3 Chapter 3: Psychology of Learning

Have you noticed that each professor has a unique way of approaching learning within the classroom? Some professors emphasize lecturing and examinations, while others prefer group discussions and projects. This may be partly due to the difference in individual perspectives of how learning best occurs. In this chapter, we look at the psychology of learning. We begin our discussion by analyzing an array of perspectives to capture the different elements of learning. This will allow you to understand how different styles of learning can impact children, adolescents, and adults to obtain new knowledge, integrate it into their daily lives, and communicate it with others. The act of learning is an extensive multi-layered phenomenon that scientists have theorized about through the decades. The intent was to discover how individuals learn, how information is recalled, and how that information is applied efficiently to guide behaviours in different scenarios. This chapter will examine five major learning theories: behaviourism, cognitivism, constructivism, humanism, and connectivism; three teaching theories: transmission, transaction, and transformation; and the micro theories of learning: mindset theory and habits of mind to understand the variety of perspectives within the psychology of learning.

 

Major Theories of Learning

[(Photo placement) Katrina Holmes: Cheerful black teacher with diverse school kids]

Behaviourism

The branch of psychology behaviourism looks at outwardly observable behaviour (Braat et al., 2020; Weegar & Pacis, 2012). Behaviourists believe that behaviour results from how an individual responds to their environment (Weegar & Pacis, 2012). Behaviourists agree on a few critical items in the field. First, that psychology is a branch of natural science; second, psychologists should measure behaviour rather than mental processes; and third, since the branch is built upon studying behaviour, only observable evidence should be used (Braat et al., 2020).

Related to learning, behaviourism sees knowledge and meaning as separate from an individual’s experience. It looks at how learning is affected by changes in behaviour. Studies into behaviourism and learning show that environmental changes can predict and control behaviour (Weegar & Pacis, 2012). As such, behaviourists believe that under the proper environmental conditions, learners can share an identical understanding of information. Behaviourist learning theory emphasizes using extrinsic motivation, such as rewards and punishments, to influence future behaviour. This can include grades, prizes or privileges, and recognition within the classroom (Braat et al., 2020; Weegar & Pacis, 2012).

History of Behaviourism

The term ‘behaviourism’ was coined by John B. Watson and was influential in his argument for objective psychology in his manifesto “Psychology as the Behaviourist Views It” (Braat et al., 2020). This argument brought about the change from structuralism and its focus on consciousness to behaviourism and its focus on observable behaviour (Kasonde Ng’andu et al., 2013; Weegar & Pacis, 2012). Watson based his work on Ivan Pavlov’s research on the classical conditioning of animals. Classical conditioning is learning through association, in which an automatic response to a stimulus is repeatedly paired with a second unrelated stimulus until the presence of the second stimulus alone is enough to elicit the response. Watson expanded on this research when he conditioned a young child, little Albert, to fear a rat by pairing the presence of the animal with a loud sound, causing the child to associate the rat with the fear he felt when hearing the sound (Kasonde Ng’andu et al., 2013; Weegar & Pacis, 2012). This experiment confirmed Watson’s ideas that the environment heavily influenced behaviour.

The research done by B.F Skinner on operant conditioning added to Watson’s work in behaviourism (Kasonde Ng’andu et al., 2013; Weegar & Pacis, 2012). Operant conditioning is learning achieved through a system of punishment and rewards. Skinner’s research was instrumental in the field of behaviourism, especially regarding its application in the field of education (Kasonde Ng’andu et al., 2013). For instance, Skinner proposed that teachers use generalized reinforcers such as giving students praise, stars, or points.

