Tampilkan postingan dengan label theory. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label theory. Tampilkan semua postingan

Strictly for adults?

This is number 23 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. The last post featured David Kolb and his cyclical model of experiential learning. In this post, we review the andragogy theory of Malcolm Knowles. As usual, this is a simplified interpretation of the theory, so if you wish to learn more, please read the associated literature.

The theory

Andragogy is a well known theory of learning for those working in further and higher education, because it focuses on the supposed differences between adults' and children's learning. When Malcolm Knowles first proposed his model, he argued that the greater experience of adults makes a difference, and that problem centred learning dominates adult learning, when compared to the content centred learning of school age children. Other distinctions are also offered between adult and child learning, including the need for relevance due to adults being employed, and involvement of adult learners in the planning of their own education. Essentially, adult learning is different to children's learning, because it is largely self directed and self-regulated. Adults have skills children are still developing, so the approach should be different, says Knowles.

How it can be applied in education

A few years ago I wrote a critique of the theory of andragogy which can be read at this link. The essence of my argument was that there are fewer differences between adult and child learning than we have been led to believe. Although Knowles tries valiantly to delineate some important distinctions between the strategies and approaches of children and adults, the distinctions he makes are either meaningless or poorly defined.

Clearly, andragogy is a theory that is best located in the adult education sector. It can enable teachers in this sector to plan and implement programmes of study that lock into the needs and cultures of adults. However, some of the principles of andragogy arguably have just as much relevance in the compulsory education sector. Children can be, and often are, involved in the planning of their own learning. In fact, involving children in planning programmes of study will probably help them to learn more than if they were passive recipients of content. One thing we might concede is that many children are not able to direct their own learning, and need some firm scaffolding to enable them to focus. However, many are also able to regulate their own learning, especially if they are inspired and motivated by the subject. Furthermore, many adult learners I have encountered are less able to direct their own learning than Knowles would have us believe.

It is a nonsense to suggest that andragogy is exclusively concerned with relevance of learning because of the needs of adults to focus on their work and careers. Clearly, children also need relevance in their learning, because, although they don't necessarily have jobs, learning that is not relevant is simply a waste of time. And how can you measure relevance? Is learning for adults only relevant if it relates directly to their employment. Of course not. My argument is that learning is learning - and that we should not distinguish between adult and child in this respect. Many of the pedagogical models and theories I have featured in this series (see list of links below) are equally relevant to adults' and children's learning.

Take one of the key tenets of andragogy - problem based learning. If teachers conduct children's education by providing them with learning experiences that are problem based, oriented toward challenge and in which they are actively involved, they will inspire their students to become lifelong learners. If we ignore this, we are missing a huge opportunity.

Reference

Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., and Swanson, R. A. (2005) The Adult Learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development (6th ed.), Burlington, MA: Elsevier

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
20. Koffka Gestalt theory
21. Köhler Insight learning
22. Kolb Experiential Learning Cycle

Photo by Norwood Adult Services on Wikimedia Commons

Creative Commons License

Strictly for adults? by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Lightbulb moments

We reach number 21 in this 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 Gestalt theory - and the work of Kurt Koffka. In this post, we will explore another Gestalt theorist, Wolfang Köhler and his studies into insight and intuition. As usual, this is a simplified interpretation of the theory, so if you wish to learn more, please read the associated literature.

The theory

During the First World War German psychologist Wolfang Köhler spent time researching the behaviour of chimpanzees in the Canary Islands, and made some interesting claims about learning. He observed how apes, when presented with problems, would solve them through means which they could not have learnt previously. For example, their ability to use sticks to reach bananas that were beyond their normal reach, or the use of boxes to reach bananas that were out of reach in the roof of their cages led Köhler to conclude that some kind of insightful thinking was present. Köhler also noticed that there was a period of time between being presented with the problem to finding the solution. This thinking time led to a lightbulb moment when the ape suddenly realised the solution to the problem. British psychologist Graham Wallas called this thinking time the incubation phase - time needed before arrival at a creative solution, which is the illumination phase of thinking. Interestingly, the incubation period is not always identified with conscious thinking but is more often unconscious processing of the problem.

