Learning Theories and the IEP: Behaviorism to Constructivism

Introduction

In education, it is important to understand the pedagogy and historical philosophical perspectives on educational theories in order to fully grasp an educational plan in a comprehensive fashion. Understanding these elements can provide insights with practical consequences for implementation. This paper provides background on three foundational theories — behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism — and discusses how each may or may not be consistent with the thirteen disability categories under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). It also considers the challenges and obstacles these perspectives present relative to an individual student's circumstances, explores how these theories are relevant to stakeholder involvement strategies in the Individual Education Plan (IEP), and examines how learning theories can influence instructional style within the IEP.

Behaviorism

Behaviorism is a theory that originated with the work of B.F. Skinner. Skinner approached psychology from an entirely different perspective than his predecessors. Behaviorism takes a scientific approach based on observable behavior, without speculation about internal processes occurring within the individual. Skinner believed that anything which could not be observed was mere speculation and therefore could not be tested using the scientific method. This approach was largely a response to theories about subconscious forces — such as Freud's id, ego, and superego — that seek to explain inner psychological processes. The basic assumption grounding this work is that behavior which is reinforced tends to be repeated (i.e., strengthened), while behavior which is not reinforced tends to die out, or be extinguished (i.e., weakened) (McLeod, 2007).

Human beings are complex social creatures, and many modern critics dismiss behaviorism as too simplistic and mechanistic to accurately model the full range of human experience. However, others find value in the system and counter such arguments on scientific grounds. Rather than attempting to fully explain personality, behaviorism is, conceptually and empirically, a science of probability — a means of understanding how we can change the odds that a particular event will or will not occur. Indeed, powerful behavioral interventions with preschoolers have failed to demonstrate a deterministic stimulus-response (S-R) relationship (Strain & McConnell, 1992). Nevertheless, numerous investigations have assessed the effects of a broad range of historical, socioeconomic, ecological, and behavioral variables on the behavior of individual children, lending credibility to the approach. Because this approach is rooted in probabilities rather than specific causality, it is broadly consistent with any of the IDEA disability categories. With respect to stakeholder involvement, each stakeholder must coordinate their activities in order to strengthen the effects of conditioning.

Cognitivism

Whereas behaviorism focuses on observable behavior, cognitivism focuses on the internal cognitive processes of the learner. Cognitive theorists seek to understand how problem solving changes throughout childhood, how cultural differences affect the way students view their own academic achievements, language development, and much more (Feldman, 2015). Because the developmental stages of children are relatively well established, this perspective provides valuable insights into the capabilities of a young brain as well as strategies for educating children effectively. For example, in the first operational stage a child begins to develop language and thinking skills and generally focuses on themselves and how the world relates to them. In the next stage, the child begins to consider how the world relates to others and becomes less self-focused.

By understanding the different stages of cognitive development, educators can design strategies to teach children in ways they will find engaging, with much of the focus placed on learning how to learn rather than simply acquiring factual knowledge. This perspective is important to stakeholders because it allows them to select learning activities appropriate to each stage of cognitive development. Notably, cognitive development stages do not follow the same timeline for children with disabilities and can vary according to a child's specific disability. For example, a child with autism or an intellectual disability may progress through the stages at a much slower pace and may never reach the final operational stage. Some theories of cognition regarding autism propose that individuals with autism fail to "impute mental states to themselves and others" and that this deficit manifests as an inability to mentalize, or a failure to take into account others' mental states (Rajendran & Mitchell, 2007). Therefore, the individual education plan should focus on the specific cognitive challenges a child faces — rooted in their particular disability — in order to design an effective and customized educational approach.

References

Brooks, M., & Brooks, J. (1999). The courage to be constructivist. The Constructivist Classroom, 18–24.

Feldman, R. (2015). Child development. Pearson.

McLeod, S. (2007). Skinner — Operant conditioning. Retrieved from Simply Psychology: http://www.simplypsychology.org/operant-conditioning.html

Peoples, S., O'Dwyer, L., Wang, B., Rosca, J., & Camelia, V. (2014). Development and application of the Elementary School Science Classroom Environment Scale (ESSCES): Measuring student perceptions of constructivism within the science classroom. Learning Environment Research, 49–73.

Rajendran, G., & Mitchell, P. (2007). Cognitive theories of autism. Developmental Review, 224–260.

Strain, P., & McConnell, S. (1992). Behaviorism in early intervention. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, Spring Edition.