HLTH 5463 Module 1 Learning Theory Comparison Example

Four Ways to Learn to Save a Life: Comparing Behaviorism, Cognitive Theory, Constructivism and Social Learning Theory for Teaching Hands-Only CPR to High School Students

Student Name

American College of Education

HLTH5463: Foundations of Health and Wellness Education

Module 1 Assignment

Instructor Name

October 5, 2026

Introduction

When a person collapses from cardiac arrest outside a hospital, the minutes before emergency crews arrive often decide whether they live. Chest compressions by a bystander can keep blood flowing to the brain, yet many people who witness an arrest do nothing, often because they do not know how or fear doing it wrong. Training is uneven. In a nationally representative survey of 9,022 U.S. adults, Blewer et al. (2017) found that only 18% reported being currently trained in CPR within the past two years, although 65% had been trained at some point, and that older adults and those with less education and lower income were less likely to be trained.

Schools offer a way to reach nearly everyone, and many states now require CPR instruction before high school graduation. This paper uses one concrete task, teaching hands-only CPR to ninth graders in a composite suburban high school health class, to compare four major learning theories: behaviorism, cognitive theory, constructivism and social learning theory. For each, it asks how the theory explains learning the skill, what teaching it recommends and where it falls short.

What Must Be Learned

Hands-only CPR looks simple but involves several kinds of learning. Students must recognize an emergency: a person who is unresponsive and not breathing normally. They must decide to act despite fear and uncertainty. They must call 911 or direct someone else to call. They must perform a psychomotor skill, pushing hard and fast in the center of the chest at about 100 to 120 compressions per minute and to a depth of about two inches in an adult, allowing the chest to recoil. And they must keep going until help arrives. This mix of perception, decision, communication and motor skill makes CPR a useful test case for learning theories, because each theory is stronger for some parts of the task than others.

Behaviorism

Behaviorism explains learning as changes in observable behavior produced by practice, reinforcement and feedback. It gives little attention to what happens inside the learner's mind and focuses instead on shaping responses through repetition and consequences. For CPR, behaviorism is well suited to the motor skill. Students kneel at a manikin and practice compressions repeatedly, receiving immediate feedback on rate and depth, ideally from a feedback device that lights up or beeps when compressions are correct. Correct performance is reinforced; errors are corrected on the spot. Resuscitation education research supports this emphasis: an American Heart Association scientific statement on resuscitation education recommended deliberate practice with feedback and mastery learning, in which learners practice until they meet a defined standard (Cheng et al., 2018).

Behaviorism's weakness is that it says little about recognition and decision. A student who can compress perfectly on a manikin in class may freeze at the sight of a real person collapsing. Drills alone do not build the judgment or the willingness to act in an unfamiliar, frightening situation.

Cognitive Theory

Cognitive theory treats learning as the processing, organization and storage of information in memory. It highlights attention, working memory limits, meaningful organization and retrieval. For CPR, cognitive theory suggests keeping the steps few and memorable, chunking them into a short sequence, check, call, compress, and using mnemonics or songs that match the compression rate. It emphasizes explaining why each step matters, because understanding supports retention: students who know that compressions move blood to the brain are more likely to remember to push hard and not stop. Cognitive theory also draws attention to retrieval, the need to practice recalling the steps rather than only rereading them, and to how memory fades over time. Its limitation is that knowledge in memory does not guarantee skilled hands or willingness to act.

Constructivism

Constructivism holds that learners build knowledge actively by connecting new experiences to what they already know, often through problem-solving and discussion with others. A constructivist CPR lesson would start with students' existing ideas: what they have seen on television, fears about hurting someone or legal consequences, stories from family. It would pose realistic scenarios, such as a coach collapsing at a basketball game, and ask small groups to decide what to do, then test their plans in simulation and reflect on what happened. This approach supports the recognition and decision parts of the task and addresses misconceptions, such as believing that mouth-to-mouth is always required. Its weaknesses are time, since discovery takes longer than direct instruction, and the risk that students construct incorrect technique without precise feedback. For a physical skill with exact standards, pure discovery is not enough.

Social Learning Theory

Social learning theory, developed by Bandura, emphasizes learning through observing others, the influence of models and the role of self-efficacy, a person's belief that they can perform a behavior successfully. Bandura (1977) proposed that self-efficacy is built mainly through performance accomplishments, vicarious experience of seeing others succeed, verbal persuasion and managing emotional arousal. For CPR, self-efficacy may be the critical ingredient, because bystanders who doubt themselves do not act. A social learning lesson would include a demonstration by a credible model, such as a student or a local firefighter, followed by practice until each student succeeds, encouragement from peers and teachers and discussion of fear. Stories of teenagers who saved someone's life offer vicarious experience. The theory's limit is that confidence without correct technique is not enough, so modeling and practice must be precise.

Comparing the Theories

Each theory illuminates a different part of the task. Behaviorism best explains how students acquire correct compression technique through practice and feedback. Cognitive theory best explains how they remember a short sequence and why understanding helps. Constructivism best addresses recognition, decision making and misconceptions through realistic problems. Social learning theory best explains why confidence, built by modeling and success, determines whether students will act. None is sufficient alone. A lesson built only on drills produces good technique without judgment; a lesson built only on discussion produces understanding without skill; a lesson built only on confidence risks enthusiasm without accuracy.

The Learner at the Center

The theories also differ in how they picture the ninth grader in the room. Behaviorism pictures a learner whose responses are shaped by the environment the teacher controls, which fits the manikin station but ignores what students bring with them. Cognitive theory pictures a processor of information with limited attention, which reminds the teacher that a nervous fourteen-year-old in front of classmates has less working memory available than a calm adult. Constructivism pictures an active meaning-maker who arrives with beliefs from television, family stories and online videos, some of them wrong, and who must revise them through experience. Social learning theory pictures a learner embedded among peers and models, watching who succeeds and judging whether people like them can do this too. In a real class, all four pictures are true at once. Some students have seen a relative collapse and carry real fear; some joke to hide discomfort; some have practiced before in scouts or sports. A lesson that takes the learner seriously must allow for these differences, which later modules will examine more closely.

Implications for Lesson Design

The comparison suggests a lesson that combines the theories deliberately. It would open with a constructivist discussion of what students already believe and fear. A credible model would demonstrate the three-step sequence, framed in a memorable form with the reason for each step. Every student would then practice on a manikin with a feedback device until meeting a standard, reinforcing technique. The lesson would close with a realistic scenario in small groups, followed by reflection on what students would do and how confident they feel. Because skills fade, a brief refresher later in the year would support retention. Module 2 will develop this into a full lesson grounded in one primary theory.

References

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191

Blewer, A. L., Ibrahim, S. A., Leary, M., Dutwin, D., McNally, B., Anderson, M. L., Morrison, L. J., Aufderheide, T. P., Daya, M., Idris, A. H., Callaway, C. W., Kudenchuk, P. J., Vilke, G. M., & Abella, B. S. (2017). Cardiopulmonary resuscitation training disparities in the United States. Journal of the American Heart Association, 6(5), e006124. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.117.006124

Cheng, A., Nadkarni, V. M., Mancini, M. B., Hunt, E. A., Sinz, E. H., Merchant, R. M., Donoghue, A., Duff, J. P., Eppich, W., Auerbach, M., Bigham, B. L., Blewer, A. L., Chan, P. S., & Bhanji, F. (2018). Resuscitation education science: Educational strategies to improve outcomes from cardiac arrest: A scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation, 138(6), e82-e122. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000583