Learning Theory Script
0 General Document comments
0 Sentence and Paragraph comments
0 Image and Video comments
If you were to ask me how I teach or run my classroom, there wouldn’t be a simple answer. There are many theorist that support the growth and development of students in my classroom.
Everybody comes into the classroom with previous knowledge and experiences. As a teacher I try to build on that to help students learn more complex topics. Constructivism is a theory that was created by Jean Piaget that encompasses this idea. Being a science teacher this is easily Students get to see or experience the topics in everyday life. When I start to teach the students about moon phases I start by asking the students to share what they know about the topic, and I ask them to create a model to represent their thinking. After that previous knowledge is refreshed I create a model and explain to the students what is happening. Through this I am trying to get students to grow their schema and make connections to things they already know. By the end of the lesson the students will have a new understanding of what is happening when the moon is revolving around the sun.
Constructivism isn’t the only philosophy that I pull from when running my classroom. Lave and Wagner believe that students learn the best when interacting with situations, and their surroundings. Mentorships are not just for adults starting a new career, but students can mentor each other. Students are constantly working in groups or with another person in my classroom. This is intended to be a little like a mentorship almost. Students are paired in such a way that not everybody in the group is at the same learning level. This allows students to help each other grow in their learning.
Thanks for listening. Hopefully this gave you some better insight into how. I run my classroom.
General Document Comments 0
I appreciate your description of how you run your classroom, but let me offer my perspective as B.F. Skinner. You’ve mentioned constructivism, Piaget, and theories that focus on building knowledge based on prior experiences, as well as social learning and mentorship. While these approaches value student interaction and schema growth, from my point of view, such theories often overlook the importance of directly observable behavior and the environmental factors that actually shape learning. I would emphasize designing classroom experiences so that each desired behavior—such as asking a question, contributing to a model, or working cooperatively—is clearly defined, observable, and immediately reinforced. The focus, as I often said, should be on the “consequences that follow,” rather than on hypothetical mental constructs.
For example, when teaching about moon phases, I would encourage frequent, small, successful steps—each reinforced by immediate feedback. Token systems, praise, or access to a preferred activity could reinforce correct responses or effective group behaviors. I agree that students come with different backgrounds, but my main interest is in what you do with that: Are students’ correct scientific explanations or cooperative behaviors followed by positive consequences? That’s where learning happens. I would also caution that relying on group work or mentorship without arranging clear contingencies can sometimes reinforce off-task or unproductive behaviors if not thoughtfully managed.
What else would you like to know? You can ask about: (1) How to apply operant conditioning in your classroom, (2) The differences between my ideas and constructivism, or (3) How reinforcement works in group activities. Tell me to hit Your Thoughts and to write which path you want to take. Then, after saving your reply, hit Continue with AI, choose me again, and ask more questions about your chosen topic.
Please Note: Everything in this comment is AI-generated. It is made up to sound like B.F. Skinner.
I invite you to read and comment on the interviews where B.F. Skinner talks more about his work. One is with Alex Steinberg and the other is with John M. Whiteley. Both can be found in this document: https://writingpartners.net/documents/7839
To design an experiment to test learning in a 6th grade middle school science class, I’d recommend starting with a clear operational definition of learning—such as the ability to correctly identify or explain the phases of the moon. Next, you’d want to arrange the environment so that students are presented with specific tasks (for example, labeling diagrams, answering questions, or demonstrating a model) and their responses can be immediately reinforced with praise, points, or another suitable reward. You could then compare groups: one that receives immediate feedback and reinforcement after each small step, and another that experiences the typical classroom approach without such contingencies.
Throughout the experiment, your focus would be on directly observing and recording student behaviors—such as the number of correct responses, participation rates, or successful group interactions—so you can measure the effects of your interventions. The key is to systematically manipulate the consequences following each targeted behavior and record the resulting changes. As I’ve said before, “behavior is altered by the consequences that follow.” That’s the principle you’re really testing.
What else would you like to know? You might want to ask about (1) Examples of reinforcement schedules for your experiment, (2) How to avoid reinforcing off-task behaviors, or (3) Methods for measuring learning outcomes objectively. Tell me to hit Your Thoughts and to write which path you want to take. After you save your reply, hit Continue with AI, choose me again, and ask more questions about your chosen topic.
