IntroductionLearning theories and tools are essential elements in education, providing developers with concepts and framework to optimize learning through their action, supervision, and (where needed) revision. This analysis and discussion examines three primary aspects of learning and development, conducting a comparative analysis of behaviourism and constructivism before assessing learning management systems (LMS). Through this, the following reveals the significance of each area, considering their strengths, weaknesses, and ideal approaches to development and applications. Here, effective learning design needs are presented alongside quality education principles, while learning based on the principles of behaviourism and constructivism can be delivered using the primary instruments of a LMS. Overall it is evident that the theories both pursue optimal development through different approaches, although the constructivist approach appears to be more appropriately methodical as a usable model.
Learning Theories
There are several learning theories, but behaviourism and constructivism are among the most common. This section identifies the basic ideas of each theory, compares and contrasts the roles of the instructors across the respective learning environments, compares and contrasts the roles of the learner across the respective learning environments, and compares and contrasts a range of learning activities within the environments. Myers pointed out that behaviourism is also commonly referred to as 'the learning perspective,' as it is generally a philosophy of psychology which considers all aspects of doing as elements of behaviour. Behaviourism assumes that all theories should have some recognized relationships with each other, but there are no (philosophy) differentiations between private and public processes or observations. Meanwhile, constructivism examines the elements of constructivist psychology, theorizing how people develop systems in attempt to better understand life. The constructivist approach favors active engagement, using activity strategies such as talking (in addition to listening), interaction with other students, problem solving, writing (in addition to reading), and other forms of interaction. These are only some of the fundamental similarities and differences between the two theories of learning.
Examining detail in greater depth, it is evident that behaviourism holds three basic assumptions: learning is developed through changes in behaviour, environment shapes behaviour, and reinforcement coupled with contiguity are fundamental in explaining a general learning process. Here, learning is gaining new behaviours from conditioning, while there are two primary types of conditioning; these are i) classical conditioning (behaviour becomes a reflexive reaction to stimulation, i.e. salivation following a dinner bell) and ii) operant conditioning (reinforcement through punishment or rewarding as deemed suitable). Here, behaviourists measure and assess changes in behaviour, relating responses and consequences to any change in action. Some theorists, however, see the learning process itself as a change in behaviour, and attempt to use this to the advantage of the learning process. Exploring constructivism in greater depth, it was initially considered a revolution in educational psychology, emphasizing the significance of 'active' participation of learners in developing their own knowledge. Thus, this approach is 'top down,' requesting learners initially attempt to improve through complex problems and basic skills as they attempt to find solutions. Constructivism attempts to example why learners do not learn details through listening to teachers, reading from textbooks, or other conventional learning strategies; Meyer asserted that people need to have a solid understanding of the learning environment if they are to be able to design environments which are 'effective' in a learning sense. Overall, constructivism considers learning to be a process where the learner creates new ideas and concepts based on existing experience, and thus the constructivist approach is more personal (despite the greater potential for variations in learning activities). However, this approach may be easier for students as it facilitates their 'free' exploration of concepts with a framework, and the instructor simply acts as a coordinator while recommending that students discover important information through their own actions.
IRMA commented on differences between constructivism and behaviourism, reporting that "behaviorism focuses on a student's behavior in relation to teaching, while constructivism is interested in the mental processes, which affect behavior. A traditional lecture is mainly based on the behaviorist approach while coursework and projects are constructivist learning. Constructivism asserts that learners construct knowledge...Learning is comprehended as the development of a learner's mental models (or declarative and structural knowledge)" (p. 640). Other theory discussed by this author included a common emphasis on constructivism when using online resources for learning; the aim of the approach is to pinpoint a learner's potential to build knowledge while they are assisted in their attempts at building, while it can also provide the instructor with a more organized framework for teaching the students. This is because it offers teachers opportunities to develop confidence and control over material. Moreover, the constructivist approach offers learners additional structure as far as seeking online resources.
