Running Head: HOW LEARNING THEORY INFLUENCES INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGNN 1

University of the West Indies Open Campus

Name of Programme: Graduate Diploma in Instructional Design

Course Name: Learning Theory and Instructional Design

Course Code: EDID6501

E-Tutor: Dr. Deanne Ford

Student Name: Kemmesia Roberts-Dixon

Student ID#: 311102132

Date: November 28, 2018

HOW LEARNING THEORY INFLUENCES INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN 2

Table of Contents
Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 3

Major Behaviourist theorists ............................................................................................................................. 4

Thorndike’s Laws of Exercise and Effects theory .............................................................................................. 4

Pavlov’s Classical Conditioning ........................................................................................................................ 5

Skinner’s Radical Behaviourism ....................................................................................................................... 7

Implications and Examples for instruction ......................................................................................................... 9

Thorndike’s Laws of Exercise and Effects theory implications and Examples for instruction .......................... 10

Pavlov’s Classical Conditioning theory implications and Examples for instruction.......................................... 10

Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................................... 13

Reference ........................................................................................................................................................ 14
HOW LEARNING THEORY INFLUENCES INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN 3

Introduction

Instructional design is built on the foundation of learning theories. Driscoll (2005) defines learning

theory as a set of constructs linking changes in performance (results), the hypothesized structures and processes

responsible for learning (means) and the resources or experiences that trigger learning (inputs).According to

Driscoll, “constructs refer to the concepts theorists invent to identify psychological variables”. Instructional

Design (ID) on the other hand is commonly defined as “a systematic procedure in which educational and

training programs are developed and composed aiming at a substantial improvement of learning” (e.g., Reiser

& Dempsey, 2007, as cited by Seel, et. al, 2017).

Merriam and Caffarella (1999 p. 250) states that, “learning theories do not give us solutions to

instructional design issues, but they do direct our attention to those variables that are crucial in finding

solutions”. Hence, the purpose of learning theory is to provide instructional designers with solutions as to how

specific instructions must be designed to meet the individual needs of the leaner while producing the desired

learning outcomes. Learning theories shed lights for designers by providing answers to key questions such as:

how does learning happen? What influence development in learners? What motivate learners to learn?

Thomas (2002) states that, “two important qualities of a theory are "verifiability" and "falsifiability". He

further explains that “a theory is verifiable if the theory makes predictions that can be confirmed through

experiments and if a theory's predictions do not match results, then it can be updated or discarded in favour of a

more accurate theory”. He also explains that “a theory is falsifiable if it is possible that the outcome of an

experiment would show that the theory is incorrect”.

Hence, it must be noted that there is no one learning theory that is considered to be the right one.

Therefore instructional design systems may include a mixture of various learning theories from different

approaches. Learning theories influence instructional design by helping designers to design more effective

instructional systems and also serves as a guide for researchers in their investigations, which eventually

facilitates the development of better systems. This paper will make the case of how learning theories influences

instructional design by researching three theories from the Behaviourist approach. The theories are as follows:
HOW LEARNING THEORY INFLUENCES INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN 4

Thorndike’s Laws of Exercise and Effects theory, Pavlov classical conditioning theory and Skinner’s radical

behaviourism.

Major Behaviourist theorists

There are many theorists that contribute to the theory of Behaviourism. According to Driscoll (2005), “the

notion of behaviourism was introduced into American Psychology by John B. Watson (1913),” who is also

responsible for coining the term behaviourism. Watson promoted the view that psychology should be

concerned only with the objective data of behaviour (Driscoll, 2005). Despite the many contributions from the

different theorists on behaviourism, the main focus is on observable behaviour instead of mental activities.

Ertmer and Newby (1993), explains that, “behaviourism equates learning with changes in either the form or

frequency of observable performance”. That is, learning is accomplished when a proper response is

demonstrated following the presentation of a specific environmental stimulus.

