Blending Behaviourism and Constructivism: A Case Study in Support of a New Definition of Blended Learning

Johannes C. Cronjé

doi:10.25159/2663-5895/8314

Authors

Johannes C. Cronjé Cape Peninsula University of Technology

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25159/2663-5895/8314

Keywords:

blended learning, behaviourism, constructivism, ODEL, WhatsApp, YouTube

Abstract

Definitions of blended learning that refer to a combination of face-to-face and computer-mediated instruction focus on the transmission of information rather than learning. It has been argued that a definition of blended learning should provide for a blend of learning theories methods and technologies. When blending learning theories, behaviourism and constructivism should not be viewed as mutually exclusive opposites. This article presents a case of a distance learning workshop with asynchronous and synchronous learning and technologies ranging from WhatsApp to YouTube. The workshop contained a blend of direct instruction (behaviourism), construction (constructivism), an integration of the two, and an immersive experience of serendipitous learning. Various modalities of learning occurred during the same learning event. Sometimes the two modalities occurred simultaneously, suggesting that behaviourist and constructivist learning can be blended.

Author Biography

Johannes C. Cronjé, Cape Peninsula University of Technology

Dean: Faculty of Informatics and Design, Cape Peninsula University of Technology

References

Ahmad, Shahzad, Naveed Sultana, and Sadia Jamil. 2020. “Behaviorism vs Constructivism: A Paradigm Shift from Traditional to Alternative Assessment Techniques.” Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research 7 (2): 19–33.

Bloom, Benjamin S. 1986. “Automaticity: ‘The Hands and Feet of Genius’.” Educational Leadership 43 (5): 70–77.

Campbell, Anita, Tracy Craig, and Brandon Collier-Reed. 2020. “A Framework for Using Learning Theories to Inform ‘Growth Mindset’ Activities.” International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology 51 (1): 26–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2018.1562118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2018.1562118

Chou, C. C. 2020. “Reviving the Theoretical Relevancy of Blended Learning: An Integrated Approach to Vocational Competency.” Academia. Accessed 15 December 2021. https://www.academia.edu/42818007/Reviving_the_theoretical_relevancy_of_blended_learning_Reviving_the_theoretical_relevancy_of_blended_learning_an_integrated_approach_to_vocational_competency_Chou_CC.

Cronjé, Johannes C. 2020. “Towards a New Definition of Blended Learning.” Electronic Journal of E-Learning 18 (2): 114–21. https://doi.org/10.34190/EJEL.20.18.2.001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.34190/EJEL.20.18.2.001

Driscoll, Margaret. 2002. “Blended Learning: Let’s Get beyond the Hype.” E-Learning 1 (4): 1–4.

Etikan, Ilker, Sulaiman Abubakar Musa, and Rukayya Sunusi Alkassim. 2016. “Comparison of Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling.” American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics 5 (1): 1–4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11

Gagne, R. M., J. M. Keller, W. W. Wager, and K. Golas. 2004. Principles of Instructional Design. 5th ed. Boston: Cengage Learning. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.4140440211

Graham, C. R. 2006. “Blended Learning Systems.” In The Handbook of Blended Learning, edited by J. Curtis, J. Bonk, and C. R. Graham, 3–21. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Iqbal, Hafiz, Shamsun Akhter, and Abdul Mazid. 2021. “Social Sciences and Humanities Open Rethinking Theories of Lesson Plan for Effective Teaching and Learning.” Social Sciences and Humanities Open 4 (1): 100172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2021.100172. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2021.100172

Kurtz, Cynthia F., and David J. Snowden. 2003. “The New Dynamics of Strategy: Sense-Making in a Complex and Complicated World.” IBM Systems Journal 42 (3): 462–83. https://doi.org/10.1147/sj.423.0462. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1147/sj.423.0462

Maharg, Paul. 2020. “Same as it Ever Was?” In Modernizing Legal Education, edited by Catrina Denvir, 147–65. New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108663311.010

Muhajirah, M. 2020. “Basic of Learning Theory (Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism, and Humanism).” International Journal of Asian Education 1 (1): 37–42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46966/ijae.v1i1.23

Oommen, P. George. 2020. “Learning Theories – Taking a Critical Look at Current Learning Theories and the Ideas Proposed by Their Authors.” Asian Journal of Research in Education and Social Sciences 2 (1): 27–32.

Pande, Mandaar, and S. Vijayakumar Bharathi. 2020. “Theoretical Foundations of Design Thinking – A Constructivism Learning Approach to Design Thinking.” Thinking Skills and Creativity 36: 100637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100637. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100637

Parson, Laura, and Claire Major. 2020. “Learning Theory through a Social Justice Lens.” In Teaching and Learning for Social Justice and Equity in Higher Education, edited by L. Parson, and C. Ozaki, 7–38. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44939-1_2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44939-1_2

Reyes, Daniel Erasto Santos, and Aileen McGuigan. n.d. “How the Current Practice of Learning Instruction Engages Engineering Students into Learning in Edinburgh College?” Paper presented at the 3rd International Conference on Research in Education, Teaching and Learning. https://www.icetl.org/abstract-3rd-round/15-470/.

Stake, Robert E. 1995. The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.