Behavioral Theory in Education Curriculum Development

Bill Kerr (2007) said in his blog (http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html) that since everyone responds behaviorally to rewards, we are all behaviorists. 

Our class assignment requested we visit http://www.kaplaneduneering.com/kappnotes/index.php/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational/ but, unfortunately, the blog was no longer available.

Fortunately, Kerr’s (2007) blog reviewed the discussions between himself, Stephen Downes and Karl Kapp.  Kapp’s opinion was stated that while behaviorism has its place, the theory is an oversimplification because humans are not so simple as to be a reward and response machine.  

Stephen Downes was noted to say that he was puzzled as to why designing curriculum was based upon behaviorism when the theory had long been abandoned.

I read a couple of my classmate’s blogs. 

Debbie (http://daspringsteen.blogspot.com/) stated that each of the significant learning theories has something useful for the learning process (Springstein, 2013).

Jeanette (http://www.eduweb3.com/) underscored that Kapp (2007) thought we needed to take the best from each philosophy and wisely create an educational curriculum. She emphasized that there are differences in learning styles between learners.  She concluded that integrating from diverse learning theories would produce optimal results for students’ learning.

My opinion is that Kerr’s (2007) generalization misrepresented behavioral theory.  The theory does not say that there are some aspects in which people respond favorably to rewards.  Rather, behaviorism mandates that people most centrally respond to rewards and punishment to the exclusion of other human motivations.

I agree that behaviorism is an oversimplification to explain the whole of human learning and behavior.  However, it does not follow that behaviorism is not useful as a model to shape curriculum.  A benefit of utilizing behaviorism as a model to shape curriculum is that the model is simple and addresses powerful human drives. 

Curriculum cannot be built on a complicated concept that suggests our teaching might parallel the totality and complexity of the human psyche.  How silly is that notion? 

Therefore, while behaviorism is inadequate to reflect the sum of human motivations, it is a useful model to consider when developing learning curriculum.

References

Delgado, J. (2013, December 22). Cognitivism as a Learning Theory.  Retrieved from http://www.eduweb3.com/

Kerr, B. (2007, January 1). _isms as filter, not blinker [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html

Springstein, D. (2013, December 25). Cognitivism as a Learning Theory.  Retrieved from http://daspringsteen.blogspot.com/

Module 1 Blog Responses

I responded to the following two blogs:

http://spencervogt.wordpress.com/

http://devtrivett.wordpress.com

Critiquing Siemens’s “Metaphors of Educators.”

There are four models of the role of the educator and students listed in Siemen’s 2008 paper, “Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers.”

I think the role that a teacher should assume in a digital classroom or workplace depends upon the goals of the classroom or the workplace as corresponding to the abilities of the student or worker.  It is unreasonable to generalize the single best role of a teacher for all digital classroom and work spaces.  For new or struggling learners, the teacher needs to take a more active part.  For innovative students on a roll of creative genius, the wise teacher would not interfere with the process other than to encourage.

In my review of the four metaphors, Educator as Curator balances individual exploration with guided instruction in order for the work process and product to be effective towards a known end.  The Educator as Curator model allows a teacher to take the role that is needed to meet the goals of the classroom or workplace and the needs of the student or worker.

Applying learning to the digital age, Educator as Network Administrator would seem to be a fitting design.  Learning in the digital age is all about the student making connections within the vast network of digital information.  However, the Educator as Network Administrator as an insufficient model because alone it does not meet the needs of the educator and learner due to the lack of a road map towards an end.

In conclusion, Educator as Curator is an optimal model, both in a digital age or otherwise.  The teacher in the digital age, just as in any age, needs to be flexible and in step with the work product of the student, as well as aware of the overall goal of the learning experience. 

References

Siemens, G. (2008, January 27). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers. Paper presented to ITFORUM. Retrieved from http://itforum.coe.uga.edu/Paper105/Siemens.pdf