During this course, many learning theories have been presented and discussed.

I will be
examining the learning environment used for a first year engineering course I took at university.
The course was structured into two components: 1) theory of mechanical design which was
facilitated by the professor of the course and 2) learning an engineering modeling software (the
engineering modeling software will be referred to as software throughout the rest of this paper)
which was conducted by the teaching assistant (TA) of the course. This paper will concentrate on
the aspect of learning the software and will attempt to analyze the used learning environment.
The learning of the software portion was held during weekly tutorial sessions in a computer lab.
Each learner had access to a computer with the software. The purpose of the tutorial sessions
were to develop knowledge of the software in preparation for upcoming mechanical design
assignments that involve the use of the software. A typical tutorial session was conducted with a
teacher-centred approach to learning. The entire session was the learners passively observing the
TAs demonstration of the software features on a projector screen and attempting to imitate the
demonstration on their computer. I cannot be certain to why the learning environment was
facilitated in this manner but I suspect it must have been believed to be an effective way to pass
along a skill to a large number of learners.
Behaviourist theory proposes that learning occurs when there is a change in observable
behaviour. Siemens (Siemens, 2005) describes a behaviouristic approach to learning as, The
observer is assumed ignorant in the first instance as the majority of available data is held in an
inner situation away from facile investigations. During the tutorial sessions, it was assumed that
the TA held all the knowledge in regards to the software and the learners had no prior knowledge
on the workings of the software. The TAs demonstration of the software focused on showcasing

software features. The features of the software were broken down into a task and that task was
broken down into even smaller sub-tasks (Sink, 2008).
While a behaviourist perspective played a role in the external learning environment, we must
examine the learning environment as a whole. Social cognitive theory proposes that the learners
learning has three influences: behavioural, cognitive and environmental (Social Cognitive
Theory, n.d.). An example of the environment influencing cognition is the learner observing the
TA demonstrating the software, the learner reflects on the TAs actions, and imitates the action on
their own software. Cognition then influences behaviour by the learner comparing the results of
their software with the results on the projector screen. If the learners results dont match the
results on the screen, then the learner would direct a question to the TA to seek clarity.
The learners experienced the four conditions described by Bandura: attention, retention,
reproduction, motivation (Social Learning Theory, n.d.). The learners had to pay attention to
the TAs demonstration to ensure they received details on the workings of the software. The
learners would have to retain the task steps the TA took during the demonstration. The learners
would have to reproduce the task steps in order to complete future design assignments. And
lastly, the learners were motivated to learn the software because the design assignments were
worth marks towards their final grade.
When completing an assignment, a common theme would often arise, a learner would have to
use a feature of the software that was not demonstrated during a tutorial session. To put things
into perspective, this was during a pre-online tutorial and even a pre-user guide manual (the user
guide became available the following year) period. The TA was the software specialist and could
have been regarded as the more knowledgeable other (MKO) (McLeod, 2007). Unfortunately,
the TA was not available outside of tutorial sessions, often leaving learners unable to proceed on

the assignment. This lead the learners to experience a feeling of anxiety due to the task level on
the assignment being too high for the skill level attained during a tutorial session. Fortunately,
other learners would be in the computer lab at the same time, which offered a learner a
collaborative environment to complete the assignments.
It must be acknowledged, the used learning environment did provide the learners the opportunity
to know more about the software than they previously did. Therefore, it can be recognized that
learning did occur. However, it must be examined if the most effective learning environment was
used. Rather than providing a learning environment that was teacher-centred, I would have used
a learning environment that was learner-centred. I would have used a constructivist approach to
learning and used problem-based learning (PBL) as the main form of instruction. When
compared to traditional forms of instruction, it has been shown that PBL leads to long-term
retention and is more effective for skill development (Strobel & van
Barneveld, 2009)
Educational institutions should have an emphasis on developing learners who aim to achieve
new things rather than simply repeat what was done in the past (Piaget, 1964). The purpose of
educational institutions is to provide learners an environment where learning can occur. Learners
passively receiving information from a demonstration does not promote discovery. Problemsolving skills are developed through discovery and require an active learner rather than a passive
learner (Piaget, 1958). To encourage a more active learner, I would remove the demonstration
and assignment portions and replace them with the learners completing a design project of their
choice. In doing so, control and pace of the learning will be given to the learner rather than the
TA. As a result, the learner will construct their own learning of the software. No longer will the
learner be dictated common features of the software but instead they will be discovering and

