Influences Of

Behaviourism, Cognitivism and Constructivism

On Instructional Design and Technology

University Name: University of the West Indies (Open Campus)

Degree Name: Master in Instructional Design and Technology

Course Name: Learning Theory and Instructional Design (EDID 6501)

Semester: August - December

1

Without an understanding of, hypotheses that describe the learning process, and factors

which influence or inhibit it; without an understanding of learning theories like behaviourism,

cognitivism and constructivism, Instructional Design (ID), which is the ‘systematic development

of instructional specifications using learning and instructional theory to ensure the quality of

instruction’ (Berger and Kam, 1996) would be ineffective. Why? According to McLeod (2003)

it is not a matter of the theories offering solutions to the problems which ID is attempting to

solve, but rather, that those theories are crucial to the effectiveness of the teaching process, and

strengthen the process, by helping to focus it, direct it, and increase its clarity (p.35). Quality

instruction and learning, which is the ultimate goal of the ID process, must therefore be preceded

by an understanding of these theories, and their respective applicatory methods.

This is an examination of theoretical concepts embedded in three major theories -

behaviourism, cognitivism, and constructivism, and their influences on earlier and current ID.

Behaviourism

Behaviourism or Objectivism is the earliest recorded learning theory. It examined

learning more as a product not a process. After a particular stimulus is presented, a correct

response is demonstrated (Driscoll & Carliner, 2005. p. 48), revealing that learning has taken

place. The response may be as simple as standing, but it is something which is observable and

measurable. Learners’ thought processes between receiving the stimuli and producing the

response are invisible and unmeasurable and therefore cannot illustrate learning - hence the

‘black box’ metaphor. To behaviourists, learning occurs because behaviour is reinforced. Either

the occasion, the consequence, or the behaviour itself is reinforced (Skinner, 1968, p. 25).

Scientific, experimental research used animals to determine the roles of stimuli, associations,

2

response, consequence and reinforcement in learning. A few major contributors and theory

contributions to the development of this perspective of learning are summarised below.

Ivan Pavlov (1949-1936) in his scientific experiments with animals such as dogs and

fishes, illustrated that learning can be explained using the theory of classical conditioning. It

happens simply, as Lieberman (2011, p. 40) puts it, “where an important event is reliably

preceded by a stimulus, the stimulus often comes to elicit the same behaviour as the event it

predicts.” This creates a sort of anticipation in the learner. For example, in using folded arms

along with ‘1-2-3-Freeze’ to get students to quiet down, students come to expect that the teacher

folding her arms at the front of the class means freeze and quiet down, and so behave

accordingly.

Edward Thorndike (1874-1949) in his experiments using animals such as cats, proposed

that learning occurs when response to a given stimulus is followed by a rewarding and positive

effect. This is strengthened through exercise and repetition. Thus, in his experiments with cats in

a puzzle box, as described and illustrated by McLeod (2007), the cats’ through trial-and-error,

found a way to escape from the box, to get to the food (rewarding and positive effect), and were

increasingly more effective (strengthened) with repeated trials.

B. F. Skinner (1904-1990) further developed Thorndike’s work. Through his scientific

experiments with animals such as pigeons and rats, he illustrated that learning can be explained

through the theory of operant conditioning. According to McLeod (2015), a behaviour is learnt

because reinforcement is given, when the desired response or behaviour is demonstrated. The

learner therefore (learns) or continues to respond to a stimulus in order to be rewarded.

Reinforcing and rewarding the right aspect of a desired behaviour increased its likelihood of

3

recurrence. For example, in my classroom, accurate completion of a task is rewarded by a visit to

the game corner to engage in a fun but educational task.

Behaviourism focusses on the conditioning of the behaviour and though it is the oldest

theory its precepts are not obsolete, and have since then, contributed to Instructional Design.

In the ID process, behaviourism helps focus and clarify instruction through the statement

of objectives in observable and measureable terms. Therefore ‘students will think’ indicates what

is in the mind, and cannot be measured to show learning. Rather, ‘students will count or write or

state’ are used since these indicate observable and assessable behaviours.

Additionally, it directs the instruction through reinforcement and reward. Reinforcement

serves as motivation and helps strengthen behaviours. It may be verbal (praise), symbolic reward

(stickers), token reward (points), tangible rewards (pencils) or even activity (field trip) (Cotton,

1988). Through shaping, teachers reinforce the behaviours which resemble the target behaviour

to increase the likelihood of learners either repeating that behaviour, or illustrating a new

approximation of the desired behaviour.