Thorndike’s Laws of Exercise and Effects theory

Edward L. Thorndike (1874–1949) was a prominent U.S. psychologist whose theory of learning

“connectionism” was dominant in the United States during the first half of the twentieth century (Mayer, 2003,

as cited by Schunk, 2012). Thorndike postulated that the most fundamental type of learning involves the

forming of associations (connections) between sensory experiences (perceptions of stimuli or events) and

neural impulses (responses) that manifest themselves behaviourally (Schunk, 2012). He also believed that

learning often occurs by trial and error (selecting and connecting).

Thorndike began studying learning with a series of experiments on animals (Thorndike, 1911, as cited by

Schunk, 2012). He believes that when animals are in problem situations they try to attain a goal (e.g., obtain

food, reach a destination). From among the many responses they can perform, they select one, perform it, and

experience the consequences (Schunk, 2012). He believes that the more often they make a response to a

stimulus, the more firmly that response becomes connected to that stimulus. He explained this by providing an

example of an experiment with a cat.

HOW LEARNING THEORY INFLUENCES INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN 5

In a typical experimental situation, a cat is placed in a cage. The cat can open an escape hatch by
pushing a stick or pulling a chain. After a series of random responses, the cat eventually escapes by
making a response that opens the hatch. The cat then is put back into the cage. Over trials, the cat
reaches the goal (it escaped) quicker and makes fewer errors prior to responding correctly Trial-
and-error learning occurs gradually (incrementally) as successful responses are established and
unsuccessful ones are abandoned. Connections are formed mechanically through repetition;
conscious awareness is not necessary. Animals do not “catch on” or “have insight” (Schunk, 2012).
Thorndike understood that human learning is more complex because people engage in other types of

learning involving connecting ideas, analyzing, and reasoning (Thorndike, 1913b, as cited by Schunk, 2012).

However, based on similar research carried out on both animal and human, the results from the studies led

Thorndike to explain complex learning with elementary learning principles. He found that an educated adult

possesses millions of stimulus–response connections (Schunk, 2012).

Thorndike’s basic ideas about learning are embodied in the Laws of Exercise and Effect. The Law of

Exercise has two parts: The Law of Use—a response to a stimulus strengthens their connection; the Law of

Disuse—when a response is not made to a stimulus, the connection’s strength is weakened (forgotten) (Schunk,

2012). Thorndike believes that the longer the time interval before a response is made, the greater is the decline

in the connection’s strength. According to Thorndike’s Laws of Effect:

When a modifiable connection between a situation and a response is made and is accompanied or
followed by a satisfying state of affairs, that connection’s strength is increased. When the
connection is made and accompanied or followed by an annoying state of affairs, its strength is
decreased (1913, p.4, as cited by Driscoll, 2005).

According to Schunk (2012),” the Law of Effect emphasizes the consequences of behavior: Responses

resulting in satisfying (rewarding) consequences are learned; responses producing annoying (punishing)

consequences are not learned”. He further states that “this is a functional account of learning because satisfiers

(responses that produce desirable outcomes) allow individuals to adapt to their environments”.

Pavlov’s Classical Conditioning

Ivan Pavlov (1849–1936), was a Russian physiologist. Pavlov’s legacy to learning theory was his work on

classical conditioning (Cuny, 1965; Hunt, 1993; Windholz, 1997, as cited by Schunk, 2012). Classical

conditioning is a multistep procedure that initially involves presenting an unconditioned stimulus (UCS), which
HOW LEARNING THEORY INFLUENCES INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN 6

elicits an unconditioned response (UCR) (Schunk, 2012). Pavlov demonstrated this by conducting an

experiment with a dog.

