Originators and Key Contributors: B. F. Skinner, built upon Ivan Pavlov’s theories of classical conditioning.

Keywords: response-stimulus, voluntary response, reinforcer

Operant Conditioning (B. F. Skinner)

Operant conditioning can be described as a process that attempts to modify behavior through the use of positive and negative reinforcement.  Through operant conditioning, an individual makes an association between a particular behavior and a consequence.

• Example 1: Parents rewarding a child’s excellent grades with candy or some other prize.
• Example 2: A schoolteacher awards points to those students who are the most calm and well-behaved.  Students eventually realize that when they voluntarily become quieter and better behaved, that they earn more points.
• Example 3: A form of reinforcement (such as food) is given to an animal every time the animal (for example, a hungry lion) presses a lever.

The term “operant conditioning” originated by the behaviorist B. F. Skinner, who believed that one should focus on the external, observable causes of behavior (rather than try to unpack the internal thoughts and motivations)

Reinforcement comes in two forms: positive and negative.

Positive and negative reinforcers

• Positive reinforcers are favorable events or outcomes that are given to the individual after the desired behavior.  This may come in the form of praise, rewards, etc.
• Negative reinforcers typically are characterized by the removal of an undesired or unpleasant outcome after the desired behavior.  A response is strengthened as something considered negative is removed.

The goal in both of these cases of reinforcement is for the behavior to increase.

Positive and negative punishment

Punishment, in contrast, is when the increase of something undesirable attempts to cause a decrease in the behavior that follows.

• Positive punishment is when unfavorable events or outcomes are given in order to weaken the response that follows.
• Negative punishment is characterized by when an favorable event or outcome is removed after a undesired behavior occurs.

The goal in both of these cases of punishment is for a behavior to decrease.

What is the difference between operant conditioning and classical conditioning? In operant conditioning, a voluntary response is then followed by a reinforcing stimulus.  In this way, the voluntary response (e.g. studying for an exam) is more likely to be done by the individual.  In contrast, classical conditioning is when a stimulus automatically triggers an involuntary response.

For more information, see:

• http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1975-20047-000

Originator: Collins, Brown and Newman

Key Terms: Modeling, coaching, scaffolding, articulation, reflection

Cognitive Apprenticeship

Around 1987, Collins, Brown, and Newman developed six teaching methods — modeling, coaching, scaffolding, articulation, reflection and exploration. These methods enable students to cognitive and metacognitive strategies for “using, managing, and discovering knowledge”

Modeling

Experts (usually teachers or mentors) demonstrate a task explicitly.  New students or novices build a conceptual model of the task at hand. For example, a math teacher might write out explicit steps and work through a problem aloud, demonstrating her heuristics and procedural knowledge.

Coaching

During Coaching, the expert gives feedback and hints to the novice.

Scaffolding

Scaffolding the process of supporting students in their learning.  Support structures are put into place.  In some instances, the expert may have to help with aspects of the task that the student cannot do yet.

Articulation

McLellan describes articulation as (1) separating component knowledge and skills to learn them more effectively and, (2) more common verbalizing or demonstrating knowledge and thinking processes in order to expose and clarify them.

This process gets students to articulate their knowledge, reasoning, or problem-solving process in a domain” (p. 482). This may include inquiry teaching (Collins & Stevens, 1982), in which teachers ask students a series of questions that allows them to refine and restate their learned knowledge and to form explicit conceptual models. Thinking aloud requires students to articulate their thoughts while solving problems. Students assuming a critical role monitor others in cooperative activities and draw conclusions based on the problem-solving activities.

Reflection

Reflection allows students to “compare their own problem-solving processes with those of an expert, another student, and ultimately, an internal cognitive model of expertise” (p. 483). A technique for reflection could be to examine the past performances of both expert and novice and to highlight similarities and differences. The goal of reflection is for students to look back and analyze their performances with a desire for understanding and improvement towards the behavior of an expert.

