Cognitivism And Constructivism Theory: A Comparison

Cognitivism Theory

Discuss about the Cognitivism and Constructivism Theory.

The cognitivism and constructivism both are important behavioral theories Management and effective methods of learning that helps in providing better learning outcome. The cognitivism theory states the interaction and self-cognition are most important for acquiring the knowledge and thus help in the development of learner knowledge. The concern about the learner knowledge and the process of using the information and processing the information in the more effective way of learning. In this matter, David Ausubel’s Assimilation theory is effective in defining the cognitivism theory. The assimilation theory of Ausubel provides adequate emphasis on the meaningful learning (Barmby, 2009). This is a procedure where the latest information is linked with a prevailing and relevant feature of an individual's knowledge structure. This specific component of this theory appropriate with the conception of the short as well as long-term memory in the rational information processing. The assimilation theory of Ausubel incorporates the cognitive, affective, along with the psychomotor theory.

The cognitivism is a psychology theory and according to psychology, cognitivism is a conceptual model, which help in understanding the mind. The key focus of cognitivism is on mental procedures inclusive of how people see, observe, think, recall, learn, problem solving process, along with direct their responsiveness to one inducement rather than another.      

This theory recognizes two aspects of the learning: rote learning as well as meaningful learning. The teachers and students usually, experience these two aspects of learning. The rote learning is learning; however, it is a low level of learning as well as has the consequence of recalling and transferability.

The meaningful learning uses to be non-arbitrary, non-verbatim and it provides substantive incorporation of latest knowledge. In the other hand, rote learning uses to be arbitrary, verbatim and it provides a combination of the latest knowledge. The meaningful learning puts deliberate effort to connect the latest knowledge with other superior order ideas (Huang, 2016). Alternatively, the rote learning does not put any effort to relate new knowledge with other superior order ideas. The meaningful learning is learning connected to experiences. The rote learning is not related to the experiences. The assimilation learning theory support in understanding the cognitive theory of learning. The meaningful learning is an affective commitment to linking latest knowledge to the prior learning. Whereas the rote learning is a non-affective commitment to linking the fresh idea with the prior learning. The knowledge gained from the meaningful learning sustained for longer. Usually, in the rote learning knowledge cannot be remembered after few hours or days (KORTENKAMP, 2016). The cognitive theory is supported by the Ausubel assimilation theory, and as per the Ausubel assimilation theory, the meaningful learning includes capability for the subsequent learning of connected materials.  Alternatively, the rote learning does not require any added capacity, in fact, it may impede the learning for the next learning of linked materials. The meaningful learning can be used in a range of novel problems or backgrounds, whereas the transferability to, the novel issues or contexts is limited.

Meaningful Learning

In order to gain meaningful learning, the learners need three important things: the past knowledge Management of the learners which is relevant to the undertaken subject, the teacher developing meaningful material in order to teach, as well as the learner selecting to apply meaningful learning. It helps in acquiring sufficient knowledge to the learners. According to the assimilation theory, the cognitive theory of learning is much more effective than the constructivism theory or the social development theory. Especially, for learning mathematics, the assimilation theory is more effective. Ausubel's assimilation theory has another major idea that depicts Advance Organizer. The Advance Organizer is mainly a model applied by a learner for organizing as well as targeting fresh idea or knowledge to be learned before learning this types of information. Ausubel had proposed this approach of Advance Organizer.  According to Ausubel the most vital factor that has the significant influence on the learning is the prior knowledge of the learner about the particular subject matter (Lugosi and Simon, 2006). There is a significant connection which is made when the two concepts of the learner meat at any level. 

The Vygotsky’s social development theory use to provide the different arguments in comparison to the Ausubel’s assimilation theory. According to the social development theory, the social interaction heads the development of the knowledge, besides the consciousness as well as cognition are the final product of the socialization along with social behavior.

