Joining the dots

This is number 20 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 last post I featured the work of Marie Jahoda on ideal mental health. In this post, we will explore the Gestalt theory of Kurt Koffka. As usual, this is a simplified interpretation of the theory, so if you wish to learn more, please read the associated literature.

The theory

German born psychologist Kurt Koffka is credited with his colleagues Max Wertheimer and Wolfgang Kohler for introducing a theory known as Gestalt psychology. Gestalt is German for pattern or shape, and provides a useful explanation for visual perception. The key principle of Gestalt is that the mind organises a 'global whole' of what the eyes see. Gestaltists believe that the human brain is capable of perceiving whole forms even though only partial component parts may have been seen. The phrase 'the whole is greater than the sum of its parts' is particularly apt in terms of Gestalt principles, although Koffka's original phrase was 'the whole is other than the sum of the parts'. The Gestalt laws of perception are innate, according to Koffka, and introduce an organisation component into the old behaviourist stimulus response links so that S-R becomes S-O-R. There are many examples to illustrate the several laws of Gestalt perception. The law of continuity for example, can be seen when people view rows of spots, and connect them into a line in their minds. Central to this process is the law of Prägnanz which suggests that each of us is seeking order from chaos and meaning from ambiguity.

How it can be applied in education

Teachers can capitalise on some of the key principles of Gestalt to enhance and enrich the learning experience. Students will have an innate need to make sense of what they see or hear, so teachers could provide them with puzzles, challenges and problems to solve that require them to 'close' or make sense of. Joining the dots or filling in the gaps are strategies teachers can use to test understanding, but they can be more powerful methods when used to encourage students to study deeper.

One example would be ill-structured problems, which have several possible solutions. Ill structured problems are deliberately poorly defined. The solution the student chooses to solve the problem must be justified, which requires them to consider other possible solutions before making their decision. Ill-structured problems have been used in a number of educational contexts to promote deeper thinking, critical analysis and the development of more divergent problem solving skills.

Further reading 

Carlson, N. R. and Heth, C. D. (2010) Psychology: the Science of Behaviour. Ontario, CA: Pearson Education Canada.
Koffka, K. (2013 - first published in 1935) Principles of Gestalt Psychology. Abingdon: Routledge.

Previous posts in this series:

1.  Anderson ACT-R Cognitive Architecture
2.  Argyris Double Loop Learning
3.  Bandura Social Learning Theory
4.  Bruner Scaffolding Theory
5.  Craik and Lockhart Levels of Processing
6.  Csíkszentmihályi Flow Theory
7.  Dewey Experiential Learning
8.  Engeström Activity Theory
9.  Ebbinghaus Learning and Forgetting Curves
10. Festinger Social Comparison Theory
11. Festinger Cognitive Dissonance Theory
12. Gardner Multiple Intelligences Theory
13. Gibson Affordances Theory
14. Gregory Visual Perception Hypothesis
15. Hase and Kenyon Heutagogy
16. Hull Drive Reduction Theory
17. Inhelder and Piaget Formal Operations Stage
18. Jung Archetypes and Synchronicity
19. Jahoda Ideal Mental Health

Photo by Clemens Koppensteiner



Joining the dots 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 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.