Pavlov presented a hungry dog with meat powder (UCS), which would cause the dog to salivate
(UCR). To condition the animal requires repeatedly presenting an initially neutral stimulus for a
brief period before presenting the UCS. Pavlov often used a ticking metronome as the neutral
stimulus. In the early trials, the ticking of the metronome produced no salivation. Eventually, the
dog salivated in response to the ticking metronome prior to the presentation of the meat powder
(Schunk, 2012, p.79).
An explanation based on the results obtains from the above experiment is as follows:

The metronome had become a conditioned stimulus (CS) that elicited a conditioned response (CR)
similar to the original UCR. Repeated non-reinforced presentations of the CS (i.e., without the
UCS) cause the CR to diminish in intensity and disappear, a phenomenon known as extinction
(Larrauri & Schmajuk, 2008; Pavlov, 1932b, as cited by Schunk, 2012). Spontaneous recovery
occurs after a time lapse in which the CS is not presented and the CR presumably extinguishes. If
the CS then is presented and the CR returns, we say that the CR spontaneously recovered from
extinction. A CR that recovers will not endure unless the CS is presented again. Pairings of the CS
with the UCS restore the CR to full strength. The fact that CS–CR pairings can be instated without
great difficulty suggests that extinction does not involve unlearning of the associations (Redish,
Jensen, Johnson, & Kurth-Nelson, 2007, as cited by Schunk, 2012).
In classical conditioning a learner learns to associate new stimuli with natural responses. That is, the learner

does not learn something new but rather begins to perform in an existing behaviour due to a new signal. This

type of behaviour is referred to as respondent behaviour. According to Driscoll (2005), respondent behaviour

“is elicited involuntarily in reaction to a stimulus”. An example presented by Driscoll is “a child’s startled

reaction to a loud noise”.

There are two basic processes that are associated with classical conditioning. They are: generalization and

discrimination. Generalization means that the Conditioned Response occurs to stimuli similar to the

Conditioned Stimulus (Shunk, 2012). For example:

Once a dog is conditioned to salivate in response to a metronome ticking at 70 beats per minute, it
also may salivate in response to a metronome ticking faster or slower, as well as to ticking clocks or
timers. The more dissimilar the new stimulus is to the CS or the fewer elements that they share, the
less generalization occurs (Harris, 2006, as cited by Schunk, 2012).
Discrimination is the complementary process that occurs when the dog learns to respond to the Condition

Stimulus but not to other, similar stimuli (Schunk, 2012). He further explains that,” to train discrimination, an

experimenter might pair the CS with the UCS and also present other, similar stimuli without the UCS”. If the
HOW LEARNING THEORY INFLUENCES INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN 7

CS is a metronome ticking at 70 beats per minute, it is presented with the UCS, whereas other cadences (e.g.,

50 and 90 beats per minute) are presented but not paired with the UCS (Schunk, 2012).

Once a stimulus becomes conditioned, it can function as a UCS and higher-order conditioning can occur

(Pavlov, 1927, as cited by Schunk, 2012). Higher-order conditioning is a complex process that is not well

understood (Rescorla, 1972, as cited by Schunk, 2012). The concept is theoretically interesting and might help

to explain why some social phenomena (e.g., test failure) can cause conditioned emotional reactions, such as

stress and anxiety (Schunk, 2012). For example:

If a dog has been conditioned to salivate at the sound of a metronome ticking at 70 beats per minute,
the ticking metronome can function as a UCS for higher-order conditioning. A new neutral stimulus
(such as a buzzer) can be sounded for a few seconds, followed by the ticking metronome. If, after a
few trials, the dog begins to salivate at the sound of the buzzer, the buzzer has become a second-
order CS. Conditioning of the third order involves the second-order CS serving as the UCS and a
new neutral stimulus being paired with it. Pavlov (1927, as cited by Schunk, 2012) reported that
conditioning beyond the third order is difficult (Schunk, 2012).

Skinner’s Radical Behaviourism

B.F Skinner, who is the major developer of radical behaviourism, presented a different framework on

behaviourism from all the other early contributors to behaviourism. Radical behaviourism involves the

experimental analysis of behaviour (Driscoll, 2005). According to Driscoll (2005), “Skinner’s approach to the

psychology of learning was to set out in search of functional relationships between environmental variables and

behaviour”. B.F Skinner believed that behaviour could be fully understood in terms of environmental cues and

results. The cues serve as antecedents to behaviour, setting the conditions for its occurrence while the results

are the consequences of behaviour which make it more or less likely to reoccur (Driscoll, 2005).