The main idea of Vygotsky’s social development theory is the idea of the constructivism. It claims that there are three important themes in respect of the social interaction, the more experienced and knowledgeable others as well as the zone of the proximal growth. The social interaction has a substantial contribution in the process of the cognitive growth of the learner. It plays a vital role in the procedure of the reasoning development of the learner. Vygotsky had felt that the social learning leads development (Orton, 2004). He said that every single functioning in the child's cultural growth perceives twice: primarily on the social level as well as after that on the personal level. Firstly, between the people that provide inter-psychological   and then inside the child intra-psychological. Vygotsky's social development theory encourages learning backgrounds in which the pupils use to play an active role in contrast with the Ausubel's assimilation theory, which supports cognitivism and as per the theory the teachers are important and they paly important role in learning of the student. According to Vygotsky’s social development theory, the roles of the students and the teacher must be changed for this reason (Ausubel and Ausubel, 1966). The teacher ought to collaborate with the students in order to help the students' constructive growth. In this way, the learning becomes a reciprocal experience for both the teacher and students.  

Assimilation Theory

Whereas Ausubel’s assimilation theory provides great emphasis on the meaningful learning where the teacher plays an important role, and the meaningful material constructed by the teacher helps in learning. On the other hand, according to Vygotsky's social development theory, the cognitive growth is incomplete and partial to a definite range at any given age. Besides this, it claims that the complete cognitive growth needs social interaction. The Vygotsky's social development theory was an endeavor to provide the explanation of the consciousness as the finished product of the socialization. As for example, in the learning language, initial child utterances with the peers or the adults are for communicating, however, once they become master internalize and permit emotional speech (Robinson and Schraw, 2008). In this way, the important theme of the Vygotsky's social development theory and its theoretical model Management states that social interaction plays a vital role in the growth of the cognition.

The learning theories assimilation learning theory (Ausubel) and social development theory (Vygotsky) are vital for the learning process. The social constructivism which directly focuses on the key collaborative nature of the learning process and the significance of the cultural and social context is the key to the learning process related to the constructivism. On the other hand, all cognitive functions are primarily focused and believed to initiate which help to provide the key explanation as for the product of the social interaction. Learning is considered to be more important and way more requirement than the assimilation of the new knowledge by the learner it is considered to be key process by which the learner was integrated into knowledge community (Afamasaga-Fuata'i, 2009). It is considered to be believed that the overall constructivist, for example, Vygotsky focused on the key social nature of the language and consequently failed to provide a brief understanding of the learning is considered to be a collaborative method. Social constructivism according to the Vygotsky is that every activity in the children regarding cultural development happen to be twice, first on the social ground and then on the individual ground. Firstly, between the people who are termed as interpsychological and then the internally which is termed as intrapsychologial. This is primarily applied in both the situation and have equal impact on the voluntary attention and logical memory which help in the formation for the key concept.  Both the concept has their two respective comparisons and contrast which help to provide a clear and precise idea about the two key concepts regarding learning process. In cognitivism, it is considered that how and why individual grasp the key attributing of the overall methods to cognitive function (Angus, 2013).  The theory is considered to be following the key behaviorist school of thought. Ausubels assimilation theory supports cognitivism and as per the theory the interaction and self-cognition and key development which help to acquire overall knowledge regarding learner knowhow and also throw light on how to use the overall efficiency way to processing key information. On the other hand, Vygotsky supports the constructivism that emphasis on the philosophy of learning which is established in the key premises which help to throw light on the overall experience and thus help to construct the key understand the place where we live in (Blunden, 2010). Each of the theory helps to provide key rules and mental figures which help to make the key sense about the overall experience gained through the overall process of minimizing and adjusting the mental facts and figure to synchronize new experiences. Basically, it is focused and states as the learning method which permits the student about the experience of the environment in first hand and thus helps to provide the student accuracy and reliability and overall trust factor which is essential during the learning procedure. The student needs to focus and act as per the key environment which is related to acquiring and thus help to test the new knowledge (Denhere, Chinyoka and Mambeu, 2013). The cognitivism is focused on teacher-centered learning whereas the social constructivism is related and focused on the student-centered learning. Cognitivism has two major elements which are methodological and theoretical whereas the role of instructor plays a major role which is termed as facilitators and the overall nature of learning process is important (Stein, 2009).