Exploration

Exploration involves giving students room to problem solve on their own and teaching students exploration strategies. The former requires the teacher to slowly withdraw the use of supports and scaffolds not only in problem solving methods, but problem setting methods as well. The latter requires the teacher to show students how to explore, research, and develop hypotheses. Exploration allows the student to frame interesting problems within the domain for themselves and then take the initiative to solve these problems.

For more information, see:

• Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1987). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing and mathematics (Technical Report No. 403). BBN Laboratories, Cambridge, MA. Centre for the Study of Reading, University of Illinois. January, 1987.

Originators and proponents: John Sweller

Keywords: cognitive load theory, working memory, multimedia learning

Cognitive Load Theory of Multimedia Learning (Sweller)

John Sweller’s paper, “Implications of Cognitive Load Theory for Multimedia Learning” describes the human cognitive architecture, and the need to apply sound instructional design principles based on our knowledge of the brain and memory. Sweller first describes the different types of memory, and how both are interrelated, because schemas held in long-term memory, acting as a “central executive”, directly affect the manner in which information is synthesized in working memory. Sweller then explains that in the absence of schemas, instructional guidance must provide a substitute for learners to develop either own schemas.

Sweller discusses, in his view, three types of cognitive load:

• extraneous cognitive load
• intrinsic cognitive load
• germane cognitive load

Intrinsic cognitive load

First described by Chandler and Sweller, intrinsic cognitive load is the idea that all instruction has an inherent difficulty associated with it (for instance, calculating 5+5).  This inherent difficulty may not be altered by an instructor. However many schemas may be broken into individual “subschemas” and taught in isolation, to be later brought back together and described as a combined whole.

Extraneous cognitive load

Extraneous cognitive load, by contrast, is under the control of instructional designers.  This form of cognitive load is generated by the manner in which information is presented to learners (i.e., the design).  To illustrate an example of extraneous cognitive load, assume there are  at least two possible ways to describe a geometric shape like a triangle.  An instructor could describe a triangle in a verbally, but to show a diagram of a triangle is much better because the learner does not have to deal with extraneous, unnecessary information. 

Germane cognitive load

Germane load is a third kind of cognitive load which is encouraged to be promoted.  Germane load is the load dedicated to the processing, construction and automation of schemas. While intrinsic load is generally thought to be immutable, instructional designers can manipulate extraneous and germane load. It is suggested that they limit extraneous load and promote germane load.

Extraneous cognitive load and intrinsic cognitive load are not ideal; they result from inappropriate instructional designs and complexity of information. Germane cognitive load is coined as “effective’ cognitive load, caused by successful schema construction. Each of the cognitive loads are additive, and instructional design’s goal should be to reduce extraneous cognitive load to free up working memory. Throughout the article, Sweller also draws interesting comparisons between human cognition and evolutionary theory.

For more information, see:

Sweller, J. (1988). “Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning”. Cognitive Science 12 (2): 257–285.

Sweller, J., Van Merriënboer, J., & Paas, F. (1998). “Cognitive architecture and instructional design”. Educational Psychology Review 10: 251–296.

Originator: Richard Mayer

Key terms: dual-channel, limited capacity, sensory, working, long-term memory

Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning (Mayer)

The principle known as the “multimedia principle” states that “people learn more deeply from words and pictures than from words alone” (Mayer, p. 47).  However, simply adding words to pictures is not an effective way to achieve multimedia learning.  The goal is to  instructional media in the light of how human mind works.  This is the basis for Mayer’s cognitive theory of multimedia learning.  This theory proposes three main assumptions when it comes to learning with multimedia:

1. There are two separate channels (auditory and visual) for processing information (sometimes referred to as Dual-Coding theory);
2. Each channel has a limited (finite) capacity (similar to Sweller’s notion of Cognitive Load);
3. Learning is an active process of filtering, selecting, organizing, and integrating information based upon prior knowledge.

