Learning Theories and Education: Toward a Decade of Synergy (original) (raw)
Related papers
The aims of the learning sciences (LS) are to understand the nature of learning from a broad range of perspectives, and to shape the ways that learning environments and resources are designed and used. LS incorporates both systemic and elemental approaches to investigating questions about learning, as a complement to the primarily elemental approach emphasized in cognitive science research. Thus, its greatest potential is in the integration of systemic and elemental perspectives. Four major themes are central. First, research in LS attempts to bridge the divide between research and practice. Second, research in LS is motivated by limitations of theories of learning and cognition for specifying instruction. Third, research in LS embraces the importance of analyzing and assessing complex interventions through both experimental and design-based research. Fourth, research in LS emphasizes the learning and behavior of the individual in interaction with the physical, social, and culturalworld, aswell aswith semiotic and technical resources. Research in LS can be conceptualized along a continuum of time scales, from the more microscopic to the more macroscopic. The time-scale framework illustrates how disparate research traditions and research methods can function within a unifying framework for the study of learning and complex behavior. The effort to ‘scale-up’ from more elemental findings to more complex, authentic settings has been generative for LS, but faces serious challenges. There is an alternate route to establishing a cumulative scientific knowledge base, namely, ‘scaling down’ from more complex, ecologically valid levels to more elemental levels. Studies of basic learning processes, framed in the context of the larger system, are well positioned to support impact in authentic settings.
Learning Theories and Education: Towards a decade of synergy
2006
Our goal is to provide an overview of important aspects of human learning that are particularly relevant to educators. Doing so represents an exciting but difficult challenge because human learning is a highly complex topic. Different theories have emerged as researchers have focused on different kinds of learning. Some have focused on the acquisition of skills such as learning to type, write and read (e.g.,
New research directions in learning and cognition
ZDM, 2014
Research in learning and cognition continues to extend the boundaries of possibilities for theoretical frameworks, research designs, and questions interrogated. This overview captures a snapshot of recent research for the purpose of drawing attention to new directions. It includes: types of theoretical frameworks employed to study student learning, the reciprocity of teaching and learning, and identifying underpinning conceptual understanding that can contribute to curriculum development, including a discussion paper on possible roles of algorithms. Future directions for research are then discussed. The papers in this special issue are briefly introduced in relevant sections. This paper draws attention to the increased use of multi-theoretical perspectives and what they have enabled us to learn about the complexities of teaching and learning in classrooms. It also draws attention to some of the innovative research designs and analysis techniques that have been employed to enable the answering of various research questions.
The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (R. Keith Sawyer, ed., 2005)
Curriculum Inquiry, 2008
The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences offers an authoritative summary of a relatively new field that draws from cognitive science, educational psychology, computer science, anthropology, neuroscience, education, and several other disciplines. The learning sciences broadly address all matters of teaching and learning in formal and informal settings. This volume provides an indispensable history of the trajectory of ideas across several decades, and an excellent reference for current research and future directions. It is an ideal resource for seminar and lecture courses at the undergraduate and graduate level, and is required reading for anyone involved in this area of scholarship. While it is difficult to provide a detailed account of such a comprehensive and eclectic volume, this review provides an overview of the main ideas found within its many chapters. The book is organized into six parts, with chapters written by researchers who are highly respected within their disciplines. The chapters are concise and well written, with ample citations for further reading. The volume begins with an introduction to the learning sciences, written by the editor, R. Keith Sawyer. He describes the field in terms of five core influences: constructivism, cognitive science, educational technology, sociocultural research, and the study of disciplinary knowledge. He also highlights the methodology of design research as one that is well suited for the study of how specific innovations influence learning and instruction. Part One of the volume is titled "Foundations," and includes six chapters that represent the core theoretical perspectives of the learning sciences over the past 2 decades. John Bransford and his colleagues lead off the section by discussing the promise of an interdisciplinary approach, addressing three major dimensions of learning: implicit, informal, and formal
Theories of Learning - a comprehensive image of the major theories and their possible connections