Vygotsky's Social Development Theory

The constructivism has contributed in the cognitive psychology and also introduced a new revision of learning concept. People are places before the learning equipped with new concept and ideas in constructivism. The minds of the students have the conceptual structures that believe in the existence of the personal theories related to their cognitive abilities and life experience, depending on their age and state. The constructivist model put emphasis on the individual and their personal experiences to perform mental constructions (Blackstone, Cooley and Andrews, 2010). It’s theory Vygotsky and Ausubel explained what is the attitude, conception and attitude of students towards learning.  The model states that the construction takes place when the interaction should be done with others and importance for the subject. Ausubel determines the quality and quantity of propositional structures and relevant concepts. The concepts are available to guide the students and summarized the core conception of the teaching-learning process. The theory focuses on the significance of knowing in advance about what the student wants before teaching them (Scott, 2013). The significance of the constructivism provides preliminary ideas and concepts that have produced a great deal of teaching and educational research on the subjects. On the other hand, Vygotsky puts emphasize on the issues related to the teaching. He stated that the cognitive potential of the subject depends on the quality of the social interaction and proximal development zone of the subject.    

Ausubel's assimilation theory and Vygotsky's social development theory both are important theories for defining the human behavior, especially the learning behavior of the students is immensely influenced by these two theories. The cognitivism theory depicts the process and the reason for the people's learning by attributing the procedures to the cognitive activity. This concept follows the behaviorist school of views. On the other hand, the constructivism theory depicts that the learning founded on the premise by reflecting on the learners own experience (Downing, 2010).  

The requirement for connecting between the basic learning study as well as educational practice has been discussed for long. In order ensure the strong relation between these two pivotal areas several academicians and research scholars try to link these two areas.        

The cognitive theories especially the theory founded by Ausubel's put great emphasis on the acquisition of the knowledge along with the mental structure. The assimilation theory of Ausubel stresses on the conceptualization of the learning procedures of the students as well as it tries to address the problems of how the information is got, organized, stored as well as retrieved by the learners' mind (Scott, 2013).   The cognitive theories put great emphasis on making meaningful knowledge as well as helping learners organize as well as relate the latest information to present knowledge in the memory.

Social Interaction

On the other hand, the constructivism is not a comprehensive novel approach of learning. Similar to other learning theories and concepts constructivism has also multiple roots in the psychological as well as philosophical point of view. The constructivism is a theory or concept that equates learning with the creating meaning of experience (Shawe-Taylor and Singer, 2004). The constructivism is deemed to be a branch of the cognitivism theory it separates itself from the traditional cognitive theories in numerous ways. Constructivism crosses the both categories by putting emphasis on the interaction between the two important variables. The constructivism does not share with the cognitivism as well as behavior the belief that knowledge in mind-independent as well as can be mapped onto the people who want to learn. 

