Behavioral Learning Theory & Direct Instruction

Thoughts of Dr. James Lee of Saint Joseph's University, Professor of Theory & Practice in Secondary Teaching

I believe most of us see learning as occurring in a constructivist manner: students connect past knowledge and experience with new learning and, through accommodation and assimilation, construct new knowledge and understanding. The mind is not a passive receptacle into which knowledge is poured; instead, it is characterized by mental schema that are actively seeking new understanding in daily experience.

So it might seem, then, that the behavioral psychology principles upon which direct instruction is based are inappropriate for guiding classroom instruction. But not so, in my view. We make use of them every time we explain ideas or model how to do something, check to see if students have understood, and have them practice what we have just modeled and explained.

We often incorporate direct teaching principles into our teaching as part of a constructivist approach. Our assumption is, whether we are consciously aware of it or not, that if we tell students something (stimulus), they are listening and understanding (response). While this is not always the case, if we didn't believe it to some degree, we would keep quiet or just be a "guide on the side." We want students to understand, to "get it," to be able to use or understand correctly what we say, and we provide positive reinforcement when they do in order to increase the likelihood that they will continue to "get it." We often give them homework that has them practicing what we have taught them.

Now, we recognize that students bring to this learning their past experience and that the learning process is therefore one of constructing meaning. Nevertheless, much of the time we still want that process to produce understanding that is close to what we have in mind. (It is true that this is not always our intent; sometimes we teach for unexpected variety and originality in what students produce rather than to know what we know or do what we can do as close as possible to the way we understand or do it.)

We want our students to be able to use particular French tense constructions correctly; we want them to follow the format of a Shakespearean sonnet when they write their own; we want them to carefully follow the steps of scientific inquiry. We do not sit back and say, in effect, "construct your understanding of how to do this however you wish."

So while I do not support teaching based on a mindless repetition of information that does not recognize that learning is idiocyncratic, I do believe that we should make use of those principles of behavioral learning theory that help us teach knowledge and skills in ways that support their strengthening and retention over time.

We teach based on an understanding of how the mind constructs meaning, and we know that pairing teacher explanation and modeling with immediate student practice and implementation supports rather than undermines this process.