THEORIES OF LEARNING Supporting statement: The genesis of this diagram started as an idea of viewing different theories/models of learning visually and also to ascertain if there were any connections between some of the theories. This diagram might be used as a teaching and/or learning resource (in conjunction with the ‘Assignments and Learning Theories’ learning resource) for those who are related to the areas of education, though not necessarily in the field of education. Thus I envisage those who are involved in teaching and learning in other fields such as clinical medicine, professions, the sciences and the arts and humanities may also be interested. Needless to say, the possible connections are based on my perceptions and thus others may offer varying opinions, which are understandable. I initially used Tusting and Barton’s Models of adult learning: a literature review (2003) as a generic source of learning theories and built on from there. Of course, there are also other generic sources on learning theories such as Illeris (2007) and Jarvis (2010), which I have referred to. I would be grateful for any comments in order to develop this diagram further. Sai. Nov. 2018 Sai Loo (廬世胤) (BSc, MA, PhD, FETC, ACA, FHEA) UCL Institute of Education, University College London e-mail: sai.loo@ucl.ac.uk https://ucl.academia.edu/SaiLoo http://www.routledge.com/authors/i15172-sai-loo
This symposium springs from an ongoing effort to bring together contrasting methodological perspectives for the study of human knowing and learning. Specifically, we build bridges between two significant process-oriented approaches: Interaction Analysis (IA) and Knowledge Analysis (KA), to study how individual cognitive dynamics interacts with complex social dynamics. We demonstrate the kind of insights and outcomes of such integration, by zooming in, and explore two specific efforts to bridge KA and IA. Both focal pairs of analyses in this symposium make central use of the theoretical construct of coordination class, a theory is associated with KA usually used for analyzing the structure and dynamics of an individual conceptual system. Coordination class theory is used to extend an IA analysis in the first pair of analyses, and is elaborated on using IA methodology in the second pair. The presentations aim to stimulate discussions about the merits and constraints of such integrations. Symposium Overview An increasing body of evidence in the cognitive and learning sciences has led the field to recognition that human knowing and learning is incredibly multi-faceted in nature. Over the past decades, the field has come to understand more deeply how cognition and learning are embedded in social context, structured by both cultural forms and assumptions and by interaction with physical artifacts. Given this diversity in forms of complexity, it is not surprising that historically different intellectual lines have pursued diverse directions, drawing upon characteristically different methodological and theoretical assumptions. While multiple perspectives can offer depth and richness to our understanding of learning processes, there is a need for an increased focus on purposeful synthetic work in the learning sciences that can enable us to develop theoretical or empirical bridges across perspectives. The current lack of articulation across perspectives is both scientifically unsatisfactory and also has important consequences with respect to educational design, one of the central enterprises of the learning sciences. The current symposium is part of a larger, ongoing effort to bring together contrasting theoretical and methodological perspectives on learning (Brown et al., 2012; diSessa et al., 2010; diSessa, Levin, & Brown, under review). In particular, we are currently focused on building bridges between two significant process-oriented approaches to studying knowing and learning: Interaction Analysis (IA) and Knowledge Analysis (KA). This work is centered on the innovative and challenging agenda of studying how the dynamics of individual cognition interacts with complex social dynamics. The aim is in this work is to be mutually accountable to issues of both knowledge and interaction in analyses of cognition and learning. Some of the central prospective outcomes of the agenda to articulate and integrate perspectives include: • Extension and refinement of lines of research that were originally developed from one (KA or IA, in this case) perspective. • Re-situating central constructs, with respect to new a contrasting perspective in a way that can result in expanded meaning for theoretical terms or extending the range of previous empirical results. The current symposium gives examples of both of the above kinds of outcomes of integrative work. We examine in detail two cases of bridging KA and IA in an attempt to better understand processes of learning in interaction. We now give brief descriptions of the two methodological perspectives that are the focus of this symposium: IA and KA. Interaction Analysis, IA (Jordan & Henderson, 1995) provides methods that have been used to study conceptual learning and teaching as mutually-accountable, purposeful activity (e.g., Hall & Greeno, 2008; Stevens, 2010; Stevens & Hall, 1998) that is accomplished through the sequencing of conversational turns, the monitoring and repair of understanding, and how talk is designed with a recipient in mind. IA methods draw
Experiential Learning Theory: Previous Research and New Directions
1999
Experiential Learning Theory (ELT) provides a holistic model of the learning process and a multilinear model of adult development, both of which are consistent with what we know about how people learn, grow, and develop. The theory is called "Experiential Learning" to emphasize the central role that experience plays in the learning process, an emphasis that distinguishes ELT from other learning theories. The term "experiential" is used therefore to differentiate ELT both from cognitive learning theories, which tend to emphasize cognition over affect, and behavioral learning theories that deny any role for subjective experience in the learning process.