Running Head: LEARNING THEORIES AND THEIR EFFECT ON STUDENT MOTIVATION

Learning Theories and their Effect on Student Motivation Amy Pollington Boise State University Dr. Yu-hui Ching 504 Theoretical Foundations of Educational Technology January 28, 2012

LEARNING THEORIES AND STUDENT MOTIVATION

2

Abstract This paper examines the contributions that behaviorism, constructivism, and cognitivism make to student motivation. Behaviorism is a learning theory based on the belief that people learn through stimulus-response. Educational computer and online programs provide immediate feedback, increasing student motivation. Cognitivism is a theory that focuses on the brain development of the individual. If a student is at an appropriate stage of development for a particular activity, then the motivation for learning will increase. Constructivism is a theory that promotes constructing new learning through the use of past experiences. In the classroom, educational technology allows students the opportunity to differentiate based on ability and interest. der to effectively motivate students, a variety of learning theories need to be implemented.

In or-

LEARNING THEORIES AND STUDENT MOTIVATION

3

Introduction Many learning theories exist in the world of education. Along with learning theories, there are learning theory proponents: the learning theorists who are generally classified as Behaviorists, Constructivists, and Cognitivists. In addition to the three major learning theory paradigms, there are other learning theories such as Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence's and Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Each theory’s proponent believes that their learning theory is the most effective tool for student learning. How does one know which learning theory holds the answer to student motivation and student learning? Can one learning theory truly be efficient for motivating students and in turn increasing student learning? We need to ask ourselves the following questions: What motivates a student to learn? Do all students have the same motivation to learn? Do all students learn in the same way? I believe that each student has their individual trigger for what motivates them. It is essential that a learning theorist or teacher take into consideration the unique nature of each student’s learning style when applying learning theory to the academic environment. With the diverse needs of students and various academic standards, it is apparent that the use of a single learning theory is insufficient. In order for students to be motivated to learn, and consequently be academically successful, a teacher must consider all learning theories, applying each learning theory to the individual student or lesson being taught. If an educator does not have the ability to shift learning theory to match the students’ diverse learning styles and varied academic curriculum, motivation will be lost and academic achievement low. The following sections of this paper

LEARNING THEORIES AND STUDENT MOTIVATION

4

describe different learning theories and how each of those learning theories can be attributed to student motivation. Constructivism Constructivism is an educational philosophy that is based on the idea that individuals form or construct new learning from previous experiences. Two people, having the same experience, can glean different information. Constructivists believe that people learn by constructing the meaning of their current learning experience based on what they already know. People learn from the current experience by linking their new knowledge to past experiences; combining new learning to the previous lessons learned. David H. Jonassen (2005) points out that, “Constructivism claims that reality is more in the mind of the knower, that the knower constructs a reality, or at least interprets it, based upon his or her apperceptions” (p. 10). There are many theories within the constructivist theory. The following sections of this paper describe some of those theories, how they can motivate students, and how educational technology and constructivism are interconnected. Sociocultural theory, contributed to Constructivist Lev Semenovich Vygotsky, is a constructivist theory in which Socioculturalists believes social interaction and social environment are the foundation of learning. Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory has three main themes. The first is that socially meaningful activities, such as a child playing with other children, contribute largely to the child’s learning. Vygotsky (1978) states that, “Every function in the child’s cultural development appears twice: first, on the social level, and later, on the individual level; first, between people (interpsychological) and then inside the child (intrapsychological)” (p. 57). A second theme in Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory relates to cultural factors such as language and

