LEARNING TASK
Learning Theories
| Key Concepts | Learning results from associations between stimuli and responses. Repetition, conditioning, and reinforcement are central processes. |
|---|---|
| Assumptions | Focuses on the learner’s grasp of the “what” through memorization, identification, and association. |
| Assumes learning is fully driven by external, environmental stimuli. | |
| Relies on repetition and reinforcement to build consistent, desired behaviors. | |
| Strengths | Ensures consistency, promotes structured delivery, and allows for easy tracking of performance outcomes. |
| Weaknesses | Ignores learner cognition, internal motivation, and the possibility of varied interpretations of tasks. |
| Applications | Emphasizes clear goals, step-by-step instruction, and measurable outcomes. Designers focus on sequencing content, reinforcing correct responses, and structuring tasks in a way that promotes consistent behavior across learners. |
| Sequenced instruction, behavior modeling, immediate feedback, task breakdown, reinforcement schedules. |
| Key Concepts | Cognitivism views learning as an internal, active process where learners organize and make sense of information. It goes beyond reacting to stimuli—learners restructure their experiences, draw connections, and build mental strategies that strengthen their ability to learn over time. |
|---|---|
| Assumptions | Cognitivism assumes that learners rely on existing knowledge, or schema, to process new information. Learning occurs when these mental structures are activated and connected to new content. Designers must help learners access prior knowledge and use strategies that link current skills to new goals. |
| Strengths | Encourages structured sequencing, comprehension, and retention through organized content delivery. |
| Weaknesses | May overlook emotional, cultural, or environmental influences on learning. |
| Applications | Cognitivism guides designers to center instruction around how learners process information. Rather than limiting design, this focus helps structure content in ways that support attention, memory, and recall. It treats knowledge as something that can be organized and transferred, allowing for clear sequencing and purposeful planning. |
| Use of advance organizers, scaffolding, chunking, and schema-based design to guide structured learning. |
| Key Concepts | Learning is constructed through experience, inquiry, and collaboration. It is shaped by social and cultural context, with learners building their own understanding. |
|---|---|
| Assumptions | Constructivism takes a more open-ended view of learning, where outcomes and methods vary from one learner to another. Unlike models that seek measurable or uniform results, this theory gives weight to the learning environment and the learner's personal goals, values, and sense of accountability. Instructional planning must consider both the setting where learning happens and how the learner perceives its usefulness. |
| Strengths | Encourages engagement and learner autonomy. |
| Weaknesses | Can lack structure and be harder to assess objectively. |
| Applications | Problem-solving tasks, real-world projects, group-based activities, scenario design, and inquiry-driven instruction. |
Interactive Chart: Major Learning Theories
Different learning theories support instructional design in distinct ways, depending on learner needs, context, and intended outcomes.
Behaviorism, grounded in the work of Pavlov (1960), Watson (1913), Skinner (1938), and Thorndike (1898), remains applicable in structured training environments where performance must be consistent and observable. Their view centered on stimulus-response associations helped establish a system where instruction follows sequenced steps, uses immediate feedback, and reinforces desired behavior. Instructional designers who draw from this theory prioritize measurable objectives, repetition, and task breakdown, especially in settings where consistent performance is critical.
Cognitivism, developed through contributions from theorists like Gagné (1985), Bruner (1966), and Ausubel (1968), shifted attention toward mental processes such as memory, attention, and recall. Rather than observing actions alone, this theory considers how learners receive, organize, and retrieve information. It emphasizes schema activation and instructional strategies like chunking and advance organizers. For instructional designers, this theory supports decisions that align content with learners’ existing knowledge and cognitive structure, helping them move through increasingly complex tasks with intention and clarity.
Constructivism, influenced by Piaget (1972), Vygotsky (1978), and Dewey (1938), positions the learner as an active participant who constructs meaning through experience, collaboration, and context. It argues against instruction as passive delivery, proposing instead that learners engage with tasks, apply prior knowledge, and interpret meaning concerning their environment. IDs working with this theory set up open-ended activities, real-world scenarios, and inquiry-based strategies that promote interpretation and analysis. While this model requires careful scaffolding and goal clarity, it allows more flexibility in how learners engage and respond.
Each theory aligns with particular conditions. For example, behaviorism supports skill mastery and procedural training; cognitivism informs lessons that build conceptual clarity; and constructivism supports learner-driven discovery and collaboration. Though overlaps may exist, tension can arise when elements of one theory contradict the assumptions of another. These distinctions urge instructional designers to match their instructional strategies with purpose, guided not just by convenience, but through theoretical clarity and contextual awareness.
REFLECTION
Re-enrolling in Academic Writing (COMM2) dismantled my earlier notion that I had already mastered the skill. Revising eJournal entries for IDT courses made it clear that academic writing requires constant recalibration. Linking structure, citation, and tone to instructional theories reshaped how I construct written work. Precision and coherence serve as anchor points in how I interpret course readings and design outputs. Through behaviorism, I treated writing as a measurable performance. Sequencing arguments, citing sources, and structuring paragraphs became observable tasks rather than vague expectations. Feedback served as reinforcement, prompting revision in a direction consistent with academic standards.
Cognitivism refined my planning. Using outlines, graphic organizers, and schema-building techniques helped me anticipate how readers might interpret my points. Writing became a layered task. Meanwhile, constructivism altered my stance on feedback. I no longer saw it as a final verdict but as a generative tool that allowed me to reconstruct purpose and meaning based on context and intent.
Learning theories stands as an indispensable foundation for my work as an aspiring instructional designer. It clarified why lesson objectives must integrate knowledge, skill, and attitude. Focusing on a single dimension undermines the learning process when constructing instructional materials. Conceptual clarity, practical application, and values alignment must converge to produce material that holds both academic and real-world value. Academic writing and instructional planning run parallel—both demand structure, theory-informed judgment, and foresight.
In future design work, I will sequence instruction deliberately, embed scaffolds where learners can build their interpretations, and prioritize design choices that respond to actual conditions. Theories guide these choices with clarity of intent and fidelity to context.
References
McLeod, G. (2003). Learning theory and instructional design. Learning Matters, 2, 35–43. https://eddl.tru.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/McLeod_from-learningmatters02durh.pdf
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. (2018). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. In R. E. West (Ed.), Foundations of learning and instructional design technology. EdTech Books. https://edtechbooks.org/lidtfoundations/behaviorism_cognitivism_constructivism
Oyarzun, B., & Conklin, S. (2021). Learning theories. In J. K. McDonald & R. E. West (Eds.), Design for learning: Principles, processes, and praxis. EdTech Books. https://edtechbooks.org/id/learning_theories
National University. (2018). Instructional behaviorism in education: What is behavioral learning theory? https://www.nu.edu/blog/behaviorism-in-education/
Michela, E. (2020). Cognitivism. In R. Kimmons & S. Caskurlu (Eds.), The students' guide to learning design and research. EdTech Books. https://edtechbooks.org/studentguide/cognitivism
