Drive through learning

This is number 16 in my series on learning theories. I'm working through the alphabet of psychologists and theorists, providing a brief overview of each theory, and how it can be applied in education. In my most recent post I featured the theory of Heutagogy by Stewart Hase and Chris Kenyon and its applications to education. In this post, we will explore Clark Hull's drive reduction theory of motivation. As usual, this is a simplified interpretation of the theory, so if you wish to learn more, please read the associated literature.

The theory

American psychologist Clark Hull is credited with developing the first theory of human motivation. Known as drive reduction theory, his approach sits in the behavioural school of thinking. Drive is the tension caused by the desire to satisfy basic biological needs such as thirst, hunger and the need for warmth. Hull believed that as we seek to maintain an internal balance (homeostasis) where these needs are fulfilled, so we then repeat these behaviours (reinforcement) to maintain pleasant feelings, whilst avoiding the tension or unpleasant feelings created by the imbalance. In a nutshell, people are motivated by the need to reduce unpleasant feelings by reinstating internal biological balances.

How it can apply in education

Clearly, although this was considered a useful theory many years ago, our thinking has moved on, and many behaviouristic theories such as drive theory have been largely rejected. Hull's theory fails to explain complex human behaviours with simple stimulus-response chains that characterise behaviourism. There is no room in Hull's theory for example, to explain how humans can continue to explore their environment, solve problems and generate creative work even though they may be cold, hungry or thirsty.

And yet, there are areas of learning within which Hull's theory could possibly apply. Elements of his theory are present in Maslow's more humanistic and learner-centred Hierarchy of Human Needs model. Although this is in itself a flawed and contentious model, Maslow's hierarchy has been used to explain more compex motivational processes. Furthermore, although drive reduction describes simple biological needs such as hunger and thirst, more complex human phenomena such as uncertainty and doubt could be considered drives which need to be reduced. Students who experience a dissonance that brings uncertainty may become anxious or stressed. If this happens students may seek to reduce this drive by putting more effort into mastering their subject.

Or they may simply run away.

Reference

Hull, C. L. (1935). The Conflicting Psychologies of Learning: A Way Out. Psychological Review, 42, 491-516.

Previous posts in this series:

Anderson ACT-R Cognitive Architecture
Argyris Double Loop Learning
Bandura Social Learning Theory
Bruner Scaffolding Theory
Craik and Lockhart Levels of Processing
Csíkszentmihályi Flow Theory
Dewey Experiential Learning
Engeström Activity Theory
Ebbinghaus Learning and Forgetting Curves
Festinger Social Comparison Theory
Festinger Cognitive Dissonance Theory
Gardner Multiple Intelligences Theory
Gibson Affordances Theory
Gregory Visual Perception Hypothesis
Hase and Kenyon Heutagogy

Photo from Roberto Fermino blog



Drive through learning by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Conflict resolution

This is number 11 in my series of short posts on learning theories. My intention is to work through the alphabet of psychologists and provide a brief overview of each theory, and how it can be applied in education. In my most recent post I examined Leon Festinger's work on social comparison and its applications to education. In this post, we continue to explore Festinger's work, this time focusing on his theory of cognitive dissonance. This is a simplified interpretation of the theory, so if you wish to learn more, please read the associated literature.

The theory

American psychologist Leon Festinger was interested in the conflict that we experience when our beliefs or values do not coincide with other values and beliefs. We naturally like consistency but if this consistency is challenged by external influences, we experience discomfort, and tend to attempt to rationalise this through reasoning. Festinger called this phenomenon cognitive dissonance. In effect, says Festinger, we seek to reduce our dissonance through attempting to rationalise our thoughts and beliefs and those with which they conflict. This may emerge as modified behaviour to reduce the dissonance, or alternatively an entrenchment of our previous beliefs and a rejection of those inconsistent with our own beliefs. Cognitive dissonance is essentially a theory of motivation through conflict resolution.

Here is one of Festinger's examples of cognitive dissonance in real life: "The person who continues to smoke, knowing that it is bad for his health, may also feel (a) he enjoys smoking so much it is worth it; (b) the chances of his health suffering are not as serious as some would make out; (c) he can't always avoid every possible dangerous contingency and still live; and (d) perhaps even if he stopped smoking he would put on weight which is equally bad for his health. So, continuing to smoke is, after all, consistent with his ideas about smoking." (Festinger, 1957, p 2)

How it can be applied in education

A lot of learning is based upon making decisions and solving problems. Indeed, problem based learning is thought to be one of the most effective situated learning methods. Some problems we encounter in education have conflicting outcomes. As Kendra Cherry argues: "Cognitive dissonance plays a role in many value judgements, decisions and evaluations. Becoming aware of how conflicting beliefs impact the decision-making process is a great way to improve your ability to make faster and more accurate choices." Teachers should be aware that often, such conflicting outcomes can lead to confusion. However, if managed appropriately, this can be a positive motivator for students to learn more. Ill-structured problems, where the problem is only partially defined and where students need to 'fill in the gaps' discover that such problems can have several possible solutions. Each solution is valid, and deeper learning occurs through discussion between students on which solution is the best.

