From the Archive - Originally submitted as part of PGDE course.
Learning Theories
In recent years the focus of
education has undergone a paradigm shift.
Increasingly, the teacher will no longer find him/herself taking centre
stage in the classroom. Instead, the
focus has switched to the child. In
essence, there are now up to thirty “centres” in every classroom. With this in mind, the “one-size-fits-all”
traditional model of educating pupils en
masse has also changed (We Are The
People, 2009). It is no longer
sufficient to expect a classroom of pupils to all “get it” in the same way at
the same time.
This change towards a child-focused
approach has been accompanied by a renewal of interest in the psychology of
teaching. By understanding how humans
learn, educators can better equip themselves for delivering worthwhile lessons
which engage and stimulate their pupils.
Unfortunately, there is no Rosetta Stone to decode or unlock the secrets
of the learning brain and the complexities of the question has led to a number
of theories arising, all seeking to explain part, or all, of the learning
process.
Given the volume of research into
how humans learn, this paper will be limited to examining one of the most
popular theories, before going on to evaluate a more recent theory, which is
gaining popularity. This will provide
some idea of how this research has and is continuing to develop.
The study of how we learn is not a
new field of study. In fact there is
evidence that academics have been thinking about this particular concept since
the teaching days of Aristotle and Plato in Ancient Greece. Yet, it was not until the twentieth century
that psychologists started to look upon “learning” as a considered process,
worthy of academic scrutiny. One of the
leaders in this area was Jean Piaget.
Piaget was a Swiss zoologist-cum-psychologist who laid out his initial
ideas on child development in his 1929 publication ‘The Child's Conception of the
World’. Piaget went on to
revise and develop his initial findings in a variety of publications before his
death in 1980, and his theory has dominated thought on the nature of children’s
thinking and learning since the 1960s (Pound, L., 2005, p.36).
Piaget, like his contemporary,
Sigmund Freud, developed the concept of developmental stages. He believed that as children age they go
through cognitive changes, wherein they naturally acquire the skills to deal
with more developed challenging thought processes. Piaget suggested that a child
would learn by exploring the world around them, adding to previous knowledge
or, when the new knowledge clashed with previous understandings, the child
would make space for this new found knowledge. (Bjorklund, D.F., 2005, p. 81) However, Piaget claimed that the child’s
ability to do this was restricted by their biological maturation, and so he
associated each stage with a specific age-bracket. According to Piaget, there are
four stages of cognitive
development or schema: sensory-motor, preoperational, concrete
operational, and formal operational.
Sensory-motor
development, understanding of the world through sight, touch etc, was
attributed to children from birth until the age of 2 years. Children between 2 and 6 years old were
observed by Piaget to be able to categorise objects by colour, shape, size etc.
This was the pre-operational
developmental stage. Beyond the age of 6,
Piaget noted, children developed the ability to do arithmetic and logic
calculations. He defined these as concrete operations and stipulated that
children didn’t move beyond the mastering of this set of cognitive skills until
the age of 12 (Capel, Leask & Turner, 2009, p.255).
Piaget’s final developmental stage,
associated with children from the age of 12 and beyond, highlighted the child’s
ability to internalise advanced thought processes which enabled them to
organise and structure arguments, logically deduce solutions from a variety of
sources, and be systematic in their decision making and problem solving.
In a classroom setting, this theory
lends itself to a teacher-centric approach, where the teacher decides what is
to be learned and how (see Appendix 1).
This allows the teacher to ‘pitch’ the lesson at a level he/she feels
the pupil is ready for, both in terms of biological maturation and cognitive
development (Fleming, P., 2004, p.36).
To meet Piaget’s criteria, the lesson must afford each individual child
opportunities to link new knowledge and experiences with previous knowledge and
experiences. This process is known as assimilation. Children may also require time to consider new
knowledge if it contradicts what they already know, this Piaget calls accommodation. Without the child either assimilating or
accommodating this new knowledge, learning will not take place. Thus the teacher must understand the
capabilities of each child if he/she is to help each child effectively.
In modern education, it is clear
that Piaget’s categorisation based on a child’s age is too restrictive. The vast majority of schools utilise a
similar approach when building pupil classes.
In Scotland, pupils start school at 5 years old and progress through
school every calendar year, moving into secondary education at the age of 12, a
similar marker as laid out in Piaget’s work.