LEARNING THEORIES AND STUDENT MOTIVATION

5

cultural norms. For example, Kozulin, Gindis, Ageyev, and Miller (2003) describe a section of a book called “The Teaching Gap,” where the authors of the book, Stiegler and Herbert, discuss differences between teachers in various countries. “In a Japanese classroom . . . a teacher serves as a mediator [between the students and knowledge] . . . In a German classroom . . . teachers perceive the knowledge as their property and dispense it to students as they think best” (p. 1). The cultural and language theme of the Sociocultural theory emphasize that a child’s learning is imapacted by his or her cultural environment. The third principle in Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory is that of the Zone of Proximal Development. The Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) is defined by Vygotsky (1978) as the “distance between the actual developmental level 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 peers” (p. 86). The Zone of Proximal Development has three major components: scaffolding, apprenticeship, and reciprocal teaching. Scaffolding (which is not a formal part of Vygotsky’s theory but does fit with ZPD) is “appropriate when a teacher wants to provide students with some information or to complete parts of a task for them so that they can concentrate on the part of the task they are attempting to master” (Schunk, 2008, p. 247). In an apprenticeship “novices work closely with experts in joint work-related activities” (Schunk, 2008, p. 248). This allows for a novice to work on tasks beyond his or her capability. Schunk (2008) states that “apprenticeships represent a type of dialectical constructivism that depends heavily on social interactions” (p. 148). The third component is reciprocal teaching. Reciprocal teaching is where students take turns being the

LEARNING THEORIES AND STUDENT MOTIVATION

6

teacher and teaching the material by asking questions or facilitating a discussion. This process is modeled to the students prior to the lesson. Socially meaningful activities, sociocultural influences and the zone of proximal development all affect and impact student motivation. If a student has a meaningful social interaction with his or her peer(s) that student will feel supported by the peer(s) and motivation will be increased. According to Kathryn Wentzel (1998), “ . . . social and emotional support from peers have been associated with motivational outcomes such as the pursuit of academic and prosocial goals, intrinsic value, and self concept” (p. 203). Sociocultural influences also play a role in student motivation. If a child is raised in a family where education and learning is not supported, a student’s motivation will consequently be low. The same applies to a student who is raised in a household of education advocates. That student’s motivation for education will be higher. “When students view parents as models and trusted partners in learning, it helps them assess their own capabilities and performance (Adunyarittigun, 1997)” (Gonzalez-Dehass, Willems, & Doan Holbien, 2005, p. 118). If a student can assess his or her own capabilities and performance, the student will feel a sense of pride and consequently motivation increases. The zone of proximal development plays a role in student motivation. When a student works on a task through scaffolding their confidence increases. During scaffolding, help is provided to prevent failure while the student is still working on mastering the task. The student’s increase in confidence leads to an increase in motivation. The student will then be motivated to complete the task again. Reciprocal teaching is motivational because students who are placed in a teaching position feel a sense of power and control because they are asking questions. Many students are nervous

LEARNING THEORIES AND STUDENT MOTIVATION

7

and unmotivated to answer questions because they are afraid to be wrong. Apprenticeships are motivational because students are not in a classroom they are out in the field learning from an “expert.” A constructivist classroom can have a large effect on student motivation and is multidimensional. According to Schunk (2008), “multidimensional classrooms have more activities and allow for greater diversity in student abilities and performance” (p. 255). Characteristics of a multidimensional classroom include differentiated instruction, high student autonomy, individual work for students or groups not assigned by ability, and individual graded assignments which are kept private (Schunk, 2008, p. 255). Each of these factors has an impact on student motivation. When instruction is differentiated, students are completing assignments or tasks that are at a level that is right for them. If the task is too difficult a student will feel less confident and experience a sense of failure which will decrease student motivation. If the task is too easy a student will not feel challenged which will cause a decrease in motivation because it is “too easy.” It is essential that instruction is differentiated in order to increase student motivation. High autonomy refers to students being able to make choices about what, when, and how complete a task. Schunk (2008) states, “when autonomy is low, . . . [this] can hinder self-regulation and stifle motivation. Multidimensional classrooms offer students more choices, which can enhance intrinsic motivation” (p. 255). When students have the opportunity to make choices they feel a sense of control. This causes an increase in motivation. Individual work or randomly grouping students (not by ability) has a positive effect on student motivation. When students are grouped by ability or they are working on whole-group activities it is likely that there will be social comparisons made. The