Humans can only process a finite amount of information in a channel at a time, and they make sense of incoming information by actively creating mental representations.   Mayer also discusses the role of three memory stores: sensory (which receives stimuli and stores it for a very short time), working (where we actively process information to create mental constructs (or ‘schema’), and long-term (the repository of all things learned).  Mayer’s cognitive theory of multimedia learning presents the idea that the brain does not interpret a multimedia presentation of words, pictures, and auditory information in a mutually exclusive fashion; rather, these elements are selected and organized dynamically to produce logical mental constructs. Futhermore, Mayer underscores the importance of learning (based upon the testing of content and demonstrating the successful transfer of knowledge) when new information is integrated with prior knowledge.

Design principles including providing coherent verbal, pictorial information, guiding the learners to select relevant words and images, and reducing the load for a single processing channel etc. can be entailed from this theory.

References:

Mayer, R. E.; R. Moreno (1998). “A Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning: Implications for Design Principles”. http://www.unm.edu/~moreno/PDFS/chi.pdf.
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. (1999). “Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity”. Journal of Educational Psychology 91: 358–368.
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Originators: Carol Dweck, based on over 30 years of research on belief systems, and their role in motivation and achievement.  Discussed in her book Self-Theories: Their Role in Motivation, Personality, and Development (1999).

Key Terms: entity theory, incremental theory

Self-Theories (Dweck)

Carol Dweck (currently at Indiana University) describes a series of empirically-based studies that investigate how people develop beliefs about themselves (i.e., self-theories) and how these self-theories create their psychological worlds, shaping thoughts, feelings and behaviors.  The theories reveal why some students are motivated to work harder, and why others fall into patterns of helplessness and are self-defeating.  Dweck’s conclusions explore the implications for the concept of self-esteem, suggesting a rethinking of its role in motivation, and the conditions that foster it.   She demonstrated empirically that students who hold an entity theory of intelligence are less likely to attempt challenging tasks and are at risk for academic underachievement.

Students carry two types of views on ability/intelligence:

1. Entity View – This view (those who are called “Entity theorists”) treats intelligence as fixed and stable.  These students have a high desire to prove themselves to others; to be seen as smart and avoid looking unintelligent.
2. Incremental View – This view treats intelligence as malleable, fluid, and changeable.  These students see satisfaction coming from the process of learning and often see opportunities to get better.  They do not focus on what the outcome will say about them, but what they can attain from taking part in the venture.

Entity theorists are susceptible to learned helplessness because they may feel that circumstances are outside their control (i.e. there’s nothing that could have been done to make things better), thus they may give up easily.  As a result, they may simply avoid situations or activites that they perceive to be challenging (perhaps through procrastination, absenteeism, etc.).  Alternatively, they may purposely choose extremely difficult tasks so that they have an excuse for failure.  Ultimately, they may stop trying altogether.  Because success (or failure) is often linked to what is perceived as a fixed amount of intelligence rather than effort (e.g., the belief that “I did poorly because I’m not a smart person”), students may think that failure implies a natural lack of intelligence.  Dweck found that students with a long history of success may be the most vulnerable for developing learned helplessness because they may buy into the entity view of intelligence more readily than those with less frequent success (Dweck, 1999).

Those with an incremental view (“Incremental theorists”) when faced with failure, react differently: these students desire to master challenges, and therefore adopt a mastery-oriented pattern.  They immediately began to consider various ways that they could approach the task differently, and they increase their efforts.  Unlike Entity theorists, Incremental theorists believe that effort, through increased learning and strategy development, will actually increase their intelligence.

For more information, see:

• Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-Theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia, PA: The Psychology Press.

Originators and Key Contributors: First described by Ivan Pavlov (1849-1936), Russian physiologist, in 1903, and studied in infants by John B. Watson (1878-1958).

Keywords: stimulus-response, psychic reflexes, unconditioned stimulus, conditioned response, respondent conditioning

Classical Conditioning (Ivan Pavlov)

Several types of learning exist. The most basic form is associative learning, i.e., making a new association between events in the environment. There are two forms of associative learning: classical conditioning (made famous by Ivan Pavlov’s experiments with dogs) and operant conditioning.