How it can be applied in education

Teachers should try to ensure that students are given enough thinking time. Time should be allocated in lessons so they can process problems before they arrive at their own solutions, instead of just being given the answers. Sadly, a large amount of schooling has been directive and didactic. This needs to change. It is what Ivan Illich once called these educational funnels, where there is little room for them to manoeuvre and little time to reflect. Giving students time to figure things out for themselves without being instructed, is very powerful learning. They will remember it for the rest of their lives. This is exemplified in some of the best flipped learning practices, but unfortunately these are rare. Students need that kind of lightbulb learning - thaqt Eureka! moment when they suddenly realise something new for the first time. Often teaching schedules don't have enough time programmed in for students to explore, incubate and then illuminate their learning.

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
20. Koffka Gestalt theory

Photo by Alan Cleaver

Creative Commons License

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

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

Creative Commons License

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

Behave yourself

This is number 19 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 Carl Jung and his theories of synchronicity and archetypes. In this post, we will explore the work of Marie Jahoda on ideal mental health. As usual, this is a simplified interpretation of the theory, so if you wish to learn more, please read the associated literature.

The theory

What is normal? We all have opinions on this, and these are usually based upon our own unique and subjective experiences. When students behave badly during lessons, everyone is affected. Behavioural management can take up more time in some lessons than teaching. Normal behaviour (read 'acceptable') is therefore something all educators have a vested interest in, and the causes of bad behaviour have become the focus of a great deal of educational research. Some of the answers come from psychological research. Psychologists such as Marie Jahoda were interested in researching the characteristics of 'normal' human behaviour. Jahoda specifically focused on what became known as ideal mental health. She proposed 6 characteristics of normal behaviour:

  • Efficient self perception
  • Realistic self esteem and acceptance
  • True perception of the world
  • Self direction and productivity
  • Voluntary control of behaviour
  • Sustaining relationships and giving affection

How it can be applied in education

The above listed characteristics seem intuitive, but teachers need to be aware of them and their effects on learning. Children need to feel that they belong and are accepted. Teachers should be vigilant to the possibilities that some children may feel as though they are on the periphery of the group and that they don't feel welcome. This may be because of other children's behaviour, but it may also be because the child has a negative self perception or a lack self esteem. Much can be done to improve this, including teachers encouraging children to integrate into the group, meet incremental challenges, succeed and gradually build on their own self-worth. Children naturally and actively seek out friendship, and are happier when engaged in a circle of relationships with other of their own age group. Teachers should be aware of this, and the negative as well as positive aspects of relationships, and their effects on self-esteem. Often simple solutions such as the configuration of tables and chairs in the classroom can optimise good behaviour, promote useful collaborative learning relationships and largely eliminate the marginalisation of individuals.  

Self direction can also be encouraged through the inclusion of student centred approaches to education where children take more responsibility for their own learning. There are more tools and technologies available to teachers than there have ever been, which if used appropriately can promote children's productivity. Learning through making and building is becoming an important component of active learning, and children naturally want to create their own content, whether it is drawings, models and paintings, or blogs and videos.

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

Photo from Wikimedia Commons

Creative Commons License

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

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

Creative Commons License

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

Activity learning

This is number 8 in my series 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 the last post we examined the various educational theories of John Dewey including experiential learning. In this post, we explore the work of Yrjö Engeström on Activity 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.

Activity Theory (AT) originated in Soviet Russia from the work of Vygotsky and Leont'ev on Cultural Historical psychology and Rubenstein and others on related neuropsychological perspectives. It is a complex theory which draws on a number of disciplines and it has far reaching implications for education. The Scandinavian school of thought that has developed around AT is arguably the most referred to in the literature and is largely based on the work of Yrjö Engeström.

Figure 1: Second generation Activity Theory
The theory 

Vygotsky's earlier concept of mediation, which encompassed learning alongside others (Zone of Proximal Development) and through interaction with artefacts, was the basis for Engeström's version of AT (known as Scandinavian Activity Theory). Engeström's approach was to explain human thought processes not simply on the basis of the individual, but in the wider context of the individual's interactions within the social world through artefacts, and specifically in situations where activities were being produced.