LEARNING THEORIES AND STUDENT MOTIVATION

8

class, whether working in ability-leveled groups or on a whole-group activity, will know which group has the “smart kids” and which group has the “dumb kids.” This can lead to a decrease in motivation as the kids who are in the lower leveled groups feel less confident in their abilities. For the students in the high leveled groups they will feel a sense of entitlement and may not be motivated to work to their full academic potential. Grading affects student motivation as well. When students’ grades are made public, students who have lower grades will feel less confident and embarrassed and their motivation will decrease. When students are graded on differentiated assignments and the grades are kept private students are unable to compare grades. “Grading [different assignments for different students] can motivate a higher proportion of students, especially those who believe they are progressing and capable of further learning (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002)” (Schunk, 2008, p. 256). Educational technology plays a role in the Constructivist Theory and the effect it has on student motivation. Students can get on a computer, choose from many educational websites that are at the academic level of that student, and learn concepts in any subject. For example, if a classroom has six computers, six students can each use a computer. All students can work on reading at their own individual levels. On many educational websites, the students are hearing, seeing, and interacting with the lesson. When using educational technology such as educational websites, students are able to work individually, at their level, and make choices that motivate them. Behaviorism

LEARNING THEORIES AND STUDENT MOTIVATION

9

Behaviorism is a theory that places its beliefs on external stimuli. Behaviorists believe that all behavior is caused from a “stimulus-response” which means something external (a stimulus), causes a behavior (a response). There are three main components of behaviorism: Operant Conditioning, Respondent Learning (classical conditioning), and Observational Learning. Operant Conditioning was contributed to the theory of behaviorism by Burrhus Frederic Skinner. B.F. Skinner developed a box called the Operant Conditioning Chamber. This chamber had a lever and a bar attached to the wall of the box. The lever released food for a rat while the metal rod produced electric shock. Skinner learned that the rat was able to discern which to push, the lever or the metal bar, in order to get the desired result which was food for the rat. The rat, through a stimulus-response, was able to learn a behavior, thus making Operant Conditioning a learning theory. According to Burton, Moore and Magliaro, Operant Conditioning is based on the principle that “there is a functional and interconnected relationship between the stimuli that preceded a response (antecedents), the stimuli that follow a response (consequences), and the response (operant) itself (p. 10). Operant Conditioning is also referred to in many educational settings as the ABCs (antecedent, behavior, consequence). The next component of Behaviorism is called Respondent Learning or Classical Conditioning. Classical Conditioning involves an involuntary action, called a respondent, produced by a stimulus. Classical Conditioning was founded by Ivan Pavlov. Pavlov discovered that if he presented a piece of food to a dog it made the dog salivate. Each time the dog was fed, Pavlov simultaneously rang a bell. Eventually, the dog would salivate when the bell was rung and no food was presented. Pavlov discovered that the dog involuntarily salivated (respondent) when the bell

LEARNING THEORIES AND STUDENT MOTIVATION

10

was rung (stimuli). The dog had connected, over time, the ringing bell with food. Pavlov named this type of stimulus response Classical Conditioning. The last component of Behaviorism is called Observational Learning. Observational Learning is a theory that incorporates the basic principles of Operant Conditioning but is based on the “definition that learning is a change of behavior brought about by experience, organisms can be thought of as learning new behaviors by observing the behaviors of others (Chance, 1994)” (Burton et al., 1996, p. 12). Many theorists contribute the theory of Observational Learning with Edward Thorndike who tested this theory with animals. Attention eventually turned to a psychologist named Albert Bandura and his “bobo doll” studies. Bandura asked a woman to kick and hit an inflatable doll in one room while children in another room, also with a bobo doll, observed the woman. The children then began to hit and kick the bobo doll just as the woman did, learning by observing the adult woman’s behavior patterns. Stimulus-Response has a major effect on student motivation. Stimulus-Response is the basis for classroom reward systems, behavior charts, behavior therapy and much more. StimulusResponse, Operant Conditioning and Classical Conditioning, are motivational for students because students understand if they do “A” then “B” will happen. For example, if a first grade student completes a worksheet and the teacher praises him by saying “great job!” the student will feel happy, and will be motivated to complete the task again. According to Effie Maclellen (2005), “Process praise [, feedback directed towards the work not the student,] is helpful following success (to indicate that success can be repeated) and failure (to overcome mistakes)” (p. 200). Stimulus-Response also motivates students by use of negative reinforcement. If a student