I have previously stated that I sometimes send my students out confused. This is a deliberate pedagogical method to spur them on to learn more - to attempt to reduce their cognitive dissonance by wider study of their course material and deeper critical reflection on their learning.

Often in learning, our expectations are not realised by the reality of a situation. This results in disappointment, which can be described as a form of cognitive dissonance. How we cope with this disappointment defines who we become. Teachers should be aware that not all disappointment is negative, and that some experiences where reality does not meet expectation could be exactly the motivation students need to try harder. As ever however, such classroom tactics should be premised on a good knowledge of one's students.

Even in behaviour management, cognitive dissonance can provide some useful guidance. Where behaviour is concerned, personal learning through reasoning is stronger than the threat of punishment. Hans and Michael Eysenck (1981) wrote that teaching children that stone-throwing is anti-social can be more effective if they are challenged to think about their actions, rather than being threatened with punishment. They comment that it is better for a child to reduce his cognitive dissonance by reasoning that he should stop throwing stones because he realises it is wrong, than to think 'I was forced to stop throwing stones but I still want to do it'. If he reasons for himself, he is more likely to think 'I don't really want to throw stones anyway.'

Here are a few more ideas on how cognitive dissonance could be applied in education.

References

Eysenck, H. and Eysenck, M. (1981) Mindwatching. London: Book Club Associates.
Festinger, L. (1957) A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Los Angeles: Stanford University Press.

Previous posts in this series:

Anderson ACT-R Cognitive Architecture
Argyris Double Loop Learning
Bandura Social Learning Theory
Bruner Scaffolding Theory
Craik and Lockhart Levels of Processing
Csíkszentmihályi Flow Theory
Dewey Experiential Learning
Engeström Activity Theory
Ebbinghaus Learning and Forgetting Curves
Festinger Social Comparison Theory

Photo by Brenna Lyn on Flickr


Conflict resolution Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

In the flow

This is number 6 in my blog series on major learning theories. My plan is to work through the alphabet of psychologists and provide a brief overview of their theories, and how each can be applied in education. In the last post we examined the work of Craik and Lockhart on Levels of Processing theory. In this post, we explore the work of Mihály Csíkszentmihályi on Flow Theory. This is a simplified interpretation of the theory, so if you wish to learn more, please refer to the original work of the theorist.

There is an interesting news report on the BBC News website this morning. It is a piece claiming that children who use technology at home are finding that they are not able to concentrate in school. They are not able to focus, claims the report, because 'they're spending so much time on digital games or social media.' Yeah right. It's easy to blame lack of concentration on technology, but what about the quality of the lessons they are attending? The onus is on teachers to make lessons more interesting, and that is what they are trained to do. Part of the solution might be to incorporate these digital games and social media into some of the lessons. Just how can we engage students more effectively? Here's Flow Theory:

The theory

You know that moment when you are in the zone, on the ball, completely focused? You become so absorbed by what you are doing that your forget what the time is, you forget to eat, you miss sleep. That's essentially what flow is. According to Mihály Csíkszentmihályi, being in the flow is the ultimate in focused intrinsic motivation. In simplistic terms, being in the flow is where students find themselves in that narrow channel between disinterest and fear. There is a fine balance between the challenge of the task, and the skills the learner has at their disposal. Maintaining this balance avoids disillusionment if your skills don't measure up to the challenge, or boredom if the task is too simple and easy to achieve.

How it can be applied in education

Learners who are immersed in their studies tend to be single-mindedly motivated to explore their topic. Getting them to the place where they fall so in love with learning that little else matters is another matter entirely. One of the ways teachers can help students to focus more on their studies is to make learning so irresistible that there is seems to be no other option. Games and gamification may offer students the fine equilibrium between boredom and anxiety, as will other forms of immersive learning such as role play, simulation and problem solving. As long as the learning resource is designed to have the appropriate levels of challenge built into it, students will be interested. The graphic illustrates this clearly. P2 and P3 are positions that should be traversed quickly if students are to remain in the flow.

To be successful, challenge based learning requires achievable goals that require some incremental development of skills beyond the average, and where the challenge rises commensurately to match those skills (student progresses from P1 to P4). If the subject matter is made interesting and enjoyable enough, teachers won't have to work too hard to encourage students to actively engage. They will do so naturally, because they will want to rise to the challenge, and succeed because they see no other possible outcome.

Reference

Csíkszentmihályi, M. (1990) Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. London: Harper and Row.