Carrying out frequent experiments over time will provide the basis for one to observe and analyse what

works and what doesn’t. According to Driscoll (2005), “by Skinner systematically observing behaviour and

manipulating environmental variables surrounding it, he set about to discover the laws that discovers learning”.

Skinner therefore defines learning as a more or less permanent change in behaviour that can be detected by

observing organism over a period of time (Driscoll, 2005).

HOW LEARNING THEORY INFLUENCES INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN 8

B.F Skinner formulated the operant conditioning theory. Conditioning refers to “the strengthening of

behaviour which results from reinforcement” (Skinner, 1953, p. 65, as cited by Schunk, 2012). The concepts of

conditioning are explained below:

There are two types of conditioning: Type S and Type R. Type S is Pavlovian conditioning,
characterized by the pairing of the reinforcing (unconditioned) stimulus with another (conditioned)
stimulus. The S calls attention to the importance of the stimulus in eliciting a response from the
organism. The response made to the eliciting stimulus is known as respondent behaviour (Schunk,
2012).
According to Driscoll (2005), “Skinner contended that all organisms are inherently active, emitting

responses that operate on their environment”. We might think of operant behavior as “learning by doing,” and

in fact much learning occurs when we perform behaviors (Lesgold, 2001, as cited by Schunk, 2012). In operant

conditioning a learner learns from the consequences of their own actions. The basic processes in operant

conditioning include: reinforcement, extinction, primary and secondary reinforcers, the Premack Principle,

punishment, schedules of reinforcement, generalization, and discrimination. Schunk (2012) provided the

following description for each process:

 Reinforcement: Reinforcement is responsible for response strengthening—increasing the rate of

responding or making responses more likely to occur. A reinforcer (or reinforcing stimulus) is any

stimulus or event following a response that leads to response strengthening. Reinforcers (rewards) are

defined based on their effects, which do not depend upon mental processes such as consciousness,

intentions, or goals (Schultz, 2006, as cited by Schunk, 2012).

 Extinction: Extinction involves the decline of response strength due to non-reinforcement. Students

who raise their hands in class but never get called on may stop raising their hands.

 Primary and Secondary Reinforcers: Stimuli such as food, water, and shelter are called primary

reinforcers because they are necessary for survival. Secondary reinforcers are stimuli that become

conditioned through their association with primary reinforcers.

 Premack Principle: The Premack Principle says that the opportunity to engage in a more valued

activity reinforces engaging in a less valued activity, where “value” is defined in terms of the amount of

responding or time spent on the activity in the absence of reinforcement.

HOW LEARNING THEORY INFLUENCES INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN 9

 Punishment: Punishment decreases the future likelihood of responding to a stimulus. Punishment may

involve withdrawing a positive reinforcer or presenting a negative reinforcer following a response,

Reinforcement can either be positive or negative. Positive reinforcement involves presenting a stimulus, or

adding something to a situation, following a response, which increases the future likelihood of that response

occurring in that situation (Schunk, 2012). Negative reinforcement involves removing a stimulus, or taking

something away from a situation following a response, which increases the future likelihood that the response

will occur in that situation (Schunk, 2012).

Implications and Examples for instruction

According to Ertmer and Newby (1993), “many of the basic assumptions and characteristics of

behaviourism are embedded in current instructional design practices”. They explain that “behaviourism was

used as the basis for designing many of the early audio-visual materials and gave rise to many related

teaching strategies”. The principlesof behaviourism is widely used in the education system. According to

Tomic (1993) “in the 1950s a number of educational technologies were developed that are still applied on a

large scale. Programmed instruction is one of these technologies, perhaps the most famous direct

application of behaviourism approach

in education. In addition to the principle of shaping, programmed instruction also applies to the principle of

faultless learning in the design of educational material”.

A second application of the behaviourist principles of psychology in education presented by Tomic

(1993) is the strategy of mastery learning. This strategy is based on the cumulative nature of learning. It states

expressively that each and every student must have mastered every unit of the curriculum at a minimum level

before moving on to a new unit.