LEARNING THEORIES AND STUDENT MOTIVATION

11

does “A” (positive) then “B”(negative) will get taken away. For example if a student follows directions all day (stimulus) the teacher will not give that student homework that night (response). In this situation there was a positive and as a consequence a negative was taken away. Punishment is also part of Behaviorism. If a student talks when the teacher is talking (stimulus) the student will miss 5 minutes of recess (response). This motivates the student to not talk when the teacher is talking because she does not want to miss 5 minutes of recess again. StimulusResponse is used in most classrooms in many different ways to motivate student behavior. Educational technology also plays a role in Behaviorism and student motivation. Many technologically integrated educational programs are in the form of a game. This is engaging for students because the possibility of winning increases their motivation to succeed. For example, in an application on an iPod touch, called TeachMe:Kindergarten, the students must answer a series of questions. If they answer the questions correctly (stimulus) they get to choose a stamp (response) to put in a stamp book in the application. The students are motivated to answer the question correctly so that they can get the stamps. This is directly related to the Stimulus-Response theory of Behaviorism. The National College of Education at National Louis University found that students’ favorite parts of a specific computerized literacy program were obtaining prizes or goals after answering questions correctly (Blachowicz et al.,) Students were asked to tell about their favorite parts of the computerized literacy program. The most common responses included to the top of an object such as an ice cream cone and getting points. Many aspects of Behaviorism contribute to student motivation. Cognitivism

LEARNING THEORIES AND STUDENT MOTIVATION

12

Cognitivism is a major learning theory that places belief on the fact that all learning is done cognitively- within the brain. According to Smith and Ragan (2005) “cognitive learning theories attempt to explain learning in terms of cognitive processes, structures, and representations that are hypothesized to operate within the learner.” Many theories exist within the theory of Cognitivism including Information Processing Theory, Gestalt Psychology, Schema Theory and Social Cognitive Theory. How the brain performs mental processes such as memory, problem solving and thinking are all part of the Cognitive Learning theory. Gestalt Psychology is a component of Cognitivism. Gestalt is a German word which means “‘share or form and entity or individual (Hartmann, 1935)” (Winn, 2004, p. 82). According to Winn (2004), Gestalt Psychology is the study of how people see and understand the relation of the whole to the parts that make it up (p. 2004). Gestalt psychologists believe that “we see our world in large phenomenological units and act accordingly” (Winn, 2004, p. 82). Within Gestalt Psychology are laws of perceptual organization which laid the groundwork for Gestalt Psychology's theory on how information is perceived and organized. Gestalt Psychology plays a role in student motivation. Gestalt Psychology is based on the belief that everything is a part of a whole. If students understand that what they are learning is part of something greater then their motivation to complete the task can be increased. For example, if a student is assigned a topic to research such as “wind” the student might be unhappy and unmotivated to research this topic. If this student was told that researching “wind” is a small part of a larger topic such as natural disasters, the student, if interested in natural disasters, might see researching “wind” as exciting because wind is part of something that is interesting to that stu-