Figure 2: Interpretation of AT in the context of digital identity
In AT people (actors) use external tools (e.g. hammer, computer, car) and internal tools (e.g. plans, cognitive maps) to achieve their goals. In the social world there are many artefacts, which are seen not only as objects, but also as things that are embedded within culture, with the result that every object has cultural and/or social significance. Tools (which can limit or enable) can also be brought to bear on the mediation of social interaction, and they influence both the behaviour of the actors (those who use the tools) and also the social structure within which the actors exist (the environment, tools, artefacts). For further reading, here is Engeström's own overview of 3 Generations of Activity Theory development. The first figure shows Second Generation AT as it is usually presented in the literature. The second figure is my interpretation in relation to digital presence, community and identity.

How it can be applied in education 

Teachers should be aware that everything in the classroom has a cultural and social meaning. The way children interact with each other and with the teacher will be mediated (influenced) by objects such as the whiteboard, furniture, technology, and even the shape, size and configuration of the room.  This also includes its ambient characteristics such as lighting and noise levels. Learning occurs within these contexts, and usually through specific activities.

Teachers should ensure that those activities are relevant and iterative, providing students with incremental challenges that they can engage with at a social level, so that the entire community of learners extends its collective knowledge through the construction of meaning.  Teachers should also be aware that tools can limit as well as enable social interaction, so must be applied wisely and appropriately to promote the most effective learning.

Reference

Engeström, Y., Mietinnen, R. and Punamäki, R-L. (Eds: 1999) Perspectives on Activity Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Photo by Artaxerxes on Wikimedia Commons
Graphic by Steve Wheeler

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

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

Experiential learning

This is number 7 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 Mihály Csíkszentmihályi on Flow Theory. In this post, we explore the work of John Dewey on experiential and interactive learning. This is a simplified interpretation of the theory, so if you wish to learn more, please refer to the original work of the theorist.

John Dewey is one of the giants in the history of educational theory, and it's difficult to isolate one of his specific theories to discuss here. He was influential in so many areas of educational reform, that to choose one theme would do him a disservice, so I will highlight several of the areas in which he was ahead of his time.

The theory and how it can be applied to education

Even before the constructivist theories of Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky were widely known, Dewey was talking about how children learn best when they interacted with their environments and were actively involved with the school curriculum. He rejected much of the prevalent theory of the time - behaviourism - as too simplistic and inadequate to explain complex learning processes. He argued that rather than the child being a passive recipient of knowledge, as was presumed by many educators of the time, children were better served if they took an active part in the process of their own learning. He also placed greater emphasis on the social context of learning. At the turn of the 20th Century, these were radical ideas.

Dewey further argued that for education to be at its most effective, children should be given learning opportunities that enabled them to link present content to previous experiences and knowledge. Again, this was a ground breaking idea for the period. Yet another feature in Dewey's theories was the need for learners to engage directly with their environment, in what came to be known as experiential learning, where 'knowledge comes from the impressions made upon us by natural objects.' This approach led later to a number of other similar approaches such as problem based learning and inquiry based learning.

Notwithstanding, Dewey was wary of placing too much emphasis on the child's abilities, but preferred to place his trust in a more balanced approach to education where teacher, students and content were given equal importance in the learning equation. Ultimately, his belief was that teachers should not be in the classroom to act simply as instructors, but should adopt the role of facilitator and guide, giving students the opportunities to discover for themselves and to develop as active and independent learners. In some schools, a return to these values is long overdue.

Reference

Dewey, J. (2011) Democracy and Education. Milton Keynes: Simon and Brown.

Photo by Sharpemtbr on Pixabay

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

Creative Commons License
Experiential learning 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

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

Reaching further

This is number 4 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 Albert Bandura on social learning theory. In this post, we explore the work of Jerome Bruner on scaffolding of learning. This is a simplified interpretation of the theory, so if you wish to learn more, please read the original works.