Pavlov’s Dogs

In the early twentieth century, Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov did Nobel prize-winning work on digestion. While studying the role of saliva in dogs’ digestive processes, he stumbled upon a phenomenon he labeled “psychic reflexes.” While an accidental discovery, he had the foresight to see the importance of it. Pavlov’s dogs, restrained in an experimental chamber, were presented with meat powder and they had their saliva collected via a surgically implanted tube in their saliva glands. Over time, he noticed that his dogs who begin salivation before the meat powder was even presented, whether it was by the presence of the handler or merely by a clicking noise produced by the device that distributed the meat powder.

Fascinated by this finding, Pavlov paired the meat powder with various stimuli such as the ringing of a bell. After the meat powder and bell (auditory stimulus) were presented together several times, the bell was used alone. Pavlov’s dogs, as predicted, responded by salivating to the sound of the bell (without the food). The bell began as a neutral stimulus (i.e. the bell itself did not produce the dogs’ salivation). However, by pairing the bell with the stimulus that did produce the salivation response, the bell was able to acquire the ability to trigger the salivation response. Pavlov therefore demonstrated how stimulus-response bonds (which some consider as the basic building blocks of learning) are formed. He dedicated much of the rest of his career further exploring this finding.

In technical terms, the meat powder is considered an unconditioned stimulus (UCS) and the dog’s salivation is the unconditioned response (UCR). The bell is a neutral stimulus until the dog learns to associate the bell with food. Then the bell becomes a conditioned stimulus (CS) which produces the conditioned response (CR) of salivation after repeated pairings between the bell and food.

John B. Watson: Early Classical Conditioning with Humans

John B. Watson further extended Pavlov’s work and applied it to human beings. In 1921, Watson studied Albert, an 11 month old infant child. The goal of the study was to condition Albert to become afraid of a white rat by pairing the white rat with a very loud, jarring noise (UCS).  At first, Albert showed no sign of fear when he was presented with rats, but once the rat was repeatedly paired with the loud noise (UCS), Albert developed a fear of rats. It could be said that the loud noise (UCS) induced fear (UCR). The implications of Watson’s experiment suggested that classical conditioning could cause some phobias in humans.

For more information, see:

• Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned Reflexes: An Investigation of the Physiological Activity of the Cerebral Cortex. Translated and Edited by G. V. Anrep. London: Oxford University Press.  Full text available online

Key proponents: Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, Malcolm Knowles

Key terms: self-actualization, teacher as facilitator, affect

Humanism

Humanism, a paradigm that emerged in the 1960s, focuses on the human freedom, dignity, and potential. A central assumption of humanism, according to Huitt (2001), is that people act with intentionality and values. This is in contrast to the behaviorist notion of operant conditioning (which argues that all behavior is the result of the application of consequences) and the cognitive psychologist belief that the discovering knowledge or constructing meaning is central to learning. Humanists also believe that it is necessary to study the person as a whole, especially as an individual grows and develops over the lifespan. It follows that the study of the self, motivation, and goals are areas of particular interest.

Key proponents of humanism include Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow. A primary purpose of humanism could be described as the development of self-actualized, automomous people. In humanism, learning is student centered and personalized, and the educator’s role is that of a facilitator. Affective and cognitive needs are key, and the goal is to develop self-actualized people in a cooperative, supportive environment.

Related theories include: Experiential Learning (Kolb), Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, and Facilitation Theory (Rogers).

For more information, see:

• DeCarvalho, R. (1991). The humanistic paradigm in education. The Humanistic Psychologist, 19(1), 88-104.
• Huitt, W. (2001). Humanism and open education. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved September 11, 2007, from the URL:  http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/affsys/humed.html.
• Rogers, C., & Freiberg, H. J. (1994). Freedom to learn (3rd Ed.). New York: Macmillan.