LEARNING THEORIES AND STUDENT MOTIVATION

13

dent. Another example is the area of math. Many students do not understand why they have to learn how to complete basic math functions and are unmotivated to do so. Once the students understand that the basic math functions are part of a larger math function (ie: learning to add can be used to understand how to multiply - a rapid form of addition with more complexity), their motivation for learning the basic math function increases. Student motivation can by increased by a change of perception of the task at hand. Winn (2004) writes “The central tenet of Gestalt theory- [is] that our perception and understanding of objects and events in the world depend upon the appearance and actions of whole objects not of their individual parts.” By using Gestalt Psychology, a students perceptions can be changed and motivation increased. Another Cognitive theory that increases student motivation is Piaget’s Stages Theory of Cognitive Development, developed by Jean Piaget. His theory of Cognitive Development holds the belief that a person goes through 4 stages of cognitive development. Each stage of development becomes more complex. In order for an individual to adequately complete certain tasks or understand certain concepts he or she must be developmentally ready. The four stages of this theory are 1) Sensorimotor, 2) Pre-Operational, 3) Concrete Operational, and 4) Formal Operational. The Sensorimotor stage happens during infancy. At this stage motor activity is the main indicator of intelligence. At about 7 months memory is acquired and physical movement starts to take place. The Pre-Operational stage occurs during early childhood or the age of a toddler. During this time a child becomes very egocentric and can demonstrate intelligence by physical movements, symbols, and sound. The Concrete Operation stage occurs during elementary school and early adolescence. Huitt and Hummel (2003) state that at this stage “intelligence is demon-

LEARNING THEORIES AND STUDENT MOTIVATION

14

strated through logical and systematic manipulation of symbols related to concrete objects. Operational thinking develops . . . [and] egocentrism diminishes.” In the formal Operational Stage, adolescence and adulthood, egocentric thought returns and “intelligence is demonstrated through the logical use of symbols related to abstract concepts”(Huitt & Hummel, 2003). Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development plays a role in student motivation. It is based on developmental stages through a person’s life. Each stage is detailed with specific tasks that cannot be accomplished until a person has gone through that stage of development. If students in kindergarten, between the ages of 5 and 6, are asked to participate in a discussion about various viewpoints about “rain” they may not participate. According to Piaget, children at this age, between the ages of 2 and 6, in the Pre-operational Stage, are not developmentally at a stage where they can understand others viewpoints. If a student’s brain is unable to understand a concept they will not participate or will participate and fail. If the expectations were that all students must participate, then the child will feel a sense of failure which will decrease motivation. If that teacher modifies that same discussion to have each student tell the class how he or she felt about rain the students would be developmentally ready to participate in that discussion. If Piaget’s stages of Cognitive Development Theory are not taken into consideration student’s motivation can be greatly impacted. Another theory that has an impact on student motivation is called the Schema Theory. Schema Theory was one of the first concepts that represented the cognitive learning theory. The Schema Theory has four main characteristics: 1) schema as a memory structure, 2) schema as an abstraction, 3) schema as a dynamic structure and 4) schema as context (Winn, 2004, p. 86-88).

LEARNING THEORIES AND STUDENT MOTIVATION

15

These characteristics suggest that schema is the idea that memory is an organized structure and things are remembered by organizing them in the brain (schema as a memory structure). Schema also helps with generalizing an object such as the identification of a cat. The brain does not have to remember every cat but only the basic characteristics of a cat in order to identify it (schema as an abstraction). In regards to schema being a dynamic structure Winn (2004) states, “As we learn new information, either from instruction or from day-to-day interaction with the environment, our memory and understanding of our world will change.” (p. 87). Schema also plays a large role in interpretation. If a story is told about a person participating in an “exciting” activity one person might assume that the story is about a person sky diving while another person might assume the story is about someone going to the movies. Depending on the context each individual might perceive the story differently. Schema as a context can be contributed to that. The Schema theory plays a role in student motivation. A student’s memory, ability to identify objects, the way a student interprets things, and how a student understands new information (accommodating new information to previous learning by assimilation) are all part of the Schema theory. When a student is introduced to new information, the brain, according to the Schema theory, accommodates that new information to previous learning which helps the student to understand the new material. If a student is familiar with the new material the student’s confidence is increased. Schema helps the student to connect the new material with past learning to find familiarity and make that learning relevant to that student. Since the new learning is assimilated by accommodating the old with the new the student will have an easier time remembering the material which will cause an increase in motivation.