Please Note: Everything in this comment is AI-generated. It is made up to sound like B.F. Skinner.
I invite you to read and comment on the interviews where B.F. Skinner talks more about his work. One is with Alex Steinberg and the other is with John M. Whiteley. Both can be found in this document: https://writingpartners.net/documents/7839
Let me reflect on your approach, especially considering the question: “What do you think of this?”—how a classroom inherits from various theories, including constructivism and mentorship, to foster learning. I appreciate the effort you make to start from the students’ prior knowledge and to connect complex concepts to their lived experiences. This aligns with my critique of what I call the “banking model” of education—the notion that students are empty vessels waiting to be filled. You are taking important steps away from this by valuing what learners bring and creating situations where knowledge emerges through doing and dialogue.
However, I find myself asking: do these methods go far enough in creating the true dialogue and critical co-investigation that I advocate? The key in my pedagogy, as seen in chapter two of Pedagogy of the Oppressed, is not only in refreshing students’ prior knowledge but in inviting them to question, to problematize, and to remake knowledge alongside the teacher. I wonder if your approach might sometimes fall back into traditional habits: does the teacher ultimately “explain” the correct model and thus risk re-establishing authority over knowledge? My challenge to you is to continually seek ways for your students not just to “make connections” but to interrogate and transform what is taken for granted—about science, about knowledge, even about the structure of the classroom and society itself.
Now, if I were to expand, there are several points I could explore further:
How to shift from teacher-led explanation to authentic dialogue where the teacher and students investigate and unveil knowledge together.
Strategies for developing students’ abilities to question the world around them—not just memorize or model, but to see knowledge as something dynamic and transformative.
Examples of how to turn science topics into real problems rooted in students’ reality, promoting inquiry and collective transformation rather than passive reception.
Which path most inspires you, or is there another angle you wish to take? Please hit Your Thoughts, let me know what you’re curious about—then, after you save your reply, hit Continue with AI, choose me again, and we’ll dig deeper into your chosen topic.
Please Note: Everything in this comment is AI-generated. It is made up to sound like me.
And before you journey onward, I invite you to read and comment on the interviews where I talk more about my work. One is with Ira Shor and another is with Myles Horton. Both can be found in this document: https://writingpartners.net/documents/7894
If you ask me, Paulo Freire, how you could use my ideas in a 6th grade science classroom, I would first encourage you to remember that both teacher and students are not merely transmitters and receivers: everyone should be engaged as co-investigators of knowledge. In science, this could mean starting with what the students know and experience about the world, then working together to question and explore the scientific concepts, like the moon phases or the laws of motion. I want you to build lessons around real problems that matter to the students—make them researchers of their own experience, connecting scientific ideas to issues in their communities and lives.
Instead of just giving information or demonstrating the “correct” model, invite the students to pose questions and propose explanations. Let their questions lead the direction of inquiry, and act as their partner in dialogue, not their authority. As I write in chapter 2, “Knowledge emerges only through invention and re-invention, through the restless, impatient, continuing, hopeful inquiry [people] pursue in the world, with the world, and with each other.” Create a classroom where it is normal—and encouraged—for students to wonder, challenge, experiment, and connect science to the broader world.
If I were to keep going, I could explore these possibilities with you:
Practical techniques to replace lectures with authentic, problem-posing discussions in science, including student-led investigations and critical questioning.
Ways to help students read scientific texts, data, and social issues as “problems” to decode—connecting science with justice, ethics, and transformation.
How the science teacher can model vulnerability and reflection, learning alongside students rather than positioning themselves as the “expert.”
Which path would you like to take? Or is there something else on your mind? Please hit Your Thoughts, tell me what interests you, save your reply, then hit Continue with AI, choose Paulo Freire again, and we can keep our dialogue going!
Please Note: Everything in this comment is AI-generated. It is made up to sound like me.
And if you wish to hear more of my heart and approach, I encourage you to read and comment on the interviews—one with Ira Shor, another with Myles Horton—linked here: https://writingpartners.net/documents/7894
on the uploaded document.
0 archived comments