Description of the two theories, evaluate and critics the two theories help in assessing the key differences between the two theories. However, the focus on performance and instruction has proven effective in providing lesson the basic skill which is required is structured knowledge areas (Steffe et al., 2013). Moreover, much of these requires being learned associates with advanced knowledge in badly structured areas. In a straight way cognitivism, constructivism continuum the emphasis of the instruction changes from teaching to learning from the passive transfer of the facts as well as routines to active application of the concept and theories to the issue. The critical question in this field that which theory is the best the cognitivism theory or the constructivism theory in order to explain the learner behavior (Sullivan, Clarke and Clarke, 2013). It is the concern of the academicians that which theory among the two is the most effective in fostering mastery of particular tasks by the particular learner. The theory of cognitivism, as well as the theory of constructivism, are both contrasts with each other. Where the cognitivism is a teacher-centric learning theory, the constructivism is student-centric learning theory. Both the theory Ausubel’s assimilation theory that advocates cognitivism style of teaching or Vygotsky’s social development theory that advocates constructivism approach are important to explain the learning behavior and pattern of the learner. However, both the theories are effective in portraying the learning behavior, most of the academician support the Vygotsky’s social development theory as it supports the primary learning of the child (Nielsen, 2008). The social development theory is an exclusive theory in learning behavior that encompasses all the conception within this one theory. The social interaction supports the overall growth and development Management of a child that help the children in learning. The mathematics learning requires analytical skills that improve with the help of this social development theory and it is very much effective. Vygotsky’s social development theory in this matter effective that back the constructivism theory. Hence, Vygotsky’s social development theory, which is types of constructivism theory is better for the primary mathematics learning (Novak, 2012).

Comparing and Contrasting the Two Learning Theories

As per the cognitivism of the assimilation learning theory (Ausubel), the relationship between the teacher and the student can be differentiated by the form of showing the development of the learning. The development of the learning is depicted to be reflecting the environment, and the evaluation of the interacting differences is appropriately constructed by the form of the depicting the ways by which the learner is capable to related itself. Therefore, the conclusion can be drawn from this theory is that the performance of the experiment on the teachers and the student. Though cognitivism focuses on the direct observations, the viewpoints can be easily varied as per the viewer is considered (Essen, 2013). The direct observation seems to be reflecting the development which is represented by the Piaget’s theory and it describes the appropriate structure by showing the appropriate intellectual differences. Therefore, the cognitive difference can be easily depicted by showing the appropriate differentiation of the knowledge and thereby the enhancement of the research can be easily progressed by showing the developments that appeared in the case of the child’s development. The enhancement of the study can be easily depicted by showing the construction of the work and also the knowledge can be easily depicted by showing the differentiation of the teachers’ ways of teaching and the learners’ ways of learning (Irby, 2013).

As per the social development theory (Vygotsky) in primary mathematics education, traditional enhancement of the model can be represented in the form of the transformation of the information and the receiving of the information (Zaretskii, 2009). The enhancement of the work can be easily represented by showing the appropriate formation of the work which is being represented by showing the formation of the structure which is being represented in the form of showing the appropriate structure of the learning processes. The explanation in this theory can be seen in the form of the active roles which are played by the student and also the enhancement of the study can be represented in the form of showing the appropriate process of showing the learning processes (Newby, 2012). The construction of the work can be easily structured by showing the encouragement of the work and thereby the learning experiences can be easily gained by showing the experiences in the learning made in the classrooms. It clearly describes the motive of the student which is being made by showing the way by which the student learns the techniques from the teachers. It also represents the ability of the student which is being made by showing the enhancement of the structure. This social development theory simply focuses on the enhancement of the study which enables in explaining the appropriate structure of the relationship and also the enhancement of the structure can be made by showing the enhancement of the study. Therefore, the differentiation is being made in an appropriate way which is being explained in a suitable way (Novak, 2012).

The role of the peers and the contexts can be easily shown in the form of the focus on the memory, and the process that is related to the assimilation learning theory (Ausubel) and also the enhancement of the process can be easily made in a semantic way (Wink, 2004). The declarative and the procedural structure can be easily made by showing the enhancement of the structure and also the strengthening of the structure is appropriately depicted by showing the enhancement of the structure of the work. The structure of the work is being depicted in the form of the declarative memory, and the broader range of the structure is being depicted by showing the enhancement of the study (Pound, 2012). The appropriate type of the knowledge can be easily represented by showing the enhancement of the structure which is represented by showing the production of the knowledge and thereby the ACT support can be easily fundamental generalization which is being illustrated by showing the enhancement of the programming language. Therefore, the illustration of the structure which is being illustrated by showing the enhancement of the structure and also the study can be depicted to be showing the conversion of the structure. The identification of the conversion of the proposition is being shown by showing the enhancement of the structure for the differentiation of the roles and the peers (Psaltis and Zapiti, 2016). The goal and the achievement of the structure and also the construction of the work can be made by showing the enhancement of the study.