Farrell and Jacobs compared behaviourist and constructivist approaches as they are used in the classroom, providing lists of common techniques applied within each approach. In the behaviourist classroom, knowledge is transferred from the teacher to the learner, noticeable changes in behaviour is regarded as learning, learners are perceived as passive (as teachers dominate through instruction, activities, and informing students of memorization needs), teachers are active through exposition, and more is covered despite rote learning leading to less effective learning (benefits here are short term). Meanwhile, in the constructivist classroom, knowledge is constructed by the learner based on their prior experience and comprehension, learning is the search for meaning through connecting existing knowledge with experiences that are unfamiliar to the learner, understanding is pursued in the context of wholes, learning takes place with the learners' understanding constantly being built and remodelled as needed, learners are active and predominantly through an inquiry based approach, learners may work individually or in groups as they pursue development or reflection, teachers serve as facilitators of construction, and less is covered (compared to behaviourist approach) although more long-term benefit is to be had from the added meaning promoted by the exercises.
Still others have provided more discussion and analysis regarding the basic ideas of each theory, the roles of the teachers and learners, and the range of activities deemed to be the most beneficial amid optimized environmental conditions. Dreeben-Irimia compared and contrasted the learning theories, providing some interesting insight regarding discrepancy; specifically, the authors stated "another discrepancy between behaviourism and constructivism is the manner in which the curriculum would be introduced to the patient. Behaviourists use a predesigned curriculum whereas constructivists use students' experiences and knowledge base to 'construct' more knowledge and expertise" (p. 199). With this, in social constructivism, the instructor should see the learners as unique individuals and existing traits, and this uniqueness should not be discouraged at any point during the learning activities or curriculum. Thus, according to the theory, the constructivist learner will be able to develop language, logic, and other important traits in a way which they can relate to their environments throughout their lifetime. Meanwhile, Voogt and Knezek also pointed out unique aspects of the learning theories, explaining that there is a false dualism between the two, because no single (comprehensive) theory has been able to successfully cover what are recognized as the four key dimensions of human cognition; namely, Voogt and Knezek listed these four critical aspects as i) individual nature of cognition, ii) its social nature, iii) its situated nature, and iv) its distributed nature. Here, the authors mention the unlikelihood of one constructed or universally accepted learning theory. In another work, English pointed out that while both theories focus on knowledge and acquisition, behaviourism considers knowledge acquisition as a form of transmission, while constructivism naturally considers it to be a manual developmental process.
Considering the above, it is clear that constructivism and behaviourism are well-researched and developed learning theories considerate of a range of human cognition and developmental elements. While behaviourism focuses on the development of the individual as knowledge is transmitted by a dominating instructor, constructivism attempts to model the process as physical development, building knowledge through processes analogous to literal building. This means that there are more differences in the student and teacher roles than just active and passive natures, as the techniques used to gain and improve the knowledge vary. Moreover, the learning activities also vary to best suit the demands of these roles and approaches to learning. This section has outlined these concepts in terms of fundamental theory and through considering details of application. The following section moves beyond this to consider the potential for organization, efficiency, and general improvements in learning to be gained through learning managements systems (LMSs).
Learning Management System
LMSs provide a unique solution through a unique approach, although the advantages and disadvantages of using the systems should still be considered in detail before adopting LMSs. This section outlines the basic traits of a LMS, their purpose, lists open source and commercial providers of LMSs, reviews the kinds of tools generally found in a LMS, and considers potential benefits from behaviourist and constructivist perspectives.
LMS can be useful for behaviourist and constructivist learning in many ways. According to Lewis and Whitlock, a LMS is a software package which supports learning management in a given organization. With this, the primary features of a LMS are listed as (by these authors): features specific to classroom training, features demanded for online learning, and features supporting offline distance learning. Standard features for all types of learning typically encompass learner registration data (such as user names and personal information), learner progress data (such as test results), and program registration data (such as prerequisites and qualifications) (Lewis and Whitlock). Meanwhile, features that support classroom learning commonly include any trainer allocation, scheduling tables or rooms (including labs and computer stations), scheduling groups and learners, and reporting and timetables. Ellis also presented an overview of basic LMS traits, features, and functions, pointing out that the systems are commonly used for administration, reporting, delivery, tracking and reporting, and other documentation associated with the providence of online education. With this, Ellis stated that an all-encompassing system has been able to address appropriate needs in an efficient manner when they have included features to: automate and centralize administration, use self-guided services (including self-services), quickly assemble content, quickly deliver content, support portability, consolidate development initiatives, personalize content, and deliver online training.
