Principles of Learning

Unlike many theories of learning the goal of this research is not to describe the psychological or biological workings of the mind and body that facilitate learning but to identify fundamental and universal principles that govern the learning process. Without knowing the details of how the mind works or how the cells of the human organism adapt to facilitate learning we can still understand the process of learning and come to understand the principles by which it is governed.

" Learning theory is a descriptive theory used in guiding the initial creation of prescriptive principles of instructional design. Learning theory as it has been developed and is now taught is not specific to particular subject-matter domains. Thus there is a need for a 15 domain-specific learning theory. Such a theory could be called a learning theory of progressive attainments in a specific domain of learning. This article uses the term domain theory to refer to a descriptive theory of the contents, substantive processes, and boundaries of a domain of human learning and growth that gives an account of construct-relevant sources of task difficulty; and conjointly, an account of the substantive processes operative at different levels of growth along the scale(s) that span the domain." Bunderson 2003, p. 15-16

"...we need a domain theory to explain what is easy, what is somewhere between easy and hard, and what is hard. When we understand these things, we can measure, give meaningful feedback, and can teach people who desire to do so how to rapidly progress from lower to higher levels in either type of domain. These lead to the construction of learning maps that reflect progress up the domain scales, or reveal standing on a map of individual difference variables." (Bunderson, 2003, p. unknown --- pdf available online at http://www.edumetrics.org/papers/How_to_build_a_Domain_Theor.pdf )

Landa (1983) also claims that instructional theories may not be derived from learning theories (p. 65). This is because a given proposition of a descriptive learning theory (such as "if a person better understands a text, then he or she remembers it more easily" may not be true and complete when phrased as a prescriptive instructional rule such as "In order for a learner to better memorize the text, it is necessary (or sufficient) to teach him or her how to understand it (or bring him or her to understanding it)." "Of course, in order to secure that a learner memorizes a text better, it is important to make sure that he or she understands it or to teach him or her how to understand it. But understanding is just one of the conditions leading to better memorizing, and to secure (or teach) the understanding is not sufficient for gaining the best results in memorization. Other factors not mentioned in these propositions of a learning theory (both descriptive and...

Landa (1983) states that "prescriptive instructional theories cannot be automatically derived from descriptive instructional theories." He gives an example to illustrate why this isn't so: "Suppose we have a descriptive proposition: 'If a student repeats a statement many times, he or she memorizes it better." This is a 100 percent true proposition. Let us convert it into a prescriptive proposition: 'In order to memorize a statement better, one has to repeat it many times.' This proposition is not as true as the first one because the state of 'memorized' is determined by many factors, not just repetition. For example, for a particular student to memorize a statement, it may be more important to understand it rather than just mechanically repeat it. Some students, due to the specific characteristics of their memory, the personal significance of the proposition for them, and some other factors, may not need to repeat it at all." [p. 60] He ...

From Landa (1983): "in order to teach effectively (and to teach at all), a teacher should be provided either ith a set of programs for solving particular instructional problems or with a method as to how to independently develop an instructional program (algorithmic or nonalgorithmic) on the basis of known descriptive and prescriptive instructional theories" [p. 61] "A necessity to pass from a theory (even prescriptive) to a program for solving individual problems explains why the knowledge of an instructional theory in itself (even if it were comprehensive and coherent) does not provide a teacher with an ability to teacher. The latter ability is based on a knowledge of programs for solving particular problems (or classes of problems) or the ability to pass from theoretical propositions to programs and be guided by them." [p. 61, footnote]

I believe that chaos theory is helpful in understanding the complexity, and apparent but not actual lack of predictability, in learning. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory

"A frequently cited desideratum for a theory of instruction is its compatibility with a theory of learning. If the proposed metatheory [referring to Gropper's theory presented in this section] is on target in its emphasis on learning requirements and obstacles to their being met , then 'compatibility' is the wrong word. An instructional theory needs to build on a theory of learning." (Gropper, 1983) desideratum - "something needed or wanted" diserata - a want list; a list of wants

"One can envision a time when there will be a variety of different models of instruction, each prescribing the best available methods for achieving a different kind of learning goal under different kinds of conditions. One can also envision researchers all over the world building upon this common knowledge base, continually improving and refining those models. it is my hope that this book will contribute in some small way to forming that common knowledge base." (Reigeluth, 1983, p. xii)

The study of learning is not itself a discipline and is therefore approached in many different ways: Behaviorists -> observable events Cognitivists -> memory processes Socialists -> interactions "two apparently competing theories may not be directed at even the same phenomena" (Driscoll 2000, p. 8)

- a dissenting view to the associative view of memory - insight: not just simple connections between stimuli and response; but perceiving stimuli in new ways (e.g. apes solving puzzles to get food) - knowledge comes from more than just experience -> the knower imposes organization on sensory data - Gestalt: configuration, organization - Four characteristics of insightful learning (Driscoll 2000, p. 24) 1) After a period of inactivity or trial and error, the learner suddenly and completely grasps the solution. 2) The learner performs the solution in a smooth and errorless fashion. 3) The learner retains the solution for a very long time. 4) The learner can easily apply a principle gained through insight to other, similar problems.

- Pavlonian or classical conditioning - learned reflex Unconditioned Stimulus (US) -- e.g. bell ringing Natural Stimulus (NS) -- e.g. food Response (R) -- e.g. salivating NS -> R NS + US -> R US -> R - Human conditioning -- Baby Albert (Watson and Rayner 1920) NS - hammer hitting steel bars US - white rat R - crying - Stimulus generalization -- also cried with white rabbit or fur coat - Higher order conditioning (Driscoll 2000, p. 22) - Systematic desensitization (Driscoll 2000, p. 22) - Wolpe 1958, 1969; Brewer 1974 (cited in Driscoll 2000, pp. 22-23) only subjects told about UCS - CS pairings tended to acquire the conditioned response Leahey and Harris 1997 p. 23

- Association btw Sensation and Impulse - Animals (cats and chickens) in puzzle box experiments - Association made when actions result in satisfying consequences

- Provided a foundation for later investigations in cognition. - Ushered in new era of interest in the study of learning (Hernstein & Boring (1965) as cited in Driscoll, 2000, p. 18) - Associationism - ideas become connected through experience; higher frequency -> stronger bond; therefore, learning should be predictable based on the number of times a given association is repeatedly experienced (Ebbinghaus [1885] 1913, as cited in Driscoll 2000, p. 18) - Provided experimental verification of some obvious facts about memory - The Forgetting Curve (Driscoll 2000, p. 19) - Note: forgetting of other learned experiences may follow different curve (e.g. personally traumatic events) (Bourne et al 1986 as cited in Driscoll 2000, p. 19)

(in Driscoll 2000) Ebbinghaus: Principle of association (1850-1909) Thorndike: Law of effect (1874-1949) Pavlov: Classical conditioning (1849-1946) Gestalt theory: Insightful learning (Early 1900s)

Questions to answer: What is it? What are the major theories? How are the theories similar and different? Can they be unified in one model? What themes emerge in the literature? What's missing from the theories?