Behaviourism, Cognitivism, and Constructivism are the three types of instruction styles that help us get through the learnings of our lives.
Read each learning style, and comment or click on the bolded terms you think you’d use in a learning environment. To help you out, I will use my personal experience of studying for a Chemistry exam, to give you a scenario of what you would choose in a situation I was in.
Behaviourism: “Focuses on the importance of the consequences of those performances and contends that responses that followed by reinforcement… The learner is characterized as being reactive to conditions in the environment.” (Ertmer, P.A., & Newby, T. J. 2013)
Behaviourism is how we would respond to a situation based on our environment, and our progress of learning is measured through how we can respond, one way could possibly be demonstrating your understanding.
Cognitivism: “Cognitive theories focus on the conceptualization of students’ learning process… Learning is concerned not so much with what learners do but with what they know and how they come to acquire it” (Ertmer, P.A., & Newby, T. J. 2013)
Memory is the main tool for having a cognitive style of learning. Memory is what can help make connections to compare and contrast ideas linked to what is being learnt.
Constructivism: ” Constructivism is a theory that equates learning with creating meaning from experience… reference tool to the real world.” (Ertmer, P.A., & Newby, T. J. 2013)
Unlike Cognitivism, Constructivism uses experienced memory rather than knowledgable memory. In other words, cognitivism uses other theories and past knowledge to help get a better understanding of a new theory. Making connections through other learning. As oppose to Constructivism, where connections are made from the reality that was personally experienced, to help understand our thinking.
Reference
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviourism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43-71.