Relatedly, task analysis as a principle of behaviourism helps sequence the ID process. In

the process of chaining, which is an application of task analysis, a complex skill is broken down

into a series or chain of respective subskills. The acquisition of the subskills is reinforced or

rewarded and is a cue to the next subskill. In forward chaining, teachers start for example, with

the addition of two numbers and students complete the process while in backward chaining,

teachers complete the last step and allow learners to determine and complete previous ones one

by one. Eventually she reduced the number of prerequisite steps she does and increases the

number of steps the learner does. In essence the behaviours are being scaffolded in both the

chaining and the shaping processes and reinforcement is done throughout.

4

ID using this theory also focused on direct instruction, drill, practice and mastery all

controlled by the teacher. In the use of cats or dogs, experiments also ensured the repetition of

the events to ensure that mastery of learning took place. Teachers still break instruction into

units, teach, drill, practise, and then administer fortnightly exams to determine the effects of

instruction.

Programmed Instruction (PI) popularized by Skinner also was based on behaviourism.  

Using software, the content, or skill was broken down into logically sequenced smaller tasks

(task analysis), allowing learners to respond to the stimulus based on those tasks, and receive

immediate feedback (Harless, 1970, p.1 and Mechner, 1965, p. 102). This was all done in an

individualized manner. Once one skill was mastered, feedback, and reinforcement were

received; a new level was started. The principles of reinforcement, shaping, chaining, drill and

practice and mastery informed this instruction.

PI was done through books but also through Skinner’s Teaching Machine, which was a

device, which revealed aspects of the learning one frame at a time (Mechner, 1965, p.102). It

allowed students to complete fill in the blank activities, and if correct, move to the next question,

but if incorrect, study the answer, and try again (Skinner, 1954). Only one aspect or frame of the

analysed task could be seen at once.

Individualization through behaviourism also included ID such as the Keller Plan and

Individually Prescribed Instruction (IPI). In IPI, students engaged in individualistic, self-directed

learning based on their individual needs working towards the mastery of identified skills and

content (Yetter, 1972, p. 491). All this was designed to meet the a) needs identified in diagnostic

assessment and b) behavioural objectives set. This is still being done, and nationwide there are

5

Special Education Needs Teacher (SENT) who go through this process to prescribe programmes

for students who struggle with the given curricula.

Computer Assisted Instruction was and is yet another manifestation of behaviourism ID.

The computer simply replaced the teacher in controlling the learning and offering drill and

practice opportunities for mastery. Still today, a plethora of flash games like Quizlet and Quia,

are built on principles of shaping, chaining, task analysis and drill.

Lastly, the Systems Approach to Instruction is also a by-product of the behaviourist

paradigm. This approach specifies behavioural objectives and devises plans for achieving,

revising, and validating the attainment of these objectives (Heinich, 1970, p. 123). This includes

models much as the Dick and Carey, Smith and Raegan and ADDIE models.

Cognitivism

The black-box metaphor of learning meant that a learner’s thought processes were not

examined to explain in the learning process. The theory of cognitivism, remedied this deficiency,

and with the emergence of the computer, likened learning and the operations of the human mind,

to the processes of a computer. It focused on acquisition, structuring, storage and recall of

information. Hence, the ‘black-box’ not examined in behaviourism, was the focus.

Learning then became “the mental processes that individuals undergo as they think,

learn, and perform problem solving and decision making activities” (Leonard, 2002, p.28).

Learning thus is a mentally active process which deals with knowledge acquisition, mental

organization, cognitive processing and storage. A few major contributors and theory

contributions to the development of this perspective of learning are summarised below.

Edward Tolman (1886–1959) illustrated learning through scientific experiments with

rats, having them negotiate mazes. He offered the concept of cognitive or mental maps. The

6

explanation was that while there were stimuli involved in getting the rats through the maze, there

were also complex, patterned and autonomous brain processes involved in the process as well

(Tolman, 1948). Rats therefore were able to figure out the maze not because there was a reward,

but because they had created a mental map of it (Yilmaz, 2011, p. 205). Additionally, he

reemphasized and further developed the idea of latent learning proposed by earlier scientists.

That is, that in the absence of reward, learning still occurred and would only be visible when

necessary (Tolman, 1948). For example, students do not get a reward for it, but they learn

teachers’ names and it is only when, for example, they are asked to deliver a document to a

particular teacher that we realize that they learnt the name.