LEARNING THEORIES AND STUDENT MOTIVATION

16

Educational technology contributes to Cognitivism and student motivation. Schema theory has been used to develop techniques to make new learning more memorable. If the learning is more memorable for a student, motivation will be increased. Schema has also been used in educational technology to “validate a theory of audiovisual . . . education” (Winn, 2004, p.88). When students have a learning opportunity that involves visual and audio material, student motivation is increased because of the various learning styles (audio and visual) that are incorporated in that material. Conclusion Many learning theorists strongly believe that there is only one learning theory that holds the truth to how students learn and what motivates student learning. Behaviorists strongly advocate that behaviorism is the key to understanding student learning and motivation. Constructivists strongly believe that constructivism is the most effective learning theory and the answer to student motivation is directly linked to the theories of constructivism. Cognitivists believe cognitivism holds the answers to how students learn and what motivates students. Behaviorism, Cognitivism, and Constructivism all contribute to student motivation. It is essential that each learning theory is examined and applied appropriately. In order to successfully motivate students, it is important that the diversity of each student is taken into consideration and that the diversity of the learning theories of Behaviorism, Cognitivism and Constructivism are all considered as an effective way to motivate students.

LEARNING THEORIES AND STUDENT MOTIVATION

17

References Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1963). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66(1), 3-11. Blachowicz, C., Bates, A., Berne, J., Bridgman, T., Chaney, J., & Perney, J. (2009). Technology and at-risk young readers and their classrooms. Reading Psychology, 30(5), 387-411. Burton, J. K., Moore, D. M., & Magliaro, S. G. (1996). Behaviorism and instruction technology. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 46-73). New York: Macmillan. Gonzalez-DeHass, A. R., Willems, P. P., & Doan Holbein, M. F. (2005). Examining the relationship between parental involvement and student motivation. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 99-123. doi: 10.1007/s10648-005-3949-7 Kozulin, A., Boris, G., Ageyev, V. S., & Miller, S. M. (2003). Sociocultural theory and education: Students, teachers, and knowledge. In Kozulin, A., Boris, G., Ageyev, V. S., & Miller, S. M. (Ed.), Vygotsky’s Educational Theory in Cultural Context (pp. 1-8). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge. Huitt, W., & Hummel, J. (2003). Piaget's theory of cognitive development. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/cogsys/piaget.html Hyun, E., & Davis, G. (2005). Kindergartners' conversations in a computer-based technology classroom. Communication Education, 54(2), 118-135.

LEARNING THEORIES AND STUDENT MOTIVATION

18

Jonassen, D. (1992). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3), 5-14. Maclellan, E. (2005). Academic achievement: The role of praise in motivating students. Active Learning In Higher Education, 6(3), 194-206. doi: 10.1177/1469787405057750 Palmer, D. (2005). A motivational view of constructivist‐informed teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 27(15), 1853-1881. doi:10.1080/09500690500339654 Sadik, A. (2008). Digital Storytelling: A meaningful technology-integrated approach for engaged student learning. Education Technology Research Development, 56(4), 487-506. doi: 10.1007/s11423-008-9091-8 Schunk, D. H. (2008). Constructivist theory. In Learning theories: An educational perspective (5th ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Seifert, T. L. (2004). Understanding student motivation. Educational Research, 46(2), 137-149. Skinner, E., Furrer, C., Marchand, G., & Kindermann, T. (2008). Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic? Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 765-781. doi:10.1037/a0012840 Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2005). Instructional design. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Trommsdorff, G., & Friedlmeier, W. (1999). Motivational conflict and prosocial behaviour of kindergarten children. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 23(2), 413-429. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

LEARNING THEORIES AND STUDENT MOTIVATION

19

Wachs, H. (1981). Visual implications of Piaget's theory of cognitive development. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 14(10), 581-583. Wentzel, K. R. (1998). Social relationships and motivation in middle school: The role of parents, teachers, and peers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 202-209. Winn, W. (2004). Cognitive perspectives in psychology. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 79-112). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.