Behaviorist and Cognitivist Theories Are Equally Valid Approaches to Modern Workplace Learning - Coursework Example

BEHAVIORIST AND COGNITIVIST THEORIES ARE EQUALLY VALID APPROACHES TO MODERN WORKPLACE LEARNING INTRODUCTION 1- BACKGROUND AND EVOLUTION OF WORPLACE Work place as the name implies refers to simple meaning of place where some work is conducted. With similar simple meaning retained, the workplace has constantly been the focus of debate for many theorists discussing its various aspects; implication, evolution as well as revolution. Lict (1988) traces the changes in the work places mainly in US over the period of 75 years. It entails single fact that over a period of time corrective measures for the workplace conditions and standard have been made once the issue burst in form of strikes or economic distress. For instance, great rail road strike in US in 1877 or industrial unrest in late 19th and early 20th century led to the measures like developing database of the labor market and negotiation oriented path of issues than countering as on battle field. There are large numbers of factors in work place that have undergone change. All these aspects can be summarized as changes with respect to location (such as varying diversity with respect to location); array of environments; changing demographics of workers within workplace such as changing role and participation of women; improvement in working conditions and standards; changing work experiences with respect to qualification, experience, integration of technological innovations in work place settings etc (Lict, 1988). Moreover, with rapid pace of change that has become one of the defining characteristics of business has increased the challenges of and for work place. 1.2- WORKPLACE LEARNING Along with change that has remained constant in overall process the other factor that remained aligned was workplace learning. More appropriate to state would be learning has remained with work in one form or the other; hence, work place learning has evolved as a separate discipline to debate as a result of changes in the workplace settings. Work place learning has gained immense attention from employers, policy makers and researcher as Gardiner, Leat and Sadler-Smith (2001) have attributed learning in organizational centrally important for the fact of continuously changing environment with rapid pace. Fuller & Unwin, (2002, p. 95) have asserted the importance of learning in workplace as organization of the current times as well as future has to integrate within new forms of knowledge that drives and transforms work and workplace. Workplace has been dominantly affected by globalization in social, political and economic aspects. Moreover, technological advancement has also changed the entire working methodologies such as flexible working settings etc. Hence, change in workplace setting has also changed workplace learning in all contexts. Further it increased the realization of benefits that organization accrues by investing in employee and providing work place environment. 1.3- DIFFERENT THEORIES OF WORKPLACE EARNING Along with the evolution of workplace learning, theorists have put forward various aspects to be made core of attention to develop work place learning; hence, fetching maximum benefits for employees as well organization. Initial work place learning has focused on individual training being conducted mainly on the formal setting whereas contemporary theories have increased the scope to encompass diverse dimensions within formal and informal and learning setting comprising from individual, team or organization wide learning and developments (Malloch, Cairns, Evans, & OConnor, 2011). Various theories and models such as behaviorist model, humanist model, information processing model, activity model and situation learning model etc (Cunningham et al. n.d.) has been defined. Despite differences in various aspects, each theory has its own benefit to offer as addressed particular need of business or employees. Accepting the importance and impact of each theory and aspect, this discussion addresses the following: Section I: Introduction and background of workplace and workplace evolution. Section II: Behaviorist Theories and its respective role in workplace learning Section III: Cognitivist theories and its respective role in workplace learning Section IV: Comments on the importance of aspects discussed Section V: Conclusion SECTION II: BEHAVIORIST THOERY Many of the work place learning theories have made employees’ behavior as the focal point of the study and changes in the behavior was considered as required outcome of such theories. Behaviorist model asserts that learning requirements are finite and can be done using empirical methodologies. It centers learning on the belief that learning shall be overt and therefore, results of learning must be reflected with change in behavior of learner with empirical evident results(Cunningham et al. n.d.). Behaviorists’ model requires job to be designed as a combination of activities that require certain behavior. The model has asserted defining the entire job as set of code-able activities. Employees’ workplace learning, according to behaviorist theories, is conducted in training sessions guiding