Jean Piaget (1896–1980) observed and questioned children, and to the cognitivism

paradigm, he contributed his Genetic Epistemology Theory. This examines the growth of

different types of thought, knowledge and cognitive structure development, from basic levels to

more complex levels. The first stage is recognized as sensory motor (0-2 years) when people

begin to create knowledge of the world through direct interaction with the senses. People

develop a realization that they have an effect on the environment and things around them. For

example, they note that they can make a ball move. The second or pre-operational stage (2-6

years) recognizes that people use words and images to represent knowledge. The ability to count

and classify is developed. The thirds or concrete operational level (7-12 years) explains that

people can rank items and think reasonably about concrete objects. The last or formal

operational stage (12 years up) is the level at which people think in abstract terms. Thus,

thoughts improve from the use of senses to understand the world to the ability to think in abstract

terms. Structures of schema are constantly changing through adaptation, either through

7

assimilation, which involves the understanding of events in light of prior knowledge, or through

accommodation, which involves changing the prior knowledge to make sense of current events.

David Ausubel (1918-2008) proposed that learning is hierarchical, the “process of

relating potentially meaningful information to what the learner already knows in a non-arbitrary

and substantive way” (Ausubel, 1963 in Johnson & Maddux, 2002). He put forth that there are

differences between rote and meaningful learning. In rote learning new information is stored in

Long Term Memory (LTM) in an ad hoc manner while in meaningful learning, there is

purposeful integration into prior schema (Novak, 2002) and organizes it and stores it in in a way

which makes retrieval easy. His contribution of the Meaningful Learning theory declared that

learning is not always observable and like Piaget, he proposed that adaptation is part of the

learning process. Storage and retrieval can be done through mnemonic strategies.

Such examination of learning, beyond a response to stimuli, has contributed to ID as

well. ID based on this paradigm advises the activation of prior knowledge and schema. Effective

instruction demands the activation of prior knowledge. It starts with what learners know about

the area of study and continues reminding them of what that already know (Omrod, 2012).

Notice well that many instructional design models such as the Concept attainment Model contain

this phase of prior knowledge activation. It is also the second principle of Merrill’s Component

Display Theory, which proposes that learning is more effective when learners activate prior

knowledge before proceeding with learning.

Within lessons teachers activate prior knowledge by questioning learners, using advance

organizers as proposed by Ausubel and strategies like KWL, anticipation guides, the Frayer

Model or Carousel brainstorming. These help activate schemata that students already possess in

preparation for assimilation and accommodation.

8

ID influenced by this paradigm also engages in task analysis but the purpose is slightly

altered. Since learning is hierarchical, instructional tasks and content should be broken down

into little chunks so that earlier learning becomes the basis for future learning and can be

assimilated or accommodated into another, thereby facilitating the processing, storing, and

retrieving of information in the STM and LTM.

ID through cognitivism helped learners develop strategies for actively processing and

retrieval of information such as mnemonics and skimming. Problems, case studies

and projects can be designed to help learners create mental models (Davis & Arend, 2013, p.38)

or cognitive maps. Learning then would be an active process occurring within the learner and

influenced by the learner thus enhancing storage in LTM.

ID should inculcate progressive differentiation both at the lesson and curriculum level.

Top-down models of instruction allow students to grasp the interrelatedness but uniqueness of

concepts, moving from the big picture to the smaller details. The most general ideas of the

discipline should be presented first and then must be progressively differentiated (Ausubel,

1963) in terms of specificity and detail (Beiser, 1984).

This is related to the application of Wertheimer, Kohler, Koffka, and Lewin’s Gestalt

Theory. Tasks mentioned above inculcated into the ID help learners understand how the whole

or ‘big picture’ is related to its components. Jigsaw puzzles are a simple strategy, which help

develop mental models and that kind of learning.

Constructivism

Cognitivism’s deficiency was its portrayal of the learning as passive and teacher-centred.

Constructivism as a learning paradigm was meant to remedy that. This new perspective

acknowledged the learner as more active in constructing knowledge. Learners do not simply

9

receive and respond, as in behaviourism, or receive and process as in cognitivism, but construct

and make sense of knowledge received. A few major contributors and theory contributions to

the development of this perspective of learning are summarised below.