investigating them. This type of learning environment will produce learners that are not only
problem solvers but also problem finders (Savery, 2006).
It can be argued that many of my suggested changes did occur during the assignment completion
portion. Feelings of anxiety experienced by the learners during the assignment portion could
have been avoided by the presence of a MKO. Therefore, the learning environment used during
the assignment portion has room for improvement. Rather than providing a demonstration to the
learners, I would have the TA take on the role of the MKO and facilitate the learning as it is
being constructed by the learner.
When using a constructivist approach to learning, one can propose that scaffolding by a MKO
can lead to a more effective learning process. Wood et al. (1976, p. 90) define scaffolding as,
Those elements of the task that are initially beyond the learners capacity, thus permitting him
to concentrate upon and complete only those elements that are within his range of competence.
The TA would act as support for the learner and could also use the opportunity to assess the
learners range of competency.
A learners range of competency can be regarded as the learners zone of proximal development
(ZPD).Vygotsky describes the ZPD as, "the distance between the actual developmental level as
determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as
determined through problem solving under adult guidance, or in collaboration with more capable
peers" (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 86). In other words, the TA would observe when a learner is in the
area where guidance would be most helpful for developing knowledge that could be applied in
other situations (McLeod, 2007). When a learner is outside their ZPD, and the task level is
appropriate, a learner can experience flow (Rathunde & Csikszentmihalyi, 2005). The learner

will experience feelings of clarity, control, motivation, concentration, and energized focused
(Rathunde & Csikszentmihalyi, 2005). If the task level is too high, the learner will often
experience anxiety rather than flow, which was the case during the assignment completion
process.
Through a lense of some of the learning theories discussed in this course, it can be established
that improvements to the learning environment used for a first year engineering course I took
were needed. Suggested changes discussed in this paper would result in a more effective and rich
learning environment.

References
McLeod, S. (2007). Lev Vygotsky. Retrieved March 16, 2013 from:
http://www.simplypsychology.org/vygotsky.html
Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. AMC,
10,12.
Piaget, J. (1964). Development and learning. In R.E. Ripple a& V.N. Rockcastle (Eds.),
Piaget
Rediscovered: A Report on the Conference of Cognitive Studies and
Curriculum Development (pp. 720). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
Rathunde, K., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2005). Middle School Students' Motivation and
Quality of Experience: A Comparison of Montessori and Traditional School
Environments. JSTOR, 3(111). doi:10.1086/428885
Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of Problem-Based Learning: Definitions and
Distinctions. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1), 9-20.
Siemens, G. (2005, January). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age.
Retrieved from International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance
Learning: http://www.itdl.org/journal/jan_05/article01.htm
Sink, D. L. (2008). Instructional Design Models and Learning Theories. In E. Biech,
ASTD Handbook for Workplace Learning Professionals.

Strobel, J. , & van Barneveld, A. (2009). When is PBL More Effective? A Metasynthesis of Meta-analyses
Comparing PBL to Conventional Classrooms. Interdisciplinary Journal of
Problem-Based Learning, 3(1).
Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1046
Wood, D., & Middleton, D. (1975). A study of assisted problem-solving. British
Journal of Psychology,
66(2), 181191.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological

processes. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.

Social Cognitive Theory. (n.d). In UOIT Principles of Learning wiki. Retrieved April 1,
2015, from: http://wikis.apa.uoit.ca/wikis/EDUC5001SEP10/index.php/Social_Cognitive_Theory

Social Learning Theory. (n.d). In UOIT Principles of Learning wiki. Retrieved April 1,
2015, from: http://wikis.apa.uoit.ca/wikis/EDUC5001SEP10/index.php/Social_learning_theory