Originator: Lev Vygotsky (1896-1934).

Key terms: Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), More Knowledgeable Other (MKO)

Vygotsky’s Social Development Theory

Vygotsky’s Social Development Theory is the work of Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky (1896-1934), who lived during Russian Revolution. Vygotsky’s work was largely unkown to the West until it was published in 1962.

Vygotsky’s theory is one of the foundations of constructivism. It asserts three major themes:

Major themes:

1. Social interaction plays a fundamental role in the process of cognitive development. In contrast to Jean Piaget’s understanding of child development (in which development necessarily precedes learning), Vygotsky felt social learning precedes development. He states: “Every function in the child’s cultural development appears twice: first, on the social level, and later, on the individual level; first, between people (interpsychological) and then inside the child (intrapsychological).” (Vygotsky, 1978).
2. The More Knowledgeable Other (MKO). The MKO refers to anyone who has a better understanding or a higher ability level than the learner, with respect to a particular task, process, or concept. The MKO is normally thought of as being a teacher, coach, or older adult, but the MKO could also be peers, a younger person, or even computers.
3. The Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). The ZPD is the distance between a student’s ability to perform a task under adult guidance and/or with peer collaboration and the student’s ability solving the problem independently. According to Vygotsky, learning occurred in this zone.

Vygotsky focused on the connections between people and the sociocultural context in which they act and interact in shared experiences (Crawford, 1996). According to Vygotsky, humans use tools that develop from a culture, such as speech and writing, to mediate their social environments. Initially children develop these tools to serve solely as social functions, ways to communicate needs. Vygotsky believed that the internalization of these tools led to higher thinking skills.

Applications of the Vygotsky’s Social Development Theory

Many schools have traditionally held a transmissionist or instructionist model in which a teacher or lecturer ‘transmits’ information to students. In contrast, Vygotsky’s theory promotes learning contexts in which students play an active role in learning. Roles of the teacher and student are therefore shifted, as a teacher should collaborate with his or her students in order to help facilitate meaning construction in students. Learning therefore becomes a reciprocal experience for the students and teacher.

For more information, see:

• Driscoll, M. P. (1994). Psychology of Learning for Instruction. Needham, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
• Crawford, K. (1996) Vygotskian approaches to human development in the information era. Educational Studies in Mathematics. (31) 43-62.
• Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Wertsch, James V. Sohmer, Richard. (1995). Vygotsky on learning and development. Human Development. (38 ) 332-37.

Originator: Abraham Maslow in 1943.

Key terms: deficiency needs, growth needs, physiological, safety, belongingness, esteem, self-actualization

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

Abraham H. Maslow felt as though conditioning theories did not adequately acapture the complexity of human behavior. In a 1943 paper called A Theory of Human Motivation, Maslow presented the idea that human actions are directed toward goal attainment. Any given behavior could satisfy several functions at the same time; for instance, going to a pub could satisfy one’s needs for self-esteem and for social interaction.

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs has often been represented in a hierarchial pyramid with five levels. The four levels (lower-order needs) are considered physiological needs, while the top level is considered growth needs. The lower level needs need to be satisfied before higher-order needs can influence behavior. The levels are as follows (see pyramid in Figure 1 below).

• Self-actualization – morality, creativity, problem solving, etc.
• Esteem – includes confidence, self-esteem, achievement, respect, etc.
• Belongingness – includes love, friendship, intimacy, family, etc.
• Safety – includes security of environment, employment, resources, health, property, etc.
• Physiological – includes air, food, water, sex, sleep, other factors towards homeostasis, etc.

Figure 1. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Pyramid.

Deprivation Needs

The first four levels are considered deficiency or deprivation needs (“D-needs”) in that their lack of satisfaction causes a deficiency that motivates people to meet these needs. Physiological needs, the lowest level on the hierarchy, include necessities such as air, food, and water. These tend to be satisfied for most people, but they become predominant when unmet. During emergencies, safety needs such as health and security rise to the forefront. Once these two levels are met, belongingness needs, such as obtaining love and intimate relationships or close friendships, become important. The next level, esteem needs, include the need for recognition from others, confidence, achievement, and self-esteem.

