Comparison Between Behaviorism and Cognitive Theories in Tesol

After reading through chapter six, I began reading chapter seven of our psychology text titled, Learning. Learning is something we do everyday even we don’t realize it. While reading chapter seven, I learned that there are three different types of learning, classical conditioning, operant conditioning, and cognitive learning. Classical conditioning stands for two types of stimuli linking providing us the tools to have a reaction; this is the type of learning that involves automatic behaviors. Operant conditioning is the type of learning that causes a change in behavior, in reaction to consequences; this is the behavior that involves choosing of choices. Lastly, cognitive learning is the obtaining of new skills, behaviors, and information through

Within the elementary classroom, there is a copious amount of rules, guidelines and considerations a teacher must take into account. Learning theories such as social, cognitive, and behavioral learning should be implemented to provide framework and boundaries for the children. When incorporating learning theories in the classroom, it is important to have a clear understanding of how they work and how they will benefit the child and the teacher. These particular theories allows the teacher to run an efficient and effective classroom from day one.

In this essay I am going to explore two of the major approaches to Psychology, Cognitive theories and Behaviourist theories. I will discuss in some detail the two approaches, state how they compare and illustrate the similarities and the differences between them. John Watson, one of the founders of Behaviourism, based his theories on the principles of learning outlined by Pavlov who suggested the theory known as Classical Conditioning; he trained dogs to salivate whenever he rang a bell. Dogs have a natural reflex response to salivate when they see food, Pavlov rang a bell when the dogs were given food and after several repetitions of this action, the dogs began to salivate whenever they heard the bell, even when there was not

Behaviorism and humanism are two theories of learning. Both theories are very important, and have many good qualities, which makes it difficult to say that one is better than the other. When it comes to learning, behaviorism does not consider mental processes, rather it looks at our response to stimuli in our environment. Whereas, humanism sees learning as personal, and is dependent on each individual self. Even though the two theories seem completely opposite of each other, there are some similarities between them pertaining to learning.

Teaching theories are as much part of the classroom as the student and the teacher. The effect individual theories have on an environment depends how they are incorporated within the classroom in addition to the influence they have had on the curriculum construction. This essay will briefly look at how motivation theory, cognitive and social cognitive theory along with constructivism have impacted on education and the classroom.

The Behaviorist and Cognitive Approaches to Psychology In this essay I am going to explore two of the major approaches to Psychology, Cognitive theories and Behaviorist theories. I will discuss in some detail the two approaches, state how they compare and illustrate the similarities and the differences between them. John Watson, one of the founders of Behaviorism, based his theories on the principles of learning outlined by Pavlov who suggested the theory known as Classical Conditioning; he trained dogs to salivate whenever he rang a bell. Dogs have a natural reflex response to salivate when they see food, Pavlov rang a bell when the dogs were given food and after several repetitions of this

Humanism and Behaviorism both promote learning and provide an explanation for behaviors in their own ways. Both theories have document success in the learning

Three main theories of education exist: behavioral, constructivist, and cognitive. I find myself ideologically aligned most closely with the constructivist approach, yet for reasons to be explored later in this document, find the theory one that can only offer guidance for my actions as a teacher a portion of the time I am working with students. Constructivism means students don’t just absorb information and understand

The cognitive theory also believes in learning from prior experiences. They believe prior experiences, knowledge, and expectations are key to learning (Learnativity, 2002). The cognitive theory has a great way of thinking. Many self-help books have been written on the cognitive point-of-view. They believe that by changing our thoughts we can change our mood, decrease our anxiety, or improve our relationships. By thinking more positively we can easily quit smoking, make more friends, enjoy our job, pretty much do anything we set our mind to. Their basic premise is, if we perceive the glass as half full rather than half empty, the world will look much brighter. And in a

In this class educators read, researched, and possibly changed their thinking on the following three theories: behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism. Throughout these theories educators must include the social cognitive theory. This paper will discuss each theory as to an educator’s thoughts and how they are applied throughout daily teaching in the classroom.

Cognitive and behavioral learning theories tend to dominate modern discussions of learning theories. Employed in both educational and clinical settings, both have important contributions to understanding how and why individuals learn. Is one approach statistically better than the other, or do they each have their own place where one approach may be more effective under specific circumstances? Each theory has supporters who claim the efficacy of their theory is superior. Comparison of the theories is necessary to determine if one is significantly better than the other, or even if one theory may be slightly more effective than the other. Determining if one competing theory

Because behaviorism and social cognitive theory both examine changes in behavior. Social cognitive theory has its historical roots in behaviorism, but, as the name implies, it has evolved over the years into a more cognitive perspective (Kim & Baylor, 2006). Even today, many authors continue to include aspects of social cognitive theory in books focusing on behavioral principles (Baldwin & Baldwin, 2001). In addition, behaviorism and social cognitive theory are similar in three ways: They focus on experience as an important cause of learning (and an important principle of cognitive theory is that learning and development depend on learners’ experience). They include the concepts of reinforcement and punishment in their explanations of learning. They target feedback as an important aspect of the learning process. Three important differences exist between the two, however. First, they define learning differently, and second, social cognitive theory emphasizes the role of cognitive processes beliefs, perceptions, and expectations in learning. Third, social cognitive theory suggests that the environment, personal factors, and behavior are interdependent, a concept called reciprocal causation.

Behaviorism is the point of view where learning and behavior are described and explained in terms

In the last fifty (50) years there has been significant contributions in the field of education in regards to how children learn, and the models in which learning theories have been developed and utilized within the classroom setting. Additionally, in as recent as the last twenty years the most notable of shifts has been that of students as “sponges” where teachers lectured and students listened, and took notes; to that of learning as a process of active engagement (Cuban 1993). The former paradigm being rooted in and is the basis of behaviorist-learning theories. Essentially, training the individual or student to respond to conditioned stimuli. This method proved to be an antiquated

The very first thing one must know about the constructivist theory of learning is the premise that learners arrive at learning situations with prior knowledge and proceed to take and active part in building new knowledge upon that prior knowledge as they experience new things and reflect on those collected experiences (Learning Theories Knowledgebase, 2012). This theory directly contradicts the behaviorist learning theory in which learners are believed to arrive at learning situations with “clean slates” of understanding. From a behaviorist’s perspective, people learn because as they respond to negative and positive stimuli in their environment (Learning Theories Knowledgebase, 2012). While that may change observable behavior