The theory

Bruner's theory of scaffolding emerged around 1976 as a part of social constructivist theory, and was particularly influenced by the work of Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky. Vygotsky argued that we learn best in a social environment, where we construct meaning through interaction with others. His Zone of Proximal Development theory, where we can learn more in the presence of a knowledgeable other person, became the template for Bruner's model.

Bruner believed that when children start to learn new concepts, they need help from teachers and other adults in the form of active support. To begin with, they are dependent on their adult support, but as they become more independent in their thinking and acquire new skills and knowledge, the support can be gradually faded. This form of structured interaction between the child and the adult is reminiscent of the scaffolding that supports the construction of a building. It is gradually dismantled as the work is completed. In a very specific way, scaffolding represents a reduction in the many choices I child might face, so that they become focused only on acquiring the skill or knowledge that is required. The simplistic elegance of Bruner's theory means that scaffolding can be applied across all sectors, for all ages and for all topics of learning.

How it can be applied to education

It is important for teachers to provide opportunities for children to constantly learn new things. Some of those may be highly complex and will require support of a very focused kind. Teachers need to be aware of the developmental state of each of the children in their care, and should provide scaffolding that is appropriate. Although this may not be possible to do on their own, teachers can improvise and provide scaffolding through other support, including the use of other adults such as teaching assistants (para-educators) parent helpers, or more knowledgeable other children within the classroom. As children gain in confidence and competence in a particular areas, teachers might place them in groups to extend each other's learning further. It's also important that teachers recognise when a child is at the point where they begin to learn independently, and decisions can be made to set them free from the scaffolding.

Reference

Wood, D. J., Bruner, J. S. and Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychiatry and Psychology, 17(2), 89-100.

Other posts in this series:

Anderson ACT-R Cognitive Architecture
Argyris Double Loop Learning
Bandura Social Learning Theory

Photo by Clément Bucco-Lechat on Wikimedia Commons

Creative Commons License
Reaching further 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

Creative Commons License
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

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

Making memories

This is the first in a series of posts on important theories of learning and memory. Over the next few weeks I plan to work through the alphabet of psychologists to explain over 30 major theories that relate to teaching and learning. In each post I'm going to try to simplify some complex ideas and present the models and theories in brief, bite sized posts. Each will also have a brief section on how the theory might apply to everyday teaching and learning. Here's the first: John Anderson's ACT-R model of memory.

A considerable amount of research into learning has focused on human memory. A number of theories about how memory and recall function has been published, but one that stands out is a model derived from the work of Canadian psychologist John Robert Anderson. Adaptive Control of Thought - Rational - abbreviated to ACT-R (previously known as ACT*) - is a cognitive theory of learning that is concerned with the way memory is structured. The so called cognitive architecture of ACT-R is made up of three main components. These are represented in the model below (adapted from the earlier ACT* model)..

The theory

The working memory (WM) is the conscious part of the memory. Previously referred to as Short Term Memory (or STM), working memory itself is thought to be constructed of several kinds of memory, including visual and auditory stores (See the work of Baddeley and Hitch and my earlier blog post memories are made of this for more on this idea). Working memory is the active buffer between the sensory register (the senses) and Long Term Memory (LTM).  In LTM there are at least two forms of memory storage, concerned with Declarative (what something is - facts) and Procedural (how to do something). According to Anderson, procedural memory consists of sequences of actions based on pattern matching that is similar to computing instructions such as if-then - if this happens, then do that. Declarative memory on the other hand, holds factual knowledge, and any relevant association and context.

How it can be applied in education

The ACT-R model of memory could be applied in education in a number of ways. Teachers should be aware that there are different kinds of memory, and that these associate with each other through the limited Working Memory. Overloading WM with too much information at once will not be conducive to good knowledge making (see my previous post Memory Full for more on this problem). At the same time, encouraging students to combine their knowledge with actions can have the effect of reinforcing learning in both procedural and declarative memory. A combination of thinking and doing can be a powerful mix of activity to deepen learning in just about any subject area.

NB: This is a simplified version of a complex theory. If you want to know more, you are advised to seek out the published literature in this field including:

Anderson, J. R. (1990) The adaptive character of thought. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Graphic by Steve Wheeler

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