Growth Needs

The highest level is self-actualization, or the self-fulfillment. Behavior in this case is not driven or motivated by deficiencies but rather one’s desire for personal growth and the need to become all the things that a person is capable of becoming (Maslow, 1970).

Criticisms

While a useful guide for generally understanding why students behave the way that they do and in determining how learning may be affected by physiological or safety deficiencies, Maslow’s theory has its share of criticisms. Some have noted vagueness in what is a “deficiency”; what is a deficiency for one is not necessarily a deficiency for another. Secondly, there seem to be various exceptions that frequently occur. For example, some people often risk their own safety to rescue others from danger.

For more information, see:

• Maslow, A. H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychological Review, 50, pp. 370. Link to Full Text.
• Maslow, A. H. (1970). Motivation and Personality, 2nd. Ed., New York, Harper & Row. ISBN 0060419873.
• Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs at the University of Hawaii.
• Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs at Deeper Mind.

Originators: James Marcia, Canadian developmental psychologist and Emeritus Professor of Psychology at Simon Fraser University.

Key terms: identity status, diffusion, foreclosure, moratorium, achievement.

Marcia’s Identity Statuses

Based on Erik Erikson’s groundbreaking work on identity and psychosocial development in the 1960s, Canadian developmental psychologist James Marcia refined and extended Erikson’s model, primarily focusing on adolescent development. Addressing Erikson’s notion of identity crisis, Marcia posited that the adolescent stage consists neither of identity resolution nor identity confusion, but rather the degree to which one has explored and committed to an identity in a variety of life domains from vocation, religion, relational choices, gender roles, and so on. Marcia’s theory of identity achievement argues that two distinct parts form an adolescent’s identity: crisis (i. e. a time when one’s values and choices are being reevaluated) and commitment. He defined a crisis as a time of upheaval where old values or choices are being reexamined. The end outcome of a crisis leads to a commitment made to a certain role or value.

Upon developing a semi-structured interview for identity research, Marcia proposed Identity Status of psychological identity development:

• Identity Diffusion – the status in which the adolescent does no have a sense of having choices; he or she has not yet made (nor is attempting/willing to make) a commitment
• Identity Foreclosure – the status in which the adolescent seems willing to commit to some relevant roles, values, or gaols for the future. Adolescents in this stage have not experienced an identity crisis. They tend to conform to the expectations of others regarding their future (e. g. allowing a parent to determine a career direction) As such, these individuals have not explored a range of options.
• Identity Moratorium – the status in which the adolescent is currently in a crisis, exploring various commitments and is ready to make choices, but has not made a commitment to these choices yet.
• Identity Achievement - the status in which adolescent has gone through a identity crisis and has made a commitment to a sense of identity (i.e. certain role or value) that he or she has chosen

Note that the above status are not stages and should not viewed as a sequential process.

The core idea is that one’s sense of identity is determined largely by the choices and commitments made regarding certain personal and social traits. The work done in this paradigm considers how much one has made certain choices, and how much he or she displays a commitment to those choices. Identity involves the adoption of 1) a sexual orientation, 2) a set of values and ideals and 3) a vocational direction. A well-developed identity gives on a sense of one’s strengths, weaknesses, and individual uniqueness. A person with a less well-developed identity is not able to define his or her personal strengths and weaknesses, and does not have a well articulated sense of self.

To better understand the identity formation process, Marcia conducted interviews with young people. He asked whether the participants in his study (1) had established a commitment to an occupation and ideology and (2) had experienced, or were presently experiencing, a decision making period (adolescent identity crisis). Marcia developed a framework for thinking about identity in terms of four identity statuses.

For more information, see:

• Marcia, J. E., (1966), Development and validation of ego identity status, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 3, pp. 551-558.