Use of Behaviourism in the Classroom

Behaviourism in the education system can be seen through techniques teachers use to guide students’ behaviour. In this perspective, teachers are the focus of the classroom as they are the ones that instruct the desired behaviour to the students and guide them to achieve that behaviour (Kasonde Ng’andu et al., 2013). Behaviourists believe that learning is achieved when students show a change in behaviour. Teachers use positive and negative reinforcement in response to students’ behaviour. These extrinsic motivators guide students’ learning of a behaviour (Weegar & Pacis, 2012). Teachers provide hints or cues to guide students to the behaviour they desire. Teachers who use the behaviouralist perspective in their classroom must have a specific plan regarding the behaviour they wish the students to learn. If teachers know when and how to use reinforcement to guide behaviour, students will quickly pick up on the desired behaviour (Kasonde Ng’andu et al., 2013).

Criticisms of Behaviourism

While behaviourism was instrumental, it was not immune to criticism. For instance, some researchers believe that using external reinforcements in the classroom may cause students’ intrinsic motivation to decrease as they begin to lose interest when reinforcements are not present (Kasonde Ng’andu et al., 2013). Another criticism is that the behavioural perspective harms the teacher-student relationship in the classroom. This is due to the teachers awarding reinforcements to students causing an increase in power imbalance. Finally, criticisms have been made that behaviourism fails to consider that the mind has a role in behaviour and the learning process (Kasonde Ng’andu et al., 2013; Weegar & Pacis, 2012). Critics say that the behaviourist perspective does not express the complexity of the learning process. While researchers agree that there is value in the behaviourist perspective, they also agree that the perspective is most valuable when used in conjunction with other perspectives (Kasonde Ng’andu et al., 2013).

Cognitivism

Consider this: A child in the classroom is trying to recall information for an upcoming spelling test. To prepare for this test, the student is encouraged to practice what they learned outside the classroom. To achieve desired results, the teacher gave the students worksheets or practice tests to store and recall information more efficiently. Engaging in activities to recall information is an example of cognitivism, one major learning theory that emphasizes the importance of internal mental operations.

In addition, cognitivism pushes the ideology that cognition is the primary cause of student success or failure (Agarwal & Roediger, 2018). For instance, when learning information for spelling tests, students will use complex internal thinking processes, such as attending—processing new information about unknown words; concept formation and thinking—understanding the rules of spelling; language—understanding the full word; perceiving—understanding the context of the words; problem-solving and decision making—deciding what to do when a word is misspelled; and information processing—acquiring, recording, organizing, retrieving, displaying, and disseminating information to ensure that the learned words can be applied to the spelling test (Agarwal & Roediger, 2018; Ertmer & Newby, 2013). Eventually, after active engagement with the words, it is expected that students will integrate the skills developed from spelling exercises and be able to incorporate this learned behaviour into their everyday lives.

History of Cognitivism

Agarwal and Roediger (2018) stated that “The word cognition is derived from the Latin word ‘to know’ and describes processes that are ‘behind-the-scenes’” (p. 8). The concept of cognitivism and learning has a long timeline—it grew from the disproval of the major theory at the time (i.e., behaviourism) to address how people accurately learn. Even today, there is ongoing debate surrounding the constructs that facilitate how humans behave in psychology. Behaviourist theory was influenced by the historical empiricist viewpoint that suggests that humans are born as ‘blank slates’ and argues that experience is the root of human knowledge, which governs behaviour. These views are thanks to early philosophers Aristotle (384-322 BC) and John Locke (1632-1794). Locke was responsible for the concept of empiricism and stressed the influence of experience, which was also highlighted in John B. Watson, B.F Skinner, and Edward Thorndike’s work on measuring behavioural constructs (Ertmer & Newby, 2013).

The father of behaviourism, John B. Watson (1878-1958), promoted his objective views of psychology and showcased a dismissal of introspective constructs that could not be measured. He promoted that overt behaviours could only measure these constructs because the mind, consciousness, and sensation are not easily defined (Moore, 2011; Watson, 1994). However, in the late 1950s, the psychology of learning began to develop a broader scope that saw past observable behaviour and turned toward a perspective that sought to understand more complex internal cognitive processes (Ertmer & Newby, 2013). Ulric Neisser was regarded as the father of cognitive psychology as he challenged the behaviourist theory specifically in his acclaimed book ‘Cognitive Psychology’ (Belardinelli,2012). In this book, he approached an objective perspective to the “Human Information Paradigm,” which allowed cognition to be considered a scientific standard in various fields, not just in psychology but mathematics, computer science, and philosophy (Belardinelli, 2012).

Use of Cognitivism in the Classroom

The public may not consider learning a science; however, cognitivism is an integral part of the psychology of learning, and it even extends across an array of professions, including computer science and neuroscience—thanks to the works of Ulric Neisser (Agarwal & Roediger, 2018). Cognitivism focuses on an array of cognitive processes, such as thinking, problem-solving, perceiving, attending, processing, decision-making, and language and concept formation, as opposed to the impact of environmental experiences on behaviour (Agarwal & Roediger, 2018; Ertmer & Newby, 2013). Ertmer and Newby (2013) define cognitivism as “discrete changes between states of knowledge rather than with changes in the probability of response” (p. 51).

Cognitive theory is more prominent in the psychology of learning as it emphasizes improving student performance (Ertmer & Newby, 2013). In contrast, behaviourist theory was at the forefront of the psychology of learning before the revolutionary cognitive theory perspective took hold. Cognitivism challenged the view that overt performance was the only effective measure to demonstrate learning and identified that improving cognitive processes is critical in improving student performance. Cognitive theory focuses on how information is received, organized, stored, and retrieved and provides an in-depth analysis of what students truly know, not just what they can show. For example, students can study for a test; however, if that information is gone after taking the test, one could ask, Did they genuinely know the information, or did they gain just enough information to pass that test? It is recommended that teachers implement four strategies of cognitivism for positive student outcomes, which include: retrieval practice in low-stakes settings, constant feedback, spaced practice so students can digest knowledge, and interleaving skills to help retention and learning over time (Agarwal & Roediger, 2018).

Constructivism

The branch of psychology known as constructivism believes that the learner constructs knowledge. In this ideology, knowledge does not exist separate from the learner but relies upon the individuals’ connections to previous knowledge and observations to make meaning from it (Bada & Olusegun, 2015; Hein, 1991). The main thought of constructivism is that learning is not about an “absolute truth” or series of facts we must obtain but is about the connections we make with the world around us. We construct meaning from the information we learn to find order and structure in knowledge (Bada & Olusegun, 2015; Hein, 1991). Learning is a continuous process that requires learners to consistently integrate new information into their philosophies and interpretations of the world (Bada & Olusegun, 2015). Constructivism does not see individual learners as attempting to make something new from information but rather as trying to understand the function of information as it applies to the world around them.

Bada and Olusegun (2015) view constructivist learning as a combination of assimilation and accommodation. Assimilation is the process of incorporating new experiences into old experiences leading to new perspectives, rethinking conflicting information, and reframing perceptions. Accommodation is reframing new experiences into pre-existing mental capacities. We all perceive the world and how it operates in our own way, and accommodation fits new knowledge into that mould.

Hein (1991) describes nine fundamental principles of learning within the constructivist perspective, which are paraphrased below:

• Learning cannot occur passively; it requires active processing. For learning to occur, the learner must actively take sensory input and make meaning out of it. In the constructivist perspective, the learner cannot simply accept knowledge as existing without engaging with it and applying it to their experiences.
• Learning is a continuous process in which “people learn to learn as they learn.” The continual construction of meaning and systems of meaning is necessary for learning.
• Learning happens in the mind. While physical activities are important for learning, especially for younger learners, activities that stimulate the mind are crucial for learning.
• Learning is influenced by language. Vygotsky found that language and learning are intertwined. Current research finds that many learners talk to themselves as they learn. This demonstrates the importance of individuals learning concepts in a language they are proficient in and the value of translating work into many languages.
• Learning is inherently a social experience. Learning from the constructivist perspective is intertwined with human connections. Our experiences with our teachers, peers, friends, family, and acquaintances influence our learning.
• Learning relies on context. Individuals do not learn new information and facts separate from their pre-existing knowledge about the world. Everything we learn, we apply to what we have previously learned about the world. Each new piece of information is contextualized with previous knowledge and observations. The context in which we learn new information will frame how we fit it into our worldview.
• Learning requires previous knowledge. We cannot obtain new knowledge without having a pre-existing foundation to apply meaning to new information.
• Learning is not instantaneous. To learn, we must take the time to apply information and make meaning from it. This is an applied process that requires time and focus.
• Learning requires motivation. For an individual to truly learn new knowledge, they must be motivated to take the time to make meaning and connections.

