The relationship between students and content—the psychological dimensions of teaching
We are continually learning more about human learning and cognition. As new theories replace old, they must adequately explain what came before and add explanatory power. Although our understanding of learning has changed over time, many ideas from previously widely-held learning theories remain important in contemporary explanations of learning. Contemporary learning theory makes two important distinctions. First it distinguishes between lower and higher psychological processes (Vygotsky, 1978). Second, it distinguishes between the individual and social aspects of learning.
Higher and lower psychological processes. Lower psychological processes are those common across all animal species and usually require an immediate reaction (Vygotsky, 1978). Higher psychological processes are unique to humans, involve reason, and are mediated through culturally accepted signs and symbols. Both lower and higher psychological processes are important to classroom instruction.
Many important aspects of schooling (i.e., completing homework on time, compliance with school rules, etc.) can benefit from what we know about lower psychological processes and behavioral change. Behavioral theories of learning have helped us understand how human behavior is shaped. Behavioral ideas of stimulus-response and reinforcement schedules are still useful for developing aspects of classroom behavior that would be considered lower psychological processes.
Most of what occurs in schools, however, should be considered higher psychological processes; that is, how we reason. The shift to studying higher psychological processes occurred during the cognitive revolution of the 1950s when psychologists shifted their attention away from behavior to how we process and store information. Models based on the “computer metaphor of mind” generated an understanding of human cognition that demonstrates how we acquire new information, organize our thoughts, and retrieve and deploy knowledge in new situations. These constructs still inform our understanding of human cognition. But, they also lead us to the second distinction made in contemporary learning theories—the individual versus social aspects of learning.
Behavioral and cognitive science/information processing theories of learning have defined learning as an individual process. In the case of behaviorism, learning is defined as a lasting behavior change often accomplished through external shaping. In information processing theories, learning is defined as connecting ideas in one’s mind. In both theories, someone other than the learner determines what is learned, while the processes involved in learning leave little room for agency. Neither theory does much to explain the origin of the ideas people construct. While maintaining some aspects of behavioral and information processing theories, contemporary theories of learning hold that learning is both an individual and a social activity. Although much of learning is accomplished by individuals, learning is situated in socially defined settings and practices and is accomplished with the assistance of others. Contemporary theories place an importance upon understanding both the individual and social aspects of learning.
Dewey (1938/1991) posited that all human activity is connected to the things we have already done; they are part of an experienced world. All of our reactions, our contemplations, our actions are informed by where we have been and by who we have encountered. Individuals do construct their own understanding of the world through their experiences, but they interpret their experiences with the assistance of more knowledgeable members of their society or culture.
Vygotsky (1978) argued that learning occurs first between people—on a social or interpsychological plane—and second within the learner—on a private or intrapsychological plane. Thus learning, according to Vygotsky, occurs in the “zone of proximal development” (ZPD) which is defined by a person’s ability to solve problems independently on one border and the person's ability to solve problems with the help of a 'more knowledgeable other'. The ZPD, rather than being a trait of the individual learner, is constructed in the interaction between learners and the more knowledgeable other (MKO) who is assisting the learner at that time. The more knowledgeable the MKO and the more willing / able the learner is to work with the MKO the greater the likelihood of learning within the ZPD at a specific time.
Through their interactions with more knowledgeable people, new members of a society grow into the intellectual life of those around them. What counts as culturally important knowledge is passed on in socially defined practices and the cultural norms and interactions with experienced members in a community. We turn next to the sociocultural influences on people and their learning.
We are continually learning more about human learning and cognition. As new theories replace old, they must adequately explain what came before and add explanatory power. Although our understanding of learning has changed over time, many ideas from previously widely-held learning theories remain important in contemporary explanations of learning. Contemporary learning theory makes two important distinctions. First it distinguishes between lower and higher psychological processes (Vygotsky, 1978). Second, it distinguishes between the individual and social aspects of learning.
Higher and lower psychological processes. Lower psychological processes are those common across all animal species and usually require an immediate reaction (Vygotsky, 1978). Higher psychological processes are unique to humans, involve reason, and are mediated through culturally accepted signs and symbols. Both lower and higher psychological processes are important to classroom instruction.
Many important aspects of schooling (i.e., completing homework on time, compliance with school rules, etc.) can benefit from what we know about lower psychological processes and behavioral change. Behavioral theories of learning have helped us understand how human behavior is shaped. Behavioral ideas of stimulus-response and reinforcement schedules are still useful for developing aspects of classroom behavior that would be considered lower psychological processes.
Most of what occurs in schools, however, should be considered higher psychological processes; that is, how we reason. The shift to studying higher psychological processes occurred during the cognitive revolution of the 1950s when psychologists shifted their attention away from behavior to how we process and store information. Models based on the “computer metaphor of mind” generated an understanding of human cognition that demonstrates how we acquire new information, organize our thoughts, and retrieve and deploy knowledge in new situations. These constructs still inform our understanding of human cognition. But, they also lead us to the second distinction made in contemporary learning theories—the individual versus social aspects of learning.
Behavioral and cognitive science/information processing theories of learning have defined learning as an individual process. In the case of behaviorism, learning is defined as a lasting behavior change often accomplished through external shaping. In information processing theories, learning is defined as connecting ideas in one’s mind. In both theories, someone other than the learner determines what is learned, while the processes involved in learning leave little room for agency. Neither theory does much to explain the origin of the ideas people construct. While maintaining some aspects of behavioral and information processing theories, contemporary theories of learning hold that learning is both an individual and a social activity. Although much of learning is accomplished by individuals, learning is situated in socially defined settings and practices and is accomplished with the assistance of others. Contemporary theories place an importance upon understanding both the individual and social aspects of learning.
Dewey (1938/1991) posited that all human activity is connected to the things we have already done; they are part of an experienced world. All of our reactions, our contemplations, our actions are informed by where we have been and by who we have encountered. Individuals do construct their own understanding of the world through their experiences, but they interpret their experiences with the assistance of more knowledgeable members of their society or culture.
Vygotsky (1978) argued that learning occurs first between people—on a social or interpsychological plane—and second within the learner—on a private or intrapsychological plane. Thus learning, according to Vygotsky, occurs in the “zone of proximal development” (ZPD) which is defined by a person’s ability to solve problems independently on one border and the person's ability to solve problems with the help of a 'more knowledgeable other'. The ZPD, rather than being a trait of the individual learner, is constructed in the interaction between learners and the more knowledgeable other (MKO) who is assisting the learner at that time. The more knowledgeable the MKO and the more willing / able the learner is to work with the MKO the greater the likelihood of learning within the ZPD at a specific time.
Through their interactions with more knowledgeable people, new members of a society grow into the intellectual life of those around them. What counts as culturally important knowledge is passed on in socially defined practices and the cultural norms and interactions with experienced members in a community. We turn next to the sociocultural influences on people and their learning.