John Dewey (1859-1952) contributed his philosophy of education to this theory. The new

education and progressive schools which were emerging, were the result of dissatisfaction with

the then traditional education (Dewey, 1938, p.18) which educated children by imposing upon

them adult methods, stands and content. Through his experimental school he illustrate that

children would be able to, demonstrate knowledge, creativity and collaboration, think and

articulate thought, if given opportunities it engage in real world, and practical experiences

through, directed living. He proposed as well, enquiry learning. The use of his experimental

school helped illustrate his theory of experiential learning. Dewey’s Progressivism later came to

be constructivism. Students were given more activities roles in their learning even in decision-

making. They had to learn by doing integrating real world experiences needs and interests

(Koch, 2015, p. 42).

Lev Vygotsky (1896-1934) proposed that language and culture influence learning and

how the world is viewed and perceived. They guide our experiences, communication, and

interpretation of reality. Different cultures perceive events differently. He agreed that learning

is a collaborative venture and proposed the principle of Zone of Proximal Development which is

“the distance between the actual development levels as determined by independent problem

solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under

adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peer” (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 86). The more

capable peer is referred to as More Knowledge Others (MKO) but can also include teachers,

10

parents and computers. It is in essence a form of scaffolding. Students, through collaboration

move from current expertise to desired expertise using prior experience and collaboration.

Jerome Bruner (1915-2016) sided with Dewey on the purpose of education, which is to

develop reason, imagination, and creativity (Takaya, 2013, p. 18). He proposed that learners’

problem solving skills differed, and that social interaction as Vygotsky proposed, was a

contributor to good learning. Instruction, he believed, should lead learners through the process

of stating and restating knowledge to increase their ability to understand, change and transfer

what is being learnt (Bruner, 1966, p. 49). Mastery of learning is dependent on that principle.

Bruner presented discovery learning which allows learners to build upon their own knowledge,

while in active dialogue with teachers and peers. Reflection was another concept, which he

proposed.

Constructivists theorized that meaningful learning occurs because of actively using

cognitive structure, using prior knowledge, schemata and experience to create or construct

meaning and knowledge (Gray, 1997). It is no surprise therefore, that cognitive theorists like

Piaget are also seen in lists naming constructivist theorist.

ID using the theories and principles embedded therein, must ensure that knowledge is

created or constructed. Prior experience is a major contributor to learning. It can also be seen

that creation of that knowledge is a mentally active process, which is influenced, by prior

knowledge and experiences. It should be noted therefore that some of the approaches outlined in

cognitivism are also applicable to constructivism but must embrace ideas of social interaction,

language, and culture as part of knowledge development.

ID within the realm of constructivism involves Experiential Learning approaches such as

apprenticeship, small communities of practice, role-play, internship, problem and project based

11

learning situated learning, simulations and problem based learning. These help develop in

learners the constructivist principles of individual interpretation of knowledge, active learning

and exploration of different understandings (Richey, Klein, & Tracey, 2014, p.130). They would

then be alerted to their role and responsibility for their learning, engaging in complex but

realistic problem solving in a collaborative manner (Driscoll, 2000). Therefore approaches such

as reflect constructivism beliefs.

Additionally, ID through constructivism, allows learners to create their own learning

paths through discovery learning. This is made manifest through the discovery learning approach

which has been adapted to the new media and technologies available. Hyperlinking of texts

allows learners to discover and construct their own knowledge (Shank, 1993 in Anderson, 2008,

p.54).

ID through constructivism should slant more towards supporting and facilitating

construction of knowledge rather that communication knowledge. These approaches when

compared with earlier paradigms reveal that they lean more towards application of learning

rather than acquisition. That being said, the level of thought and skill being developed and

assessed is generally higher. Construction of learning leans more towards the synthesis level of

blooms taxonomy of learning.

The abundance of instructional approaches and strategies, may create in instructional

designers varying levels of cognitive dissonance. However, if they gain at least working

understandings of the past and emerging learning theories presented, they will be able to, more

adeptly, prescribe instructional specifications for any learning setting. These theories can serve

as a backbone for design and will help clarify and direct the design and planning process. It

should not be a matter of matching a theory to learning because as noted each theory has its

12

shortcomings, which led to the formation of a new theory. Realistically, designers need to have

a working knowledge of multiple theories and examine which one ought to best suit the needs of

the given scenario and apply it. They will help the designer better match learning needs to

approaches, strategies, and materials to be used. In the creation or selection of models,

Curriculum or systems oriented product oriented or classroom oriented level. Alternatively, in

the design and construction of instructional materials and technology.

