backgrounds (Kolb, David A., Boyatzis, Richard, E., Mainemelis, 2000). Indeed, such an individual would most probably read such material with passion and discover more related to the reason for concern, as opposed to a learner who does so because of merely academic or examination needs. As such, the application of the experiential learning theory only becomes effective when the educator takes into consideration several principles. For example, it is critical that learning is more beneficial when it takes place with the interest of the learner, unlike when the program is a curriculum which is an umbrella to generalize the needs of all people (Kolb, David A., Boyatzis, Richard, E., Mainemelis, 2000). Furthermore, the external and internal threads to an individual should be eliminated if not reduced to significant margins, as experiential learning would always profit with limited anxiety and discomfort. Thirdly and finally, the learning process becomes more effective if it is self-initiated and hence the impact remains to be long-lasting.



Transformative Learning

Based on the arguments of one Jack Mezirow, the description of the hypothesis of transformative learning is structured in a way that is reflective of how learners initiate the process through building interpretations and reinterpretations of the learning material. Both the communicative and the instrumental learning approaches are core pillars of transformative learning (Taylor, 2008). The instrumental learning is critical because it majorly focuses on not only the determination of cause and effect but also the problem-solving technique of learning, as well as the relationship building. On the other hand, when different personalities communicate, including how ideas, desires, needs, and feelings are shared is core. The expectations of an educator are very dependent on the cognizance of the learners when it comes to this mode of delivering knowledge. This is because the effectiveness of the information on every single individual is varied on impact. Moreover, meaning and component of structures both are held in lofty esteem about the theory (Taylor, 2008). Many psycho-cultural assumptions and predispositions resulting from transformative learning play exponential roles in this theory while learning is ongoing. Consequently, transformative learning is divided into three critical codes; the epistemic, psychological, and the sociolinguistic codes. The scheme in meaning that the transformative theory of learning surrounds and about judgment, a constellation of purpose, feelings, and belief which shape a specific interpretation, both in the minds of the educator and the learners.

Reflection is one fundamental aspect of transformational learning. This is because culturally, character gained in childhood is perceived to be passed on to adulthood, and hence directly influences the behavior and habits of the individual across a lifetime. The element of reflection is equivalent to the process of problem-solving, and hence a window of time wherein individuals figure out the formula of approach, the premise of the problem and at best the eventual goal expected as a show of having solved the challenge (Newman, 2012). Through such a self-criticizing channel, people are capable of realizing the past, understanding the present, and getting equipped for the future, and hence the effectiveness of the learning process. As such, it becomes evident that by refining meaning, a lot can be learned, including transforming the meaning, perspectives, and the transformation process. Because this theory is very relative to the Cross and Knowles hypothesis, it is often applicable while teaching the elderly persons, just as is the case with the experiential theory (Kucukaydin & Cranton, 2013). The clear application of the transformative theory is very realistic in adulthood. Indeed, the onset of early adulthood is more applicable, especially among the individuals who have just graduated from their secondary education; because at the early adulthood, it is when people are deciding on their career, as well as investment and relationship fundamentals. Practical examples of the application of the transformative theory include the element of curriculum evaluation in schools, whereby the premise, process, and the content of the program is evaluated. The mapping of the curriculum entails the reflection process, while best practices define the process reflection, and finally, the premise is redefined by the literature review and self-efficacy proprieties. Finally, the application would be wound up by comparing the reflection and the premise to deliver the recommendations of the whole program (Newman, 2012).









References

Boghossian, P. (2006). Behaviorism, Constructivism, and Socratic Pedagogy. Philosophy, 38(6), 713–722. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787408100194

Faryadi, Q. (2007). Behaviorism and the Construction of Knowledge. Learning, 2007(11), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.47.11.1423

Ferguson, R. L. (2007). Constructivism and Social Constructivism. Theoretical Frameworks for Research in Chemistry/science Education, (1994), 28–49.

Gerstenmaier, J., & Mandl, H. (2001). Constructivism in Cognitive Psychology. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 2654–2659). https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-043076-7/01472-8

Jackson, R., & Sorensen, G. (2007). Social Constructivism. In Introduction to International Relations Theories and Approaches (pp. 162–177).

Kolb, David A., Boyatzis, Richard, E., Mainemelis, C. (2000). Experiential Learning Theory: Previous Research and New Directions. Perspectives on Thinking Learning and Cognitive Styles, 1(216), 227–247. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2005.17268566

Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. a. (2005). Learning Styles and Learning Spaces : Enhancing Experiential Learning in Higher Education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(2), 193–212. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2005.17268566

Kucukaydin, I., & Cranton, P. (2013). Critically questioning the discourse of transformative learning theory. Adult Education Quarterly, 63(1), 43–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741713612439090

Newman, M. (2012). Calling Transformative Learning Into Question: Some Mutinous Thoughts. Adult Education Quarterly, 62(1), 36–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741713610392768

Powell, K. C., & Kalina, C. J. (2009). Cognitive and Social Constructivism: Developing tools for an effective classroom. Education, 130(2), 241–250. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.3.571

Taylor, E. W. (2008). Transformative learning theory. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 119(Autumn), 5–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace