Learning Theories - Student Success Courses
The following is an excerpt entitled "2.2 Theories of Learning" pages 5-7 within the publication Redesigning a Student Success Course for Sustained Impact:Early Outcomes Findings by CCRC (Community College Research Center) - Teachers College Columbia
"Rooted in cognitive and developmental psychology, theories of how individuals
learn indicate that exposing students to content and new skills through rote memorization
and instruction alone is not an effective method for encouraging knowledge application
and changed behavior. Rather, the application of new knowledge occurs when students
5
are provided with opportunities to fully engage and practice new skills, as well as when
they are assisted in developing the metacognitive skills to reflect on their learning and
engage in more critical thinking (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000; Bransford &
Stein, 1993; Davidson, Deuser & Sternberg, 1994; Hiebert & Grouws, 2007; Perin &
Hare, 2010).
In a meta-analysis of 164 studies, Alfieri, Brooks, Aldrich, and Tenenbaum
(2011) found that “enhanced discovery” learning, in which students are guided to
construct meaning and knowledge, is associated with greater learning than other
instructional approaches. The authors also found that explicit teaching leads to greater
learning than unassisted discovery (for example, when students are given a problem but
not given guidance on how to approach or solve it) and that assisted or enhanced
discovery leads to more learning than either unassisted discovery or direct instruction. In
other words, while giving students information to solve a problem is preferable to letting
them figure it out entirely on their own, guiding them via questioning, examples, or
“worked examples” leads to even greater learning.
Similarly, Chi (2009) conceptualized learning activities as occurring along a
continuum from passive to interactive. Passive activities merely expose students to new
information; active activities (for example, underlining text) engage students in learning.
Constructive activities require students to produce their own knowledge, often by having
them go beyond the information presented (for example, by creating a concept map).
Finally, interactive activities enable learners to build knowledge by engaging in dialogue
with others.
In examining the literature, Chi (2009) found that this continuum represents both
increasing cognitive engagement and increasing efficacy. Students engaged in active or
constructive learning, for example, had greater learning gains than those engaged in
passive learning activities. Students engaged in interactive learning, such as peer tutoring,
had greater learning gains than those engaged in actively answering questions. In other
words, deeper and more substantial learning occurs when learning activities help students
think deeply and creatively about the content to which they are being exposed.
In addition, it is widely held that students must also be provided with enough time
to thoroughly process the information that they are receiving in the classroom for the
6
subsequent transfer of knowledge to new situations to occur (Bransford et al., 2000).
Moreover, this processing time must be structured and guided in order to ensure that
students achieve the intended learning outcomes (Alfieri et al., 2011; King, 1994). The
extended time and opportunity for processing may be part of the reason that constructive
and interactive learning activities encourage greater learning than passive and active
activities (Chi, 2009).
The above findings imply that certain types of pedagogies are likely to be more
effective than others. Strategies that help students engage deeply with content, via guided
engagement, constructive learning, or interaction, are more likely to encourage lasting
learning than other, more passive or less reflective strategies. Research has found that in
order for students to apply what they have learned to future courses or situations, they
must understand issues of context, relevance, and utility, and that they benefit from
opportunities for practice.
For example, King (1994) compared students who were and were not taught how
to construct, ask, and answer questions focused on reconstructing information and
integrating previous learning into new lessons. The students were then were given the
opportunity to practice such exercises. The former group learned more and retained more
information over time, as compared with the latter group. Similarly, Alfieri and
colleagues’ meta-analysis (2011) suggests that pedagogies such as guided discussion,
scaffolded tasks, encouraging students to provide explanations for their ideas, and
providing worked examples are likely to be more effective than either direct lecture or
unguided or un-facilitated discussions. Other studies also support the use of active
pedagogies in order to further students’ understanding of course content and build their
knowledge (Anderson & Adams, 1992; Braxton, Milem, & Sullivan, 2000; Chickering &
Gamson, 1987).
These theories of learning suggest the usefulness of an applied pedagogical
approach that allows students to actively learn the material covered via authentic
opportunities for practice and reflection. Doing so is thought to help learners “take
control of their own learning” by teaching them how to become aware of the points at
which they understand the content they are learning and also when more information is
needed to understand something or to solve a problem. These practices therefore allow students to develop metacognitive skills, which some studies suggest enhance transfer of
knowledge to new settings (Bransford et al., 2000).
The perspectives on learning reviewed here suggest that for student success
courses to have long-term impacts, they must offer students an in-depth learning
experience in which students can start to understand when and how they will return to the
knowledge and skills they have learned for use in new situations. Additionally, they
indicate that the integration of metacognitive strategies within success courses, such as
reciprocal teaching or group problem-solving, will allow students to both actively
participate in their own learning as well as assess their own understanding of the material
and thus improve knowledge transfer (Bransford et al., 2000).
Under this perspective, the paucity of improved long-term outcomes in prior
research for student success courses can be viewed as a reflection of their typical
pedagogical approach (Karp et al., 2012). When course content is disconnected from
academic coursework and when large amounts of content are delivered rapidly and with
little depth, students are exposed to important knowledge but may not have the
opportunity to understand how to use that knowledge to support their academic success.
Thus the current information-focused structure of student success courses may be
insufficient to encourage lasting positive outcomes."