There are many ways constructivist or behaviourist approaches can be applied through LMS, with the opportunities for either approach through such instrumentation being practically unlimited. Further elaborating on the traits and potential benefits of LMS, Ellis reported that LMS types vary from those designed specifically to manage training or education records to those used to deliver an entire range of courses online. While educational institutions use LMSs to deliver courses online, corporations use LMSs for training and record keeping. LMSs can be customized to allow students to serve themselves, and self-registration and instructor training can be among the most important aspects of the system. Other common vital elements include training workflow (such as manager approvals and user notifications), online assessments, managing continuing education, collaboration, and training resource management. Ellis pointed out that the majority of LMS are web-based, because this assures the best access to administration and learning content. Meanwhile, the systems are used by regulated organizations (such as financial services) for training in compliance, a common need. Some LMSs further include systems for performance management, so that employees can be appraised for competency, ability levels, gaps in skills, or other areas; this can thereby be used as a basis for meeting performance requirements, or to provide guidelines for the direction of training programs.
LMSs are commonly compared to virtual learning environments (VLEs) and learning content management systems (LCMSs). VLEs are more commonly pursued in education, as they are developed with specific learning needs in academia in mind. Meanwhile, the LCMS systems are more geared towards the creation, storage, management, reuse, and deliverance of digital content from a central repository. This information is commonly delivered through a conventional LMSs, so LCMS can be a beneficial expansion or supplement of an existing system revolving around a LMS.
Lastly, considering the major open source and commercial providers of LMS, it is evident that there are a range of providers offering LMSs today, but over half of them in academia (51 percent) are provided by the organization Blackboard. Following this, the next greatest market shares are Moodle (19 percent) and Desire2Learn (11 percent). Meanwhile, considering the corporate market, six organizations comprise the supplies given to 50 percent of the market, and Success Factors Learning and Sumtotal Systems are the greatest providers here. Additional vendors, training outsourcers, resource planners, and consultants also commonly supply systems within smaller distribution networks. The LMS market is relatively new, while the majority of customers use authoring tools to create their own content hosted on an LMS.
ConclusionConsidering all of the differences between behaviourism and constructivism as learning theories, constructivism seems more practical for classroom integration and real-life modelling. The other theory appears to be best as a theory, with the assumption that learning is only observable through changes in behaviour being unsettling when taken as a certainty, especially in any environment where changes perceived as beneficial are the sole markers of progress. The best approach to learning should consider aspects from both theories, while utilizing tools improving efficiency, such as LMSs.
REFERENCESDreeben-Irimia, O. (2010). Patient Education in Rehabilitation. New York, NY: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Ellis, R. (2009). Field Guide to Learning Management Systems. Alexandria, VA: ASTD Learning Circuits.
Ellis, R. and Calvo, R. (2007). Minimum indicators to quality assure blended learning supported by learning management systems. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 10(2), 60-70.
English, L. (2002). Handbook of International Research in Mathematics Education. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Farrell, T. and Jacobs, G. (2010). Essentials for Successful English Language Teaching. New York, NY: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Information Resources Management Association (IRMA) (2001). Managing Information Technology in a Global Environment: 2001 Information Resources Management Association International Conference. Ontario, Canada: Idea Group Inc.
Lewis, R. and Whitlock, Q. (2003). How to Plan and Manage an E-Learning Programme. Farnham, UK: Gower Publishing, Ltd.
Meyer, D. (2009). The Poverty of Constructivism. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 41(3): 332-341.
Myers, D. (2008). Exploring Psychology. New York, NY: Worth.
Voogt, J. and Knezek, G. (2008). International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education. London, UK: Springer.
Yount, W. (1996). Created to Learn. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman.