employees to modify the required behavior to correct or improve particular activity. The basic methodology to be adopted by trainer requires specifically designed mechanism that directs required stimuli and follows the reinforcement schedules for the training participants (Malloch, Cairns, Evans, & OConnor, 2011). The reinforcement of the response to stimuli is rewarded for giving the required behavior. Since the stimuli are generated by the trainer it is regarded as the external motivation generated theory (Cunningham et al. n.d.). Though applicable on many aspects, the underlying assumption for the behaviorist model that results must be observable is criticized for being flawed. The factors such as encouraged thinking, enriching knowledge base and developing an understanding that are considered as associated concepts for the learning are since not visible therefore, form the lacking of behaviorist model. These criticisms established more deep rooted foundations as rapid change in social, economic and overall business environment appeared to take place and led workplace learning to become on-going process than signal activity with quantifiable results. SECTION III: COGNITIVIST THEORY With the growing recognition of the facts that work place learning is not observable only and faulty assumption of the behaviorist theories that stated the learning results are solely reflected as tacit behavior within task activities; recognition of cognitive factors started taking place. The Cognitive theories laid emphasis on the factor of learning, understanding, thinking as well as reflection as an important part of workplace learning despite the fact results of these are not observable within the any specific task in terms of improved numbers. Cognitive theories are based on the processing of information in any structure that makes some sense and developed meanings from such processed information are easier to understand and learn. Moreover, it further refers to thinking process that leads to the knowledge development in accordance with the capacity of the learner. It is a continuous learning process and results are based on facts that learner is able to solve the certain problem. In contrast to the behaviorist model, the motivation for cognitivists theories are internal and initiated from the leaner’s self. Hence, cognitive theory relies on the fundamental that learning is an on-going process and based on information assessment. As the learner develops some insight from the information processing it gets easier to expand understanding of newer information with developing link of new information with already assessed information (Cunningham et al. n.d.). Though the results of the cognitivist theories are not observable within the results of segmented tasks; this not refer that results for such learning are not assessed. Hence, for assessing the results of cognitivist workplace learning, psychometric tests are designed. Cognitive psychometric assessments (CPA) are tools designed by specialist that draws insight from cognitive psychometric models about the cognitive trait of individuals such as abilities, interests, understanding etc. Thereby, using such models and tools workplace learning with respect to the factors that cannot be observed with numeric values; results of work place learning of employees are explored. Psychometric tests are also beneficial for identifying the capabilities of an individual as well as its weak areas. Identification of these traits along with personality and behavioral styles enables management to identify the best fit for employee within organization (Psych Press, 2013). Cognitivist theories have also faced considerable criticism from ignoring or over accounting certain factors. For instance, Multi-Store Model theory given by Atkinson and Schiffrin has to face criticism for overly dependency and recalling ability of long term memory within learner with impairment of short term memory. Further, Levels of Processing theory by Craik and Lockhart has been facing criticism for not considering individual state during testing as well as results lack reliability. Other cognitive theories also have their respective limitations along with the benefits these offered (Price, 2007). Section IV: APPLICATION AND IMPLICATION OF BEHAVIORIST THOERY AND COGNITIVIST THEORY IN WORKPLACE Applicability of both theories has been accounted and therefore it can be confidently stated that the both theories have their respective roles to play within suitable context. For instance, Smith, Smith, and Smith,(2010) discusses that mature age workers are more inclined to work place learning in informal manner. Smith, Smith, and Smith,(2010) further discusses that unlike younger people who prefer to get instructions from manager about the procedure to perform and learn accordingly whereas mature age people are more interested in developing learning skills other ways that are less formal instead of simply enriching knowledge with typical operational procedures guidance by colleagues. Schmidt-Hertha, Tikkanen, & Hansen, (2009) in a study develop that mature age people have comparatively less cognitive abilities than young ones. On the other hand, learning from experience that has been developed over a period of time