Image via Wikipedia
As I watched on CBS’ The Big Bang Theory’s Dr. Sheldon Cooper teach a class on *insert highly intellectual physics topic here* to undergraduate students, my mind began to wonder. What has this self-acclaimed insanely intelligent professor/scientist taught us? Yes, of course, I have learned much about Star Wars conventions, Whil Wheaton, and a comic book lover’s life, but what does it expose us, average Americans, about teaching and learning?
I remember watching an episode two years ago, while I was taking my first graduate course, and I was super excited when there was a reference to Thorndike and Skinner, which we had conveniently discussed in class that week! I got my first ever (highly intellectual) reference to the background of the joke! Boy, did I feel smart! (Then I realized how many jokes I had probably missed…oh well…I got one…)
Here’s my take on how Dr. Sheldon Cooper does behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism.
Sheldon & Behaviorism
Behaviorism is a learning theory that focuses on our response to environmental stimuli, and behaviorists believe that all of our behaviors are a result of conditioning. B.F. Skinner is considered the father of operant conditioning, which he based off of Edward Thorndike’s law of effect theory. Skinner’s operant conditioning theory, which Dr. Cooper uses below, states that using reinforcements (positive and negative) teaches someone to perform a desired action.
At first glance, this seems a little belittling; yet, behaviorism is still used today in our classrooms. Maybe not the way that Michael Hanley describes on his E-Learning Curve Blog; however, he may be on to something. For example, as a teacher, have you ever rewarded your students with candy for a correct answer?
Sheldon & Cognitivism
Cognition concludes that how effectively a person makes meaningful connections with new information, using prior knowledge or schemas, affects the success of retrieval. A couple seasons after my validating experience with the Operant Conditioning episode, Dr. Cooper attempts to teach Penny ‘a little physics.’ He begins by asking her to describe her foundation of science to trigger her schemas (or lack of). As you can see from the clip below, Penny’s schema of science was not well encoded and her retrieval was limited.
Educators define this as a pretest to assess our learners’ background knowledge by taking in account their schemas (as described by Dixie_NYU) regarding a topic.
Sheldon & Constructivism
The last learning theory is constructivism, which is also currently a buzz word in education. In my opinion and in Terica Butler’s post, educators don’t have the true definition. Nonetheless, constructivists believe that students construct their own learning. A main principle of constructivism is situated cognition, which states that learning takes place in interactions with situations; cognitive processes do not reside in one’s mind. Real learning cannot take place unless it is in a real-world situation.
Dr. Cooper demonstrates a constructivist approach as he assesses Penny’s learning after teaching her ‘a little physics’ by judging her conversation as she engages in a real-world situation.
One would argue, that since her environment or situation is similar (in this case the same) as to where she learned, her ability to exhibit her learning was successful.
After the Big Bang
So, which learning theory do you believe? Psychologists say that only one can be true. Do we have to pick just one? Dr. Cooper, teacher of the year? Probably not…however, he does know and practice educational psychology theories. So, BAZINGA! He is not so socially inept after all!
References
Reiser, R.A., & Dempsey, J.V. (2007). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology. Upper Saddle, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Schunk, D.H. (2004). Learning theories: An educational perspective (4th ed.). Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Guest Blogger
Logan Prevette has been an elementary school teacher for the past eight years, working with second, third, and fourth graders. She is not as accredited as Dr. Sheldon Cooper, “I am Doctor Sheldon Cooper, BS, MS, MA, PhD, and SCD. OMG, right?” However, she did receive her bachelor’s degree from the University of North Carolina in 2003 and is working on her master’s degree from the University of Memphis in IDT. She plans to stay in education (in some fashion) after the completion of her coursework.
Logan,
An interesting revelation I had the other day. I would like to think of myself as a constructivist in my approach to teaching but I might be a cognitivist in my approach to learning. It’s almost hypocritical. However, I am still trying to figure out a successful play of constructivism with a little bit of structure that I would like to call good planning. I’m not sure if this sounds like an oxymoron though.
Suha, I completely agree with you. I initially thought I was constructivist, however, as I have learned more about the true definition, I realize I am actually more on the cognitive side.
@Suha and @Logan, how did you come to learn about your “tendencies”?
I feel that in the public education world that the word constructivist is thrown around, but the practices (in elementary) are not true constructivist approaches. Educators in the public school setting do not have the freedom (or time) to allow their students to truely contsruct their own learning. My eductional psych class I recently took discussed the differences or tendencies of both learning theories (along with behaviorism). I feel my style is more cognitive. However, I do not see why we have to pigeon-hole ourselves. Why can’t I combine practices from different learning theories?
Logan, I’m not sure it’s a position of pigeon-holing. Instead, it may be a connection with philosophies of teaching and learning or dissatisfaction with existing teaching and learning practices.
When I plan “instruction” I always tend to lean towards the construction of knowledge on the side of the learner, giving general guidelines and many options. I do want the learner to discover knowledge. On the other hand, as a learner, I like structure, clarity of guidelines and expectations. I do want the whole “piece of knowledge” presented to me directly or through guidance and I get frustrated with incomplete “knowledge”.