While these age-brackets are a suitable guideline for many children’s
development, and avoid stigmatising slower developers from the outset, there
are a great many that are excluded or let down by them. Schools today continue to compile classes of
age cohorts rather than of children of similar developmental maturation. A recent example of why this may be cause for
concern comes from a Scottish secondary school wherein a single class
simultaneously must provide appropriate learning for two disparate
children. The first is the region’s highest
scoring pupil on the standard ‘MIDYIS’ baseline test and the second is a
pupil with the developmental maturation of an 8 year old. With such a range of abilities,
differentiation of class work will likely fall short of helping either extreme,
and to avoid this, the school must employ additional support staff to prop up
the less developed child and to stretch the more developed child.
In the ninety years since Piaget’s
ground-breaking work was first published there has been a succession of alternative
and counter theories regarding child development and learning. In 1943 Abraham Maslow released A Theory of Human
Motivation in which he outlined the needs which
drive humans forward in life. From this
he constructed a 5-stage pyramid of motivation (it has since been extended to
7-stages) which outline human motivation from basic biological and
physiological needs such as air, food, water , shelter and sleep up through
categories of safety, belongingness and love, esteem needs to self actualisation
(personal growth and fulfilment) (see Appendix 2).
By understanding, or at least
acknowledging this hierarchy of needs, a teacher can be better placed to get
the most out of their pupils. One
student recently found himself removed from class by a teacher who was
struggling to hold his attention and stop his disruptive behaviour during a
pre-lunchtime lesson. Once in a
one-to-one environment, the pupil revealed that he had not eaten all day
despite having a 5am start due to his paper round. It is clear that the lack of food and sleep
may have contributed to this pupil’s inability to concentrate. This falls neatly within Maslow’s basic needs
criteria and would need to be addressed.
A teacher should promote health and wellbeing and model these behaviours
to help maximise every child’s ability to learn in class.
Maslow built this hierarchy on a study
of a small group consisting specifically of highly successful individuals, such
as Albert Einstein. He refined his study
in such a way because he believed that studying “crippled, stunted, immature, and unhealthy specimens can
yield only a cripple psychology and a cripple philosophy" (Maslow, A., 1954, p.236). Despite the limitations of his foundation
study, it is clear that Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is relevant to every human,
underpinning the forces which drive every human, regardless of cultural or
regional variances which may affect what precisely contributes to each
stage.
More recently, motivation has become a
major focus for psychologists who are keen to understand how people learn and
how to help people learn better.
Professor Carol Dweck is currently at the forefront of this field, and
she too has used Albert Einstein in her work, but unlike Maslow, Dweck prefers
to highlight Einstein’s work ethic and the attitude he adopted for overcome
challenges and problems rather than as a torchbearer of human learning.
Dweck’s most popular research looks at how
students perceive intelligence, the development of “mind sets” and how these
can change (depending on subject, teaching styles etc). These theories were outlined at the Scottish
Learning Festival 2009 (SLF09). The
crux of this work compares the Growth Mindset and the Fixed Mindset.
Growth Mindset learners believe that intelligence is not fixed, and they understand
that “even Einstein wasn’t Einstein
before he spent years and years and years of dedicated passionate labour” (Dweck,
C., SLF09, 2009). These learners look for ways to
overcome difficulties and focus on long term goals. In essence, in a Growth Mindset, “talent is just a
starting point; you jump off from there” (Dweck, C., SLF09, 2009).
Fixed Mindset learners are less likely to feel they can overcome significant challenges.
“When students are in this mindset they worry about how clever they
are. They don’t want to take on challenges and make mistakes; they want
to stay in their comfort zone” (Dweck, C., SLF09, 2009). The Fixed Mindset student believes that
talent or intelligence is fixed and innate, and “failure means you don’t have
it. And if you don’t have it, you will
never have it” (Dweck, C., SLF09, 2009)
In a Fixed Mindset it is
important to appear intelligent at all times, and to make learning look
effortless. Effort, challenges and
struggles are seen as negatives by someone with a Fixed Mindset because they show apparent weakness. However, these “negatives” are precisely what
contribute to a Growth Mindset
learner’s achievements. “They say, the harder you work at it, the better you’ll
be at it. They think that even
geniuses [like Einstein] have to work hard” (Dweck, C., SLF09, 2009)
Pupils can choose whether to be a learner or a non-learner (Dweck,
C., SLF09, 2009), but the teacher can affect this process, in effect teaching
a mindset to a pupil. That is, a teacher
can reinforce negative attitudes by praising results or can help a child to
become an independent learner where the pupil learns to see difficulties as
problems to be solved rather than the limit of their abilities.