History of Constructivism

Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky developed constructivism from the study of cognitive development (Weegar & Pacis, 2012). These psychologists differed on some points but agreed on the fundamental premise that learning (or cognition) is achieved through mental construction (Bada & Olusegun, 2015). Piaget viewed cognitive development as a “product of the mind” completed through observation and experimentation (Weegar & Pacis, 2012). He believed that individuals could not instantly understand information; instead, they must incorporate new information with previous knowledge, observations, and experiences to understand it (Weegar & Pacis, 2012). Conversely, Vygotsky viewed cognitive development as a social process completed through observing and interacting with knowledgeable community members (Weegar & Pacis, 2012). While both psychologists were influential in the formation of constructivism, Piaget’s theories have significantly impacted learning theories, teaching methods, and educational reforms (Bada & Olusegun, 2015).

Use of Constructivism in the Classroom

Within the classroom context, constructivism can cause tension in how educators think about teaching. This theory elucidates that learning is an active process, and students will not succeed by being passive learners (Bada & Olusegun, 2015). Teachers must remember their goals when designing lesson plans. Some educators become entirely focused on the content they want to teach and forget to consider the student (Hein, 1991). This can create tension as many education systems enforce a specific curriculum and emphasize a “base” knowledge that students must acquire in the classroom. Within the theory of constructivism, knowledge is not separate from the learner as it carries no meaning without connection to the individual (Bada & Olusegun, 2015; Hein, 1991). When developing lesson plans, educators must consider how the student thinks about knowledge as the priority and not the knowledge itself (Hein, 1991). To achieve this, teachers must give their students a chance to interact with knowledge and construct meaning from it to understand how it applies to their world (Bada & Olusegun, 2015; Hein, 1991). Teachers can use experiments and real-world problem-solving to help students make connections between academic content and life experiences (Bada & Olusegun, 2015). An emphasis on reflecting on the content presented is essential as it allows students time to discuss how this new piece of knowledge fits into their understanding of the world and where it may conflict with existing views. To do this, teachers must first have a good understanding of students’ pre-existing views and conceptions so that they can plan activities that will help guide their students (Bada & Olusegun, 2015).

In the constructivist view of learning, the context in which new information is presented is critical for the learner to construct meaning (Bada & Olusegun, 2015; Hein, 1991). Below are four characteristics that are crucial for a beneficial learning environment (Bada & Olusegun, 2015)

• Knowledge is shared between teachers and students. Students share knowledge in the classroom with their peers and teacher as much as the teacher shares knowledge with the students.
• Authority in the classroom is shared between the teacher and students. Students help to direct conversation and guide the class and are allowed to give their input on how the class should look.
• A teacher’s role in the classroom is to facilitate and guide. To promote the best learning in the classroom, the teacher must focus primarily on the students learning by helping to guide their construction of meaning within the lesson. To do this, teachers help students clarify their points when they are struggling and facilitate conversations between peers.
• Groups with a small number of students are important for learning. As Vygotsky emphasizes, learning is a highly collaborative and social process. By giving students a safe space within small groups to share thoughts and observations and construct meaning, learning is more likely. Small groups also allow students to hear multiple perspectives and constructions of meaning different from theirs.