HOW LEARNING THEORY INFLUENCES INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN 10

The third application in education presented by Tomic (1993) is behaviour modification in which the

principles of reinforcement are used to help maintain order and to change the behaviour of students from

undesirable to desirable.

Some of the strategies that are associated with the behaviourist theory are direct approach, demonstration and

drill and practice. These strategies can be seen in action in the traditional classroom setting where the teacher

acts as a “Sage on the Stage” and the learners are passive.

Thorndike’s Laws of Exercise and Effects theory implications and Examples for instruction

Thorndike’s theory is also applicable to instruction. Thorndike wrote books that addressed topics such as

educational goals, learning processes, teaching methods, curricular sequences, and techniques for assessing

educational outcomes (Hilgard, 1996; Mayer, 2003; Thorndike, 1906, 1912; Thorndike & Gates, 1929, as cited

by Schunk, 2012). Two of Thorndike’s contributions to education presented by Schunk (2012) are as follows:

 Principles of Teaching. Teachers should help students form good habits.

Sequence of Curricula: Thorndike and Gates (1929, as cited by Schunk, 2012) urged that knowledge and

skills be taught with different subjects. For example, when teaching the concept of measurement in

mathematics, teachers can link the concepts of measurement to other subjects such as clothing and textile,

science, technical drawing and food and nutrition. By doing this, students are able to see how measurement

is applied in clothing when cutting fabrics and in food and nutrition when baking.

Pavlov’s Classical Conditioning theory implications and Examples for instruction

Pavlov (1932a, 1934, as cited by Schunk, 2012) applied classical conditioning principles to abnormal

behavior and discussed how neuroses and other pathological states might develop. His views were speculative

and unsubstantiated, but classical conditioning principles have been applied by others to condition emotional

reactions.

An example of Pavlov’s theory in action presented by Schunk (2012) is:

HOW LEARNING THEORY INFLUENCES INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN 11

 Children entering kindergarten or first grade may possess fears related to the new experiences. At the

beginning of the school year, primary teachers might develop procedures to desensitize some of the

children’s fears. On the first few days of school, the teacher might plan fun but relatively calm activities

involving students getting to know their teacher, classmates, room, and school building.

Skinner’s Radical Behaviourism theory implications and Examples for instruction

According to Driscoll (2005) few would argue that radical behaviourism has had profound impact not only

in psychology but on instruction as well. She further explains that its influence continues to be felt in fields

ranging from clinical therapy to instructional design. Radical behaviourism may be applied to instruction or the

education system in a number of ways. This theory may be applied to areas such as:

 Behaviour modification  Contingency contracts

 Instructional objectives  Personalised system of instruction (PSI)

Some examples of Radical behaviourism theory in action presented by Schunk (2012) are:

 Behavioral Objectives: as teachers prepare lesson plans, it is important that they decide on specific

behavioral objectives and plan activities to assist students in mastering these objectives. Instead of an art

teacher planning a lesson with the objective, “Have students completed a pen-and-ink drawing of the

front of the building,” the teacher should decide on the major objective for the students to master. Is it to

use pen and ink or to draw the front of the school building? The objective may be better stated as

follows: “Have the students draw the major lines of the front of the building in correct perspective

(materials/medium: drawing paper, pens, ink).”

 Contingency Contracting: Assume that Kathy Stone has tried unsuccessfully to apply several

motivational techniques to encourage James, a student in her class, to complete work in language arts.

She and James might jointly develop a contract to address the inappropriate behaviors. They should

discuss the problem, identify the desired behavior, and list the consequences and time frame for

fulfilling the terms of the contract.

HOW LEARNING THEORY INFLUENCES INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN 12

Behavior Modification: a teacher might use shaping to address a specific annoying behavior. Kathy Stone

has been having problems with Erik, who continually pushes and shoves other students when the class gets

in line to go somewhere in the building. When the class is going only a short distance, Mrs. Stone could

inform Erik that if he stays in line without pushing and shoving, he will be the line leader on the way back

to the class; however, if he pushes or shoves, he immediately will be removed from the line. This procedure

can be repeated until Erik can handle short distances. Mrs. Stone then can allow him to walk with the class

for progressively longer distances until he can behave in line for any distance.

