Bandura and social intellectual theory diary
Excerpt coming from Journal:
Educating methods usually be extremely structured and teacher directed. Bandura’s theory suggests an alternative solution form of class room practice with respect to fostering scholar agentic self-regulation. Under typical developmental circumstances young children acquire rudimentary agentic capability through everyday contribution in sociocultural events and contexts. The introduction of agentic self-regulation by college students can be produced through energetic engagement inside richly equipped curricular options with the support of educators who inspire student risk taking and active, self-directed experimentation with alternative options. The tutor becomes a facilitator of learning instead of a dispenser of knowledge.
Social Cognitive Theory and Choice Theory: A Compatibility Examination, by Yvonne Malone
This kind of paper is definitely an examination of Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory (SCT), and William Glasser’s Choice Theory (CT). The concurrent concept of the both these ideas is that folks are active members in their own development. SCT contends that learning is usually accomplished by vicarious reinforcement, symbolic activities, priority activity, self-regulatory capabilities, self-reflecting capabilities, self-efficacy and self-reinforcement. Both hypotheses subscribe to the premise of individual responsibility, yet there are key differences in terms. SCT believes in rewarding your self, while CT followers would argue that rewarding oneself for “staying for the straight and narrow” is not the same as getting what you want and feeling great about having what you want.
Bandura’s and Glasser’s view on punishment differ significantly. Bandura’s analysis demonstrated the adaptation of violent patterns by children after witnessing models affect a doll, and the diminishment of this chaotic behavior following children witnesses models penalized for chaotic behavior. Glasser views equally punishment and rewards will be ineffective and unethical since they are a type of coercion used to manipulate people into desired habit.
The landscapes of SCT and COMPUTERTOMOGRAFIE are often diametrically opposed, although there are a few contributions that SCT can make to CT. First, SCT stops working and data specific performance that takes place at different stages of planning and executing manners. The language of SCT helps individuals provide focus and direction for their goals. Conditions used in SCT can be used to clarify CT principals such as top quality world images (visualization), preparing change in tendencies (forethought activity) and evaluating whether current behavior is having what you want (self-reflection). Finally, SCT can bring about CT in the way it specifies some of the concepts Glasser uses, but with no specifics, one example is future period perspective, self-efficacy and self-evaluation.
Bandura, A. (1999). Social intellectual theory: An agentic point of view. Asian record of interpersonal psyshology, 2(1), Retrieved July 11, 2010, from Academic Search Most recognized database http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=6hid=109sid=c8c83cd3-a0b1=49e0=8871-dffd0904343fd%40sessionmgr104
Malone, Sumado a. (2002). Sociable cognative therory and decision theory: A compatablity evaluation. International diary ofreality theropy. Vol. XXII, No . one particular, 10-15. Gathered July 11, 2010, from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=10hid=1112sid=78cbb354-63f2=4afl-bd6b-0bad71c31dd6%40sessionmgr110
Martin, J. (2004). Self-regulated learning, social cognative theroy, and agency. Educational psycholoigst, 39(2), 135-145. Lawrence Erilbaum Acquaintances, Inc. Retrieved July 11, 2010, from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=5hid=106sid=429b1e1d-4fa8-46f1-b702-7037d2b25bba%40sessionmgr111