References

Anderson, T. (2008). The theory and practice of online learning. Edmonton: AU Press.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Berding, J. W. (1997). Towards a Flexible Curriculum John Dewey's Theory of Experience and

Learning. Education and Culture, 14(1), 24-31.

Berger, C. & Kam, R. (1996). Definitions of instructional design. Retrieved from

http://www.umich.edu/~ed626/define.html

Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction (Belknap press). Cambridge, MA: Belknap

Press of Harvard University Press.

Cooper, P. A. (1993). Paradigm Shifts in Designed Instruction: From Behaviorism to

Cognitivism to Constructivism. Educational technology, 33(5), 12-19.

13

Davis, J. R. & Arend, B. D. (2013). Facilitating seven ways of learning: A resource for more

purposeful, effective, and enjoyable college teaching. New York, NY, United States:

Stylus Publishing (VA).

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education: The 60th anniversary edition (60th ed.). West

Lafayette, IN: Kappa Delta Pi.

Driscoll, M. P. P. (2004). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson Allyn

and Bacon.

Driscoll, M., & Carliner, S. (2005). Advanced web-based training strategies: Unlocking

instructionally sound online learning. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

Ertmer, P.A. and Newby, T.J. (1993) ‘Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing

critical features from an instructional design perspective’, Performance Improvement

Quarterly, 6(4), pp. 50–72. doi: 10.1111/j.1937-8327.1993.tb00605.x.

Gray, A. (1997). Contructivist teaching and learning. SSTA Research Centre Report, 97-07.

Jarvis, P., Holford, J., & Griffin, C. (2003). The theory and practice of learning (2nd ed.).

London: Taylor & Francis.

Hakkarainen, P., & Bredikyte, M. (2008). The zone of proximal development in play and

learning. Cultural-Historical Psychology, 4,

Harless, J.H. (1970). A Technology of Performance Problem Solving. Educational Technology,

10, 7.

Heinich, R. (1970). Technology and the management of instruction (Association for Educational

Communications and Technology Monograph No. 4). Washington, DC: Association for

Educational Communications and Technology.

Koch, J. (2016). TEACH (3rd ed.). Boston, Massachusetts: Cengage Learning.

14

Lewis, L. H., & Williams, C. J. (1994). Experiential learning: Past and present. New Directions

for Adult and Continuing Education, 1994(62), 5–16. doi:10.1002/ace.36719946203

Lieberman, D.A. (2011) Human learning and memory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

Mechner, F. (1965) ‘Learning by doing through Programmed Instruction’, AJN, American

Journal of Nursing, 65(5), pp. 98–104. doi: 10.1097/00000446-196565050-00024.

McLeod, G. (2003). Learning theory and instructional design. Learning Matters, 2(2003), 35-43.

McLeod, S. A. (2007). Edward Thorndike. Retrieved from www.simplypsychology.org/edward-

thorndike.html

McLeod, S. A. (2015). Skinner - Operant Conditioning. Retrieved from

www.simplypsychology.org/operant-conditioning.html

Novak, J.D. (2002). ‘Meaningful learning: The essential factor for conceptual change in limited

or inappropriate propositional hierarchies leading to empowerment of learners’, Science

Education, 86(4), pp. 548–571. doi: 10.1002/sce.10032.

Piaget, J. (2002). Principles of Genetic Epistemology: Selected Works (Vol. 7). New York, New

York: Routeledge.

Richey, R. C., Klein, J. D., & Tracey, M. W. (2014). The instructional design knowledge base

theory, research, and practice. New York: Routledge.

Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories: An educational perspective (6th ed.). Boston,

Massachussetts: Pearson/Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Skinner, F. B. (1954). Teaching machine and programmed learning. [Video file]. Retrieved from

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTH3ob1IRFo

Takaya, K. (2013). Jerome Bruner: Developing a sense of the possible. Netherlands: Springer.

15

Tolman, E.C. (1948) ‘Cognitive maps in rats and men’, Psychological Review, 55(4), pp. 189–

208. doi: 10.1037/h0061626.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: the Development of Higher Psychological Processes.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Yilmaz, K. (2011). The Cognitive Perspective on Learning: Its Theoretical Underpinnings and

Implications for Classroom Practices. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational

Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 84(5), 204-212. doi:10.1080/00098655.2011.568989

16