Benefits and Criticisms of Constructivism

Research shows many benefits to applying constructivist theory in the classroom. For instance, students are more likely to enjoy learning and actively participate. Students are urged to make the information their own and apply it to their worldview. This view of learning stimulates and engages students, making acquiring new information more enjoyable (Bada & Olusegun, 2015). Constructivism in the classroom gives students ownership over their learning. Students are given a voice, allowing them to take responsibility for their learning. Finally, constructivism promotes communication skills and social awareness. By spending time in small groups and interacting with peers, students learn how to express their understanding and worldview and listen to others’ views (Bada & Olusegun, 2015).

While there are benefits to constructivism, many have also criticized it. Some theorists believe that putting teachers in the role of facilitator and allowing students to take charge of the classroom will cause learners to become “lost and frustrated” (Alanazi, 2016). By removing the emphasis on curriculum, some critics believe that crucial information and concepts will not be effectively taught. Others believe that learners need physical objects to connect knowledge and acquire new information and that the constructivist approach does not allow these connections to be made (Alanazi, 2016). Finally, some critics who prefer more structured classrooms believe that a constructivist approach does not give students a way to demonstrate the knowledge they acquire. For instance, rather than small group discussions and reflections, critics believe that physical examples of learning, such as exams and projects, are necessary (Alanazi, 2016).

Humanism

Carl Rogers (1961), the founder of humanistic psychology, stated that “Humanism involves the stretching and growing of becoming more and more potentialities’ involves the courage to be. It means launching oneself fully into the stream of life” (p.174). Similarly, Abraham Maslow (1954) said, “A musician must make music, an artist must paint, a poet must write if he is to be ultimately at peace with himself. What a man can be, he must be” (p. 93). Both statements point to the primary goal of humanistic learning, which emphasizes that humans should be able to live lives that promote optimal functioning and experience.

History of Humanistic Psychology

Humanism is described as a “third” force between the prominent theories of behaviourism and psychoanalysis (Hayes, 2012). Behaviourism focuses on passive organisms and their reaction to the environment, while psychoanalytic theories focus on previous experiences and their effect on behaviour (Hayes, 2012). Conversely, the pioneers of humanism, Abraham Maslow (1908-1970) and Carl Rogers (1902–1987) stated that these theories ignore the importance of the “healthy human being’s model of functioning” since they view human behaviour mechanically, which creates a behavioural a framework that fixates on environmental deficits (Buhler, 1971). These criticisms lead to humanistic psychology, which advocates for a holistic and contextualized approach that these other theories neglected. Maslow focused on how the hierarchy of self-actualization is determined by motivation, and Rogers was a prominent figure in the world of person-centered therapeutic techniques (Buhler,1971). The humanistic psychology theory demonstrates a genuine love of humanity, trust in reason and science, reduction in emotional suffering, and the desire to improve overall well-being. This is achieved when empiricism is viewed through a person’s values, goals, meanings, choices, self-acceptance, and self-actualization (Hayes, 2012).

Use of Humanism in the Classroom

Humanism is broad, originating from psychotherapy and Roger’s desire to find the best conditions for therapeutic personality change. Yet, humanistic theories also apply to the development and application of learning strategies in the classroom to promote a learner-centered approach that considers the environment and needs of the learner (DeRobertis, 2006). Ideally, research about practicality in the classroom focuses on how information is delivered to fit the learner, as humanism believes learners are free and have control over their lives and educational prospects.

Roger identified humanistic education as involving a focus on intelligence (i.e., intrapersonal and interpersonal) and interventions promoting dialogic, reflective, and expressive methods. Intrapersonal intelligence is intelligence that encompasses a concrete concept of self and awareness. More specifically, it is having a thorough knowledge of oneself regarding mood, intentions, motivation, temperament, desires, self-discipline, and self-esteem (Gasong & Toding, 2020). Interpersonal intelligence