As per the social development theory (Vygotsky) in primary mathematics education, the structure of the concept can be made by showing the development of the cultures that seems to be appearing the enhancement of the structure and also the enhancement of the study can be easily depicted by showing the respect for the particular task or the concept. The study can be easily shown by showing the enhancement of the structure which is being shown by depicting the appropriate enhancement of the structure (Shabani, Khatib and Ebadi, 2010). The coaching must be made in the form of the MKO process that enables the learner to gain the appropriate knowledge and the enhancement of the practices that is related to the younger development of the interpsychological structures and also the development can be easily depicted by showing the enhancement in the connection of the people. The process of the tools used in this case shows the appropriate description of the structure and also the enhancement of the study can be easily made by showing the construction of the image which is requisite for structuring the acts of the human tools and the development of the culture (Weiner, 2012). It also clearly shows the formation of the social developments by the provision of the speech and the writing techniques in the initial part of the structure that indicates the development of the children at the primary mathematics education. The study can be easily conducted by showing the proper structure of the work and also the appropriate practices can be easily shown in the form of the enhancement of the connections which are required for showing the interactions with the people. Therefore, the study is depicted to be showing the enhancement of the work which is being included in this case as undertaken for the study (Wertsch, 2012).

Teaching mathematics in the proximal development zone of a child is viewed as one of the most effective ways to improve the performance in mathematics. Planning for effective learning and teaching involves designing the flexible sequence of the learning activities and clear about the concepts that the student should develop in each of the activity. The instructor should understand the thinking, attitude, and skill of the student and use different techniques and strategies to guide them. Mathematics plays a significant role in shaping how an individual can deal with a different sphere of social, civil and private life (Sutherland, 2007). However, many students face difficulties while solving mathematics problems. Thus, it is very much important for the teachers to provide effective teaching to the students. Effective pedagogies approaches can help to develop the mathematical disposition and capability within the effective learning community. The effective mathematic pedagogy must not be taken in the isolation and complex factors that affect the student learning. The teachers incorporate the elements of the practices which is related to the classroom community. The main objective is to enhance the thinking of the student and the role of the teachers (Tanner and Tanner, 2007). The principles are based on the recognition that the classroom teaching is considered as a complex activity. The classroom learning communities is either the static nor linear. In the collective knowledge, individual and theoretical frameworks evolve and emerge with the dynamics of people shares and within the which they participate. The pedagogy focuses on the classroom as the community of the practice. The teachers play a significant role in increasing the positive attitude among the students and understating the ideas of effective curriculum (Smith and Stowell, 2011). An effective mathematic pedagogy states that all the students can create mathematical identities and can become a mathematical learner, it is based on the interpersonal sensitivity and respect and responsive to a multiplicity of the thinking process, realities and cultural heritages found in the classrooms. The students would be able to understand the theories and formulas of mathematics (Twomey, 2006). The teachers should use effective learning techniques and strategies to provide appropriate guidance to the students. Effective teachers and teachers can facilitate the learning process and engaging students in the learning activities. The teachers work to develop interpersonal relationships that helps to create spaces for the students in order to develop their cultural and mathematical identities (Stein, 2009). They have the expectations about developing the capacity of the students to think, communicate, reason, critique and reflect their own practice and providing opportunities to the students. The relationships develop in the classroom and developing mathematical identities and competencies. The students should learn the importance togetherness environment (Young and Astarita, 2013). Teachers can make the students feel included by valuing and respecting the cultures and mathematics that the students bring to the classroom. The students should feel safe and allow the students to get involved. An effective teacher can develop classroom relationship and allow the students to think, ask questions and determine the solutions.

