Analysis of Constructivism and Behaviorism in Instructional Design

This assignment delves into the contrasting educational philosophies of constructivism and behaviorism, exploring their core principles and applications in instructional design. The student examines how these seemingly opposing ideologies can be integrated effectively, citing examples like computer game design where behavioral elements (rewards) reinforce constructivist learning (adaptation and implementation of ideas). The assignment further analyzes a case study involving Beth Owens, who faces the challenge of transitioning a culinary arts program from a behaviorist approach to a more constructivist model, emphasizing the need for flexibility and student-centered learning. References include key articles by Ertmer and Newby, and Ertmer, Quinn, and Glazewski, providing a comprehensive understanding of the topic and practical suggestions for educators navigating this philosophical landscape.

Running head: CONSTRUCTIVISM AND BEHAVIORISM
Constructivism and Behaviorism
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1CONSTRUCTIVISM AND BEHAVIORISM
After reading Ertmer and Newby's (2013) article, please answer the following question:
Constructivism and behaviorism are often presented as competing philosophies, yet
many designers seek to include elements of both approaches in their practice. How can
that be done while maintaining foundational cohesion in philosophy? Feel free to
include an example to illustrate your opinion(s).
As per the article suggests, Constructivism and Behaviourism are described as
opposing ideologies. Where behaviourism is a concept concentrating mostly on the
consequences of stimuli, constructivism theory develops based on the stages of a human life
(Ertmer & Newby, 2013). It is believed that in the earliest stage of life, a child imitates and
adapts to the environment around him. Later, with the advancement of age, the assimilations
are extended by implementing more experiences and adjusting to the pre-adapted skills,
which are more mobile for a better coordination based on the individual. This is a
constructivism theory of learning (Ertmer & Newby, 2013). On the other hand, behaviourism
is based on the response of an individual derived from external stimuli.
Therefore, both these ideologies are contradictory to each other. However, both of
these could be implemented into the instructional designing arena. Adaptation of
behaviourism can be beneficiary too, even if it depends on responding to stimulus. Computer
Assisted Instructional Software or simply the computer game designing are an example
where the implementation of both behavioural and constructive ideologies are seen (Ertmer &
Newby, 2013). Every game at first comes with a tutorial, which is generalised. With the
advancement of the stages in the game, the user can adapt and implement ideas to proceed
further. This constructivism can be implemented in a computer game. Again, it is seen that
the user receives a reward for passing one stage and proceeding to the next. This reward
works as a stimulus and passing on to the next step is a process that would occur even

2CONSTRUCTIVISM AND BEHAVIORISM
without the reward, but it enhanced the urge of the users to pass on to the next stage even
more.
Thus, the two contradicting ideologies exist simultaneously in instructional designing
keeping the basic cohesion of philosophy intact.
After reading Ertmer and Quinn's (2013) article and case study #16, what suggestions
do you have for Beth for how to deal with her perceived conflict between constructivist
and behavioral approaches to instruction?
From the case study, it is evident that the meeting of Beth Owens with the institution
dean Carlton Jacobs involved a basic idea of transforming a behaviourist approach of
teaching to a constructive approach (Ertmer, Quinn & Glazewski, 2017). The dean had
involved Beth in this meeting, as her approach is more of a constructive teaching and
appreciated by everyone in the institution. Her teaching style is adaptive to the changing
academic programs.
The Dean had informed her that the decision-making panel would like to ask for her
contribution since her style of studying their program was one of the highest priorities
amongst the institution management body. The Dean wants her to take over the review of the
smallest program within the school, the culinary arts program. This was because the Chef
Gerhard Reiner was informed to be a taskmaster and an authoritarian, who made the students
suffer a lot. According to studies, this has proven to be a behaviourist approach towards the
teaching styles (Duke, Harper & Johnston, 2013). However, even if Chef Reiner was the best
in the business and taught both the introductory and upper-level classes, his approach was
inflexible that could not suffice the changing academic structure. The students had
complaints about the teaching method and left the course midway.

3CONSTRUCTIVISM AND BEHAVIORISM
The only way Beth could mend this was by changing the approach of teaching from
behaviourist to constructive. This could be done when knowledge is acquired with stability
and cognition being challenged directly (Chen, 2014). If Chef Reiner becomes more flexible,
the problem could be solved as the students would not have to follow a strict and painful
teaching process.

4CONSTRUCTIVISM AND BEHAVIORISM
References
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing
critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement
Quarterly, 26(2), 43-71.
Ertmer, P. A., Quinn, J. A., & Glazewski, K. D. (2017). The ID casebook: Case studies in
instructional design. Routledge.
Duke, B., Harper, G., & Johnston, M. (2013). Connectivism as a digital age learning
theory. The International HETL Review, 2013(Special Issue), 4-13.
Chen, S. J. (2014). Instructional design strategies for intensive online courses: An objectivist-
constructivist blended approach. Journal of interactive online learning, 13(1).