To do this, Dweck calls for a change in traditional forms of
praise as a means of motivation. Rather
than praising an individual’s high scores in a test, the teacher should praise
the level of effort shown in the test. In
presenting feedback this way, Dweck suggests firstly, that the teacher can
convey the idea of valuing effort over talent.
By valuing effort, the teacher prompts pupils to try harder instead of
coasting along on natural talent alone, and this in turn provides the pupil
with the resilience, tools and ‘mindset’ to meet much more difficult challenges
in the future. This refocus of praise
will avoid further entrenching “Fixed
Mindsets” in the pupils who have achieved well and have a lot to lose if
they now “do something that might show that [they] weren’t clever after all”
(Craig, C., LTScotland, 2009).
Dr.
Carol Craig, of the Centre for Confidence and Well-being in Glasgow promotes
similar ideas on self-confidence, motivation and the ability of a learner to
learn. Dweck’s principles can help to
increase class motivation. In many
Scottish secondary schools, motivation is more likely to affect attainment and
class learning than bad behaviour, and while praising or punishing behaviour
can be a very motivating system in a school, praising effort is a much more
potent tool.
In a
class of 14 year olds, many will have learned to follow whole school behaviour
policies and will not actively disrupt a class, but few will have learned how to learn. Ask a class how they feel they coped in a
recent test, and it will soon become clear which of the pupils have developed fixed mindsets. A teacher wishing to increase the level of
involvement a pupil has in his or her education must first rid the classroom of
apathy. Using Dweck’s effort-praising
model is one way in which this can be done.
In one secondary school, teachers following a Positive Assertive
Behaviour Management scheme have adapted some of its elements to raise student
effort levels by building pupil confidence.
The effect of this strategy has been the empowering of the students so
that they feel able to make mistakes and to learn from them. But praising effort alone is not enough, it
must be followed up by the teacher imparting the class with learning techniques
and study strategies that will enable the learner to become a life-long,
independent learner. This may be a high
risk strategy though, as some children may resent not being praised on an
occasion when the work simply wasn’t challenging enough to stretch them. Lastly, the change in emphasis from result to
effort in a single class is not one which most pupils (nor parents, nor
employers) hold much store in. At the
end of the day, real success will be
viewed in how well they have achieved, unless this shift of focus also takes
places throughout our whole community.
While Dweck’s
effort praising will contribute to a child wanting to do better, it does not
help the teacher to help their pupil.
Any teacher needs to know that what they are teaching is being
understood in class, and also if any pupil is struggling to get to grips with the
content of the lessons. To further include
pupils and teachers in the learning process, the Scottish Government introduced
the Assessment is for Learning (AifL) strategy (see Appendix 3). This sought to ensure that “evidence of
learning is gathered and used in appropriate ways” (LTScotland website).
“Assessment for learning
shifts the emphasis from summative to formative assessment - from making
judgments, to engaging in ongoing activities that can be used to support the
next stages of learning” (LTS Video: Assessment for Learning, 2007)
The Assessment FOR Learning process revolves around
setting out learning intentions, goal defining and giving timely feedback. This process should allow both teacher and
pupil to better understand the learning which is occurring in the classroom and
to refine or revise any areas where learning has been less successful. It is just as important for teachers as it is
for learner, because if a teacher discovers that many members of the class
struggled to grasp the purpose of a class, then it may be that the teaching is
at fault. As a teacher you are “using information to adapt your teaching, or
the learning” (William, D., November 2007a).
Learning & Teaching Scotland’s Curriculum and
Assessment Programme highlights that research clearly
indicates that children learn best when they understand what they are trying to
learn and what is expected of them, are given feedback on the quality of their
work and advice on how to improve it. Children should also be involved in
deciding what needs to be done next, and know who can help them if they need it
(LTS, Curriculum and Assessment Programme, AifL section).
Black and
Wiliam define Assessment For Learning as 'all those activities undertaken
by teachers, and by their students in
assessing themselves, which provide information to be used as feedback to
modify the teaching and learning activities in which they are engaged' (Black, P. &William, D., 1998, p.2).
To enable children to understand clearly what they
are to learn and what is expected of them, teachers should clearly outline the
learning objectives at the start of every class. These can be in the form of statements or questions,
but should be clear and appropriate to the level of the class (see Appendices 4
& 5).
If assessment is to be a meaningful dialogue
between teacher and pupils then, Black and William assert, “opportunities for
pupils to express their understanding should be designed into any piece of
teaching, for this will initiate the interaction whereby formative assessment
aids learning” (Black, P., & William, D, 1998, p.11).