References

Afamasaga-Fuata'i, K. (2009). Concept mapping in mathematics. New York: Springer.

Angus, M. (2013). Educational theories of herbart and froebel. [Place of publication not identified]: Hardpress Ltd.

Ausubel, D. and Ausubel, P. (1966). Chapter I: Cognitive Development in Adolescence. Review of Educational Research, 36(4), pp.403-413.

Barmby, P. (2009). Primary mathematics. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Blackstone, W., Cooley, T. and Andrews, J. (2010). Commentaries on the laws of England. [Whitefish, Mont.]: Kessinger.

Blunden, A. (2010). An interdisciplinary theory of activity. Leiden: Brill.

Denhere, C., Chinyoka, K. and Mambeu, J. (2013). Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development Theory: What are its Implications for Mathematical Teaching?. Greener Journal of Social Sciences, 3(7), pp.371-377.

Downing, A. (2010). An Investigation of the Advance Organizer Theory as an Effective Teaching Model. 1st ed.

Essen, M. (2013). Making efficient public good decisions using an augmented Ausubel auction. Economic Theory Bulletin, 1(1), pp.57-68.

Huang, C. (2016). Coordination and social learning. Economic Theory.

Irby, B. (2013). The handbook of educational theories. Charlotte, N.C.: Information Age Pub.

KORTENKAMP, U. (2016). EARLY MATHEMATICS LEARNING. [Place of publication not identified]: SPRINGER-VERLAG NEW YORK.

Lugosi, G. and Simon, H. (2006). Learning theory. Berlin [u.a.]: Springer.

Newby, P. (2012). Research methods for education.

Nielsen, L. (2008). Comparative Evaluation of the Cognitive Theories of Piaget and Ausubel. 1st ed.

Novak, J. (2012). Learning, creating, and using knowledge. New York: Routlege.

Orton, A. (2004). Learning Mathematic. London: Continuum International Pub. Group.

Pound, L. (2012). How Children Learn. Luton: Andrews UK.

Psaltis, C. and Zapiti, A. (2016). Interaction, communication and development. London: Routledge.

Robinson, D. and Schraw, G. (2008). Recent innovations in educational technology that facilitate student learning. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Pub.

Scott, D. (2013). Theories of learning. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE.

Shabani, K., Khatib, M. and Ebadi, S. (2010). Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development: Instructional Implications and Teachers' Professional Development. English Language Teaching, 3(4).

Shawe-Taylor, J. and Singer, Y. (2004). Learning theory. Berlin [etc.]: SpringerLink [host].

Smith, M. and Stowell, M. (2011). Learning About Learning: The Contributions of Ausubel's Assimilation Theory to a Teacher Education Program at the University of Vermont. 1st ed.

Steffe, L., Nesher, P., Cobb, P., Sriraman, B. and Greer, B. (2013). Theories of Mathematical Learning. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.

Stein, F. (2009). Relating What is to Be Learned to What is Known: Subsumptive Sequencing, Co-Ordination and Cognitive Skills Activation. 1st ed.

Sullivan, P., Clarke, D. and Clarke, B. (2013). Teaching with Tasks for Effective Mathematics Learning. New York, NY: Springer.

Sutherland, R. (2007). Teaching for learning mathematics. Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.

Tanner, D. and Tanner, L. (2007). Curriculum development. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Twomey, E. (2006). Linking learning theories and learning difficulties. Australian Journal of Learning Disabilities, 11(2), pp.93-98.

Weber, B. and Depew, D. (2003). Evolution and learning. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Weiner, E. (2012). The theater of educational possibility. New York, N.Y.: Peter Lang Pub.

Wertsch, J. (2012). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Wink, J. (2004). A vision of Vygotsky. Boston [u.a.]: Allyn and Bacon.

Young, R. and Astarita, A. (2013). Practice Theory in Language Learning. Language Learning, 63, pp.171-189.

Zaretskii, V. (2009). The Zone of Proximal Development. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 47(6), pp.70-93.