has as additional learning that old age people facilitate work in organizations. Hence, it is visible from fact discussed in comparison within young and old age people that workplace learning and its results are vary in variety receiving impact from variety of way and in light of above information organization needs to apply both mechanisms for different age group of people. Study conducted in New Zealand’s small manufacturing firms to evaluate work place learning with respective to manufacturing concerns had its own results distinction (Coetzer, 2007). The study refers to the suitability and applicability of the cognitivists theory within small manufacturing concerns. It puts emphasis that formal training procedures cannot be employed within small firms mainly for the reason of cost, time as well it is perceive less relevant for performance. It further asserts that in such organizations where formal training settings are not accounted; managers are to play an important role of trainer to employee. Further, the cognitive learning make its way as usually less number of employees are to perform variety of tasks and develop knowledge by processing information. 2. COMMENT Based on above discussion it can be confidently stated that both types of theories go hand in hand. Behaviorist theories rely on observable results solely whereas cognitivists theories are more concerned with other forms of learning, understanding as well as developing knowledge. Every organization is dependent on the learning from the combination of both theories. For instance, in the New Zealand case discussed above, though learning were adopted with cognitive based processes; however, no assessment of results was conducted using Cognitive psychometric assessments (CPA) tools. Moreover, small numbers of people are retained in an organization on the basis of their capability to learn and perform wider range of activities; hence, results are observed on observable metrics. Similarly, the difference in learning acceptability is witnessed among people of different ages within same organization. Hence, suitability, applicability and acceptability are dependent on wide range of factors such as, though not limited to, cost and time etc. Hence, work place learning requires employees to develop understanding of matters in a way that broadens ones’ vision and its impact are visible in the day to day performance; therefore, results remain measurable in the overall organizational results. 3. CONCLUSION Workplace has undergone complete transformation over a period of time. This transformation, along with many changes has led businesses to transform work place learning for and of employees. Among various approaches present, the discussion assessed work place learning theories of behaviorist and cognitivist perspectives. Both theories are contrast to each other in many aspects. Furthermore, both has benefits as well as has faced criticisms. In depth assessment of two theories with reference to applicability led to conclusion that despite the fact that both vary to each other in many dimensions and so does their applicability as well as suitability; still the two approaches is not mutually exclusive. Instead, both theories if applied in combination are inclined to fetch business learned employees that is ultimate aim of every effort. References Coetzer, A. (2007). ‘Employee perceptions of their workplaces as learning environments’. Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 19, no. 7, pp.417 – 434. Cunningham, T., Gannon, J., Kavanagh, M., Greene, J., Reddy, L., and Whitson, L. (n.d.). Theories of learning and curriculum design Key positionalities and their relationships. Available from http://level3.dit.ie/html/issue5/tony_cunningham/cunningham.pdf [Accessed 27 January 2013] Fuller, A. and Unwin, L. (2002). Developing pedagogies for the contemporary workplace, in Evans, K., Hodkinson, P. and Unwin, L. (eds.) Working to Learn: transforming learning in the workplace. London: Kogan Page. Gardiner, P., Leat, M. & Sadler-Smith, E., (2001). ‘Learning in organizations: HR implications and considerations’. Human Resource Development International, vol. 4, no.3, pp. 391-405. Lee, T., Fuller, A., Ashton, D., Butler, P., Felstead, A., Unwin, L. & Walters, S. (2004). ‘Learning as Work: Teaching and Learning Processes in the Contemporary Work Organisation’. Centre for Labour Market Studies, Learning as Work Research Paper, No. 2, pp. 1-39. Lict, W. (1988). ‘How the workplace has changed in 75 years’. Monthly Labour Review, Available from http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1988/02/art3full.pdf [Accessed 27 January 2013] Malloch, M., Cairns, L., Evans, K., & OConnor, B. (2011). The SAGE Handbook of Workplace Learning. Boston, SAGE Publications Ltd. Price, A. (2007) Human Resource Management in a Business Context, 3rd edition. London: Cengage. Psych Press. (2013). What is Psychometric Testing?. Available from http://www.psychpress.com.au/psychometric/psychometric-testing-guide.asp?what-is [Accessed 27 January 2013] Smith, E., Smith, A. and Smith, C.(2010). ‘Old Dogs, New tricks: training mature aged manufacturing workers. Journal of Workplace learning, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 277-291. Read More