Positive and Negative Reinforcement: Teachers can use positive and negative reinforcement to motivate

students to master skills and spend more time on task. For example, while teaching concepts in a science

unit, a teacher might ask students to complete questions at the end of the chapter. The teacher also might set

up activity centers around the room that involve hands-on experiments related to the lesson. Students would

circulate and complete the experiments contingent on their successfully answering the chapter questions

(positive reinforcement). Students who complete 80% of the questions correctly and who participate in a

minimum of two experiments do not have to complete homework. This would function as negative

reinforcement to the extent that students perceive homework as a negative reinforcer.

Ertmer and Newby (1993) explains that more recent examples other than Skinner’s teaching machines and

programmed text include principles utilized within computer-assisted instruction (CAI) and mastery

learning. The principles of behaviourist theory can be observed through online learning environments such

as Go GSAT. GoGSAT provides educational games, thousands of practice questions, topic specific tests,

study guides, topic specific notes, animated notes, pre-tests and post-tests for all the topics on the grades 4-

6 curricula in subjects such as math and Language Arts. This type of setting facilitates drill and practice and

also reinforcement. Two screen shots of the online GoGSAT environment can be seen below.
HOW LEARNING THEORY INFLUENCES INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN 13

Conclusion

In a behaviourism setting, “the learner is characterized as being reactive to conditions in the

environment as opposed to taking an active role in discovering the environment” (Ertmer and Newby,

1993). According to the behavioursist theory, learning is accomplished when a proper response is

demonstrated following the presentation of a specific environmental stimulus (Ertmer and Newby, 1993).

Based on the research that was done on the behaviourist theory, as a math teacher who also has the task to

design instruction, I could make the connection of how behaviourism influences instructional design. I was

able to relate to aspects of it such as behaviour modification and even how some lessons are being plan and

taught in my work environment. I also use the positive reinforcement in my math classes to motivate my
HOW LEARNING THEORY INFLUENCES INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN 14

students. The applications and examples presented in this paper provided the affirmation that the

behaviourist theory influences instructional design.

Reference

Driscoll, M. (2005). Introduction to Theories of Learning and Instruction. Psychology of Learning for

Instruction (3rd ed.) (p.1). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Driscoll, M. (2005). Radical Behaviourism. Psychology of Learning for Instruction (3rd ed.) (pp. 29-

69).Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Ertmer, P.A, & Newby T. J. (1993). In Behaviourism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing critical features

from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4)

Merriam and Caffarella (1999 p. 250). Introduction to Learning Theory and Instructional Design (Course

material University of the West Indies Open Campus) Retrieved from

https://2018.tle.courses.open.uwi.edu/pluginfile.php/25583/mod_resource/content/1/EDID6501_Module

_1_Introduction_to_learning_theory_and_instructional_theory_rev2.pdf

Seel,, N., Lehmann, T., Blumschein, P. and Podolskiy, O. (2017). Instructional Design for Learning

Theoretical Foundations. [online] Sensepublishers.com. Available at:

https://www.sensepublishers.com/media/3115-instructional-design-for-learning.pdf [

Schunk Dale. H. (2012). Learning theories an Educational Perspective (6th.ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Thomas (2002). ). Introduction to Learning Theory and Instructional Design (Course material University of the

West Indies Open Campus) Retrieved from

https://2018.tle.courses.open.uwi.edu/pluginfile.php/25583/mod_resource/content/1/EDID6501_Module

_1_Introduction_to_learning_theory_and_instructional_theory_rev2.pdf

Tomic, W. (1993). Behaviourism and Cognitivism in Education. [online] Dspace.ou.nl. Available at:

https://dspace.ou.nl/bitstream/1820/3210/1/BEHAVIORISM%20AND%20COGNITIVISM%20IN%20EDUC

ATION