Previous posts in this series:

Anderson ACT-R Cognitive Architecture
Argyris Double Loop Learning
Bandura Social Learning Theory
Bruner Scaffolding Theory
Craik and Lockhart Levels of Processing

Photo by Randy on Wikimedia Commons
Graphic by Steve Wheeler


In the flow by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Watch and learn

This is the third in my blog series on major learning theories. My plan is to work through the alphabet of psychologists and provide a brief overview of their theories, and how each can be applied in education. Yesterday we examined the work of Chris Argyris on double loop learning. Today, we explore the work of Albert Bandura on social learning theory.

It's been said that Albert Bandura's theory of social learning spans the gap between behaviourism and cognitivism. Social learning theory incorporates the idea of behaviour reinforcement from the former, and cognitive processes such as attention, motivation and memory from the latter. In fact, Social Learning theory is essentially - as the name suggests - an explanation of how we learn when we are in social contexts.

The theory

It was Albert Bandura's intention to explain how children learn in social environments by observing and then imitating the behaviour of others. In essence, be believed that learning could not be fully explained simply through reinforcement, but that the presence of others was also an influence. He noticed that the consequences of an observed behaviour often determined whether or not children adopted the behaviour themselves. Through a series of experiments, he watched children as they observed adults attacking Bobo Dolls. When hit, the dolls fell over and then bounced back up again. Then children were then let loose, and imitated the aggressive behaviour of the adults. However, when they observed adults acting aggressively and then being punished, Bandura noted that the children were less willing to imitate the aggressive behaviour themselves.

From his research Bandura formulated four principles of social learning. These were:
1. Attention. We cannot learn if we are not focused on the task. If we see something as being novel or different in some way, we are more likely to make it the focus of their attention. Social contexts help to reinforce these perceptions.
2. Retention. We learn by internalising information in our memories. We recall that information later when we are required to respond to a situation that is similar the situation within which we first learnt the information.
3. Reproduction. We reproduce previously learnt information (behaviour, skills, knowledge) when required. However, practice through mental and physical rehearsal often improves our responses.
4. Motivation. We need to be motivated to do anything. Often that motivation originates from our observation of someone else being rewarded or punished for something they have done or said. This usually motivates us later to do, or avoid doing, the same thing.

How it can be applied to education

Social modelling is a very powerful method of education. If children see positive consequences from a particular type of behaviour, they are more likely to repeat that behaviour themselves. Conversely, if negative consequences are the result, they are less likely to perform that behaviour. Novel and unique contexts often capture students' attention, and can stand out in the memory. Students are more motivated to pay attention if they see others around them also paying attention. Another less obvious application of this theory is to encourage students to develop their individual self efficacy through confidence building and constructive feedback, a concept that is rooted in social learning theory.

Reference

Bandura, A. (1977) Social Learning Theory. New York: General Learning Press.

Photo by MikePD


Watch and learn by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

In the loop (twice)

This is the second in my series of short blog posts on important theories of learning. My plan is to work through the alphabet of psychologists and provide a brief overview of their theories, and how each can be applied to education. In the first post we looked at John Anderson's cognitive architecture model ACT-R.

Today, I'm going to discuss the work of Chris Argyris and his theory of double loop learning. This is a simplified explanation of the theory, so those who wish to read more deeply should read to the volume in the reference section.

The theory

Argyris bases his theory on the premise that each of us has a cognitive map inside our heads - in other words, a mental script to deal with problems and challenges based on previous experience. Working with others including Donald Schon, Argyris developed this idea into a theory of learning. We live and work in a mode of 'detection and correction of error'. When we meet a problem, we fall back on our experience (including the rules and what we are allowed to do within them) and attempt to address the problem from this mental array of skills and knowledge - known as our 'espoused theory of action'. We learn to develop a theory for everything, and this becomes our way of coping with change, decision making and challenges that come our way. Argyris calls this process Single Loop learning, and sees it as the most common response. He likens this to a thermostat in your house. When it becomes too warm, the thermostat turns down the heating.

Alternatively, in Double Loop learning, we learn to think outside of the box. We learn to examine the problem from a different angle, perhaps questioning the rules (what Argyris calls the 'governing variables'), and attempting to make changes that are more holistic and wide ranging than merely solving the problem itself. As Argyris and Schon wrote in 1978, 'Double loop learning occurs when the error is detected and corrected in ways that involve the modification of an organization's underlying norms, policies and objectives' (p 2-3).

How it can be applied in education

It's clear that Argyris's work is aimed at organisational learning, so his work is of great relevance for learning and development professionals. Those who manage change in large organisations would also have an interest in how double loop learning (and the thinking behind it) might be encouraged. Essentially, Argyris is calling for creative approaches to problem solving, where the problems themselves become opportunities for workers to improve their organisation, reflect on their practice and implement change that is sustainable and effective. The theory also has applications in education where teachers can encourage their students to think more widely than the problem itself, examining the entire context in which the problem is presented. Creative and critical thinking of this kind can often lead the learner to a global appreciation of the topic they are studying.

