As far as the learning of Science is concerned, the past two decades have been dominated by two strong theories of learning: the first, the behaviourist learning theory, emphasizing the factual recall of Science content to the near exclusion of the knowledge-generation process; and the second, the constructivist learning theory which emphasizes the learners’ personal construction of knowledge (Ralenala, 2003:65). These theories are explained in detail below:
2.8.2 The Behaviourist Theory
The first coherent conception of learning was the behaviourist conception based on the work of Pavlov in the Soviet Union and Skinner in the United States. This conception says that there is an objective world from which people form associations in their minds and these people seek the truth by matching these associations (in their minds) with what is presented by the world around them. If these associations match each other, then that person is described as having gained knowledge, which according to them is equivalent to learning. And if these items do not match, then learning is perceived as having not taken place (Monk & Dillon, 2000:15).
This thinking originates from the popular but faulty belief that academic texts particularly in the hard Sciences are a series of impersonal statements of facts which add up to the truth. This theory regards learning as a mechanical process of habit-response sequence. Teaching based on the behaviourist view of Science attempts to transmit to learners, concepts that are precise and unambiguous, using language capable of transferring ideas from experts to novice (educator to learner) with precision.
The researcher is of the opinion that educators are likely to support the behaviourist way of presenting knowledge which discourages learners from asking questions since they (learners) will not know what to ask. All they can do is to commit this information to rote learning. This is an unhelpful way of learning and teaching Science. If learners come to classes with ideas about their world which already make sense to them, then teaching needs to interact with those ideas, first by encouraging their declaration and then by promoting consideration of whether other ideas make sense.
47
The practice of encouraging learners to make use of their prior knowledge when they read is very uncommon among many traditionally African schools where the textbook and the educator’s notes are the “be-all” of knowledge. Learners are not only encouraged but urged to memorize and reproduce information verbatim (Ralenala, 2003:67).
This approach takes away construction of knowledge on the part of the learner and should be discouraged at all times. It reinforces the assumption that the educator’s job is to fill a learner’s mind with bits and pieces of knowledge the way a shop assistant fills the supermarket’s shelves with stock. Further, it encourages passive learning which is not engaging. For learners to sense that their work is important, they need to tinker with real-world problems, and they need opportunities to construct knowledge (Ralenala, 2003:67).
2.8.3 The Constructivist Theory
This theory of learning is based on the premise that people are naturally curious. The implication is that education can either develop or stifle their inclination to ask or to learn. If the learner’s task is to memorize rules and existing knowledge without questioning the subject matter or the learning process, their potential for critical thought will be restricted. Whereas the behaviourist theory of learning portrays the learner as a passive receiver of information, the constructivist view takes the learner to be an active processor of information. This perspective is currently enjoying popularity as a framework for both the analysis and practice of Science and mathematics education even though there is no consensus of what is actually meant by this term (Ralenala, 2003:68). It emphasizes Bloom’s taxonomy as explained in paragraph 2.5.1. above.
The core of constructivism is the belief that learning is an active process in which learners construct new ideas and knowledge based upon their current and past experiences. The learner selects and transforms information, constructs hypotheses, and makes decisions, relying on a cognitive structure to do so (Brunner, 1986:45). This view replaces the more traditional view that claimed that knowing the subject is a pure entity unaffected by biological, psychological and sociological contingencies (Roth, 1995:15).
48
According to this theory, which is based heavily on the work of psychologists Vygotsky (1978) and Piaget (1972:10), genuine learning is deeply subjective and intensively active. Beginning in infancy, each of us constructs a personal understanding of the world, weaving every new experience or fact into our widening fabric of integrated concepts. Learning, then, occurs when learners actively assimilate new information and experiences and constructs their own meaning. Accordingly, a fundamental principle for how learners should learn Science is that they should be actively involved in the learning process. Hence, Osborne and Wittrock (2003:103) describe a constructivist theory adapted for Science learning as the ability to comprehend what learners are taught verbally, or what they read, or what they find out by watching a demonstration or doing an experiment. These learners must invent a model or explanation that organises the information selected from the experience in a way that makes sense to them, that fits their logic or real world experiences, or both.
Osborne and Wittrock (2003:16) hinted that “the process of building such a theory requires metacognitive strategies of evaluating the plausibility of the theory and revising hypothesis if necessary”. The implication for this is that educators should abandon the notion that subject matter is something fixed and ready made in itself, outside the learner’s experience; they should stop thinking of the learner’s experience as something hard and fast, and they should realise that the learner and the curriculum are simply two limits which define a single process.
In as far as the teaching of Science is concerned; the constructivist theory accepts that, because scientific knowledge is constantly being discovered, questioned, re-evaluated, and tested, changes in what is taught will inevitably occur (Osborne and Wittrock, 2003:16). This conditional nature of scientific knowledge is sometimes distressing to some educators because they regard knowledge as stable. These educators believe that one may sometimes add to the knowledge at hand but unless it was wrong from the beginning, it should not change.
In the constructivist approach, therefore, teaching Science is more like engaging Science the way scientists do. It is an active, social process of making sense of experiences. By using constructivist epistemology as a referent, the role of the educator becomes one of listening to what learners say and trying to understand what they do and how they are doing it (Thier,
49
2001:25). Thus, learners learn by thinking about and trying to make sense of what they see, feel and hear all around them. Further, in trying to make sense, the learner utilizes all his existing knowledge, namely, current experience, past experience, textbook knowledge, learning from society (elders, the media, cultural legends, etc). The learner therefore, tries to predict lines of thought, interrogate the author on his position, and evaluate work for its usefulness and importance to his own life.
The researcher is of the opinion that the two theories are of importance to the study of Science and therefore very key to the present study. Science learners do work with existing empirical data, and therefore they need to be able to collect reliable empirical data (behaviourism). At times, the same learners have to spend time explaining, discussing and offering personal opinions to a particular phenomenon (constructivism).
At the other times still, the same learners may have to codify, simplify and publicize findings among their peers (behaviourism and constructivism). Whatever the case, it is important to note that Natural Science is made up of different learning activities and therefore if its learning is going to focus on one aspect and neglect the other, it may create in the minds of the learners a one-sided and distorted image of Science.
The behaviourists’ view on language learning (paragraph 2.8.2) and the constructivists’ viewpoint (see paragraph 2.8.3) all confirm that the way a learner views learning has a bearing on how he goes about his learning and in selecting a language through which learning has to be facilitated, a knowledge of the above cited theories of learning is a sine-qua-non.