Through open dialogue, effective questioning and
self- or peer-assessment strategies, the teacher can build up a good picture of
how their pupils are learning.
In addition to setting learning objectives it is
imperative that the teacher also clearly states what knowledge or skills he/she
expects the pupils to have learned by the end of the lesson (see Appendix
5). These success criteria will help the
child know whether the lesson has been a success with regards their own
learning, and if they feel that they can’t match those criteria, they can discuss
with their teacher what they might do to gain that knowledge or skill, or
clarify anything they are unsure of.
This is all the more effective when pupils can collaborate with the
teacher to set out “success criteria” for an activity. By taking responsibility for developing the
success criteria, pupils become more aware of what it expected from them and
will better understand the activity.
This quality
feedback is essential for effective learning and teaching because it helps the
planning of pupils’ ‘next steps’ in learning (LTScotland website, 2009). Feedback is an integral part of the formative
assessment process and should be both given and received by pupil and teachers
alike. Without feedback neither would
know how to improve their own work.
Feedback can happen in any number of ways, and it is important that a
teacher builds this skill within the classroom so that pupils understand how to
engage with the process. Similarly,
teachers should introduce feedback as a means of gauging learning, and not
necessarily, as a means of judging pupil’s abilities or aptitudes.
A
common strategy for self- and peer-assessment is traffic-lighting, where a
pupil/or a peer will mark the piece of work as red (not understanding), amber
(getting there, but still needs some support/more though) and green (fully
understanding the subject matter). By
doing this, the pupil will become more aware of what they or their peer
perceive to be deficiencies in their knowledge.
The pupil can then take it upon his/herself to work a little harder to
build up their knowledge until they are comfortable with the subject
matter. An alternative to using colours
to indicate how pupils feel about their learning is to use thumb signals (both
thumbs pointing up for “good”, horizontal for “ok” and down for “struggling”).
Dylan William remarked that during research into
formative assessment they saw “students being very, very effective
commentators on each other’s work and giving very, very sound advice” and he
emphasised that the feedback that children give each other can be “a lot harder
than the teachers would give; children [would be] much tougher on each other
than the teacher would dare to be due to the power-relationships in the
classroom” (William, D., 2007 b).
A teacher should heed caution when introducing these
systems to pupils however, as it has been noted that due to the subjective
nature of this assessment, there can be a discrepancy (especially when used in
self assessment) between perceived capability and the child’s actual level of
understanding. Most notably, boys tend to over-estimate themselves, while girls
are more likely to underestimate their own understanding of a subject. Furthermore, in a recent class where the
“thumbs up, side or down” strategy was introduced, a minority of pupils took
the opportunity to ‘play the fool’. This
novelty soon wore off, and with the teacher reinforcing the idea that the
activity was taking place to help the individuals to learn, and that if this
strategy was used responsibly they could help shape future lessons, this became
a very useful tool which is used regularly with the class to great effect.
“Two stars and a wish” and “Pink for Think, Green
for Go” are common marking strategies which are utilised in Scottish secondary
schools. By not simply marking work with
a quantitative grade, pupils are less likely to disengage from the marking
process. By using colours to indicate
strengths and weaknesses, and using effective comments, questions or
suggestions the pupils gain knowledge about the quality of their work and how
they might improve it. These comments
can also further prompt a pupil to discuss their work with the teacher,
reinforcing the teacher’s knowledge of the child’s learning, and empowering the
child to take responsibility for his/her own learning.
Bibliography
Publications & Websites
Assessment Reform Group (2002) Assessment for Learning: 10 principles. London: QCA.
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B. and William, D., (2003) Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. (Maidenhead; OUP)
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B. and William, D., (2002) Working inside the black box: Assessment for learning in the classroom (London; GL Assessment)
Black, P. and William, D., (1998) Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment, (London, GL Assessment)
Bjorklund, D.F., (2005), Children’s Thinking: Cognitive Development and Individual Differences, (Belmont, CA: Thomson-Wadsworth)
Capel, S., Leask, M., & Turner, T., (2009) Learning to Teach in the Secondary School, (London: Routledge)
Claxton, G., (2009) Cultivating positive learning dispositions. In H. Daniels, H. Lauder and J. Porter (eds.) Educational theories, cultures and learning: A Critical Perspective, pp.176-187, (London: Routledge).