Reference

Argyris, C. and Schon, D. A. (1978) Organizational Learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.

Photo by Albert Debruijn
Graphic by xjent03 on Wikimedia Commons


In the loop (twice) by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Taking risks

Students, when asked, are usually quite honest. What engages them in learning the most is taking risks and having fun. This was mentioned recently by a headteacher of a school in England, who argued that schools are too risk averse today, and we need to inject some excitement back into lessons. Those who can remember their school days will often remember the fun they used to have with their friends. Ask them when the fun times happened, and most of them will recollect them occurring outside of formal lesson time. Rigid standards and curricula, and a growing culture of strict health and safety in schools has militated against a lot of risk taking. 'You can't do that' has become the commonly heard phrase when someone tries to innovate.

So how can we build fun and risk taking back into the school day?

Firstly, we need to look at learning in a new light. Students make their own meaning. They are not taught. They learn - and only if they are motivated and inspired to do so. Giving students some latitude to make their own meaning by solving problems and meeting challenges is more effective than giving them the answers. Too often in the past teachers have presented answers, when they should be asking questions. Better still, get the students to ask their own questions. Kate Friedwald, a teacher in Christchurch, New Zealand believes in this, suggesting an approach that answers questions with more questions, finding out for themselves, and exploring. This is the start of enquiry based learning, and for some will develop into a lifelong interest in personal research.

Secondly, make lessons fun. Teachers can only provide so many resources, but the best fun and engagement comes when students create their own resources. This is learning by stealth. As they conceive and construct their resources and then present them, students are actually going through a process where they solve problems, investigate and learn more deeply around the topic. Varying the pace and offer of a lesson also works, as Sonia Guilana, a teacher in Spain notes. She introduces surprise elements, polling and games.

Thirdly, risk taking in a controlled environment such as school need never be hazardous. Experimenting under supervision with chemicals, light sources, language, videos, music, computers, historical events, writing styles, mathematical formulae, in fact just about anything that is in the curriculum, will offer new perspectives for students. The most important point to consider here is to ensure that the lessons are not only physically safe, but also psychologically safe. That means that students are allowed to make mistakes, and are not penalised for doing so. Some of the best learning comes from reflection on failure rather than on success. Kate Galloway, a lecturer at James Cook University in Cairns, Australia, argues that there is no real learning without some form of risk.

Finally, a word of advice from former deputy head teacher and now independent education consultant Dave Mitchell, who suggests that all teachers should imagine themselves being a student in the class. Wise words.

'The secret of change is to focus your energy not on fighting the old, but on building the new.' - Socrates

Image by Zenos Frudakis


Taking risks by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Curious learning

Curiosity killed the cat, but it also made each of us who we are today. Without curiosity, none of us would learn very much at all. Learning is based more on curiosity than any other human characteristic. Children who are curious are always interested in discovering more. Children who lose their curiosity usually turn off and tune out. Children are naturally curious, but sadly, rigid school systems and curricula have often knocked this out of them by the time they graduate.

My wife Dawn, who is a teacher in a secondary school, told me this morning that the school inspectors are always demanding evidence that children progress rapidly. She went on to add that children will only progress rapidly if they are fully engaged in their learning, and that engagement can only happen if they are really interested in the subject they are learning. She's right. All educators instinctively know that children who are engaged, are children who achieve. Having a passion for your subject is always a good thing for an educator, and it has an impact on students. But sometimes it is not enough. Other means are necessary to promote curiosity.

The trick is not to rely on new technology. That doesn't necessarily impress younger students. The solution for engaging children and sustaining their curiosity is to engineer situations where they will be challenged, surprised and yes - kept in a constant state of suspense. Sometimes it is as simple as changing the format of a lesson, or altering the layout of a classroom. Sometimes it is to introduce a new approach or problem where students need to take an alternative role. I often create chaos and uncertainty in my lessons. People are not comfortable with this, and will do anything to resolve it into something meaningful. The answer is always, always keep them guessing - and then send them out confused, if you have to.

Sometimes technology can be used to support this process of maintaining curiosity. Giving students a problem to solve is one thing. Embedding the problem into a larger project where they need to rely on each other (collaborative), and their resources (content) and their own intuition and personal qualities (creativity) to achieve their goals. The process is equally important - what they do to get to their goal should require some stamina and fortitude, and it shouldn't come easy. Some of the best learning projects I have seen have been wide ranging, open to multiple interpretations, complex and problematic, and have involved technology of some kind to support the process.

We need to engage our learners. They will only be engaged fully if they can actively participate in their learning. They won't learn if they are not curious. The responsibility for this lies with the educator. Go figure.

Photo by Steve Wheeler


Curious learning by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.