Fleming, P., (2004) Becoming a Secondary School Teacher, Ltd (London, David Fulton Publishers Ltd)
Hattie, J,. (2009) Visible Learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. (Oxon: Routledge)
Hayward, E.L., (2007) 'Curriculum, pedagogies and assessment in Scotland: the quest for social justice. 'Ah kent yir faither'',Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice,14:2,251 — 268, (Glasgow: University of Glasgow).
Kyriacou, C., (1997) Effective Teaching in Schools 2nd Revised Edition (Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes Ltd)
Lehrer, J., (2009) . The Decisive Moment. (Edinburgh, Canongate Books Ltd)
Maslow, A., (1954) Motivation and Personality. (New York, Harper Books Ltd.)
Miller, D., & Lavin, F., (2009) ''But now I feel I want to give it a try': formative assessment, self-esteem and a sense of competence', Curriculum Journal, 18:1, 3 – 25, (London: Routledge)
Mueller, C.M. & Dweck, C.S., (1998) Praise for Intelligence Can Undermine Children'sMotivation and Performance in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 75, No. 1, 33-52 (Washington, DC.: Columbia University)
McLuhan, M., & Fiore, Q., (2000) The Medium is the Massage, (New York, Bantam Books / Random House).
Pollard, A., (2002), Readings for Reflective Teaching (2nd edition). London: Continuum
Pollard, A., (2008), Reflective Teaching (3rd edition). London: Continuum
Pound, L., (2005) How Children Learn. (London, Step Forward Publishing Ltd.)
Powell, A., 16/11/2009 interview, in Edge, (2009) Britain’s Late Bloomers, available: http://www.edge.co.uk/news/britains-late-bloomers (accessed 21/11/2009)
Learning & Teaching Scotland, (2009) Curriculum and Assessment Programme http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/assess/for/keyfeatures/involvement.asp (accessed 22/10/09)
Learning & Teaching Scotland, (2009) Curriculum for Excellence: Literacy across learning. available at http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/curriculumforexcellence/responsibilityofall/literacy/principlesandpractice/definition.asp
Learning & Teaching Scotland (2006), Building the Curriculum 1, available at http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/curriculumforexcellence/buildingthecurriculum/guidance/btc1/introduction/index.asp
Learning & Teaching Scotland, CfE: Numeracy website http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/literacy/index.asp
Learning & Teaching Scotland, CfE: Literacy website http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/numeracy/index.asp
Learning & Teaching Scotland, CfE: The four capacities (online) http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/curriculumforexcellence/curriculumoverview/aims/fourcapacities.asp
McBryde,M., National Archives Scotarch email, 22/04/2002, available: http://www.gla.ac.uk/external/scotarch/0207.html (accessed 19/11/09)
Scottish Executive (2001) Adult Literacy and Numeracy in Scotland
Scottish Government, (2009) Literacy Commission Report, released 4 December 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/8394639.stm
Recordings / Speeches/Videos
Craig, C. (2009), Learning About Learning: “Fixed and Growth Mindsets”, Learning And Teaching Scotland website (accessed 30/12/2009): http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/video/f/fixedandgrowthmindsetscarolcraig.asp?strReferringChannel=learningaboutlearning
Dweck, C., Brainology: Online resource package, http://www.brainology.us/ (accessed: 31/10/2009)
Dweck, C., (2009). Keynote Presentation: “How Do We Make Sure Our Students Remain Learners?” Scottish Learning Festival 2009, 23 September 2009 available: http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/video/c/video_tcm4565678.asp?strReferringChannel=sharedvideo
Edge, (2009) We Are The People We’ve Been Waiting For (2009) Dir: Puttnam, available http://www.wearethepeoplemovie.com/
Scottish Government, A Curriculum for Excellence - The Curriculum Review Group: Purposes and Principles for the Curriculum 3-18 (March 20, 2006) available http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2004/11/20178/45863
Teachers TV, (2006) Formative Assessment, http://www.teachers.tv/video/565
William, D., (2007a) Assessment for learning, Learning and Teaching Scotland website (accessed 04/11/2009) http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/video/a/assessmentforlearningdylanwiliam.asp
William, D., (2007b) Self and peer assessment, Learning and Teaching Scotland website (accessed 04/11/2009) http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/video/a/assessmentforlearningdylanwiliam.asp
William, D., (2009) Keynote Speech at the National Numeracy Conference, Edinburgh available: http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/numeracy/aboutnumeracy/numeracyconference09.asp
Wesch, Dr. M. (2007) A Vision of Students Today (Manhattan, KS; Kansas State University) available: http://mediatedcultures.net/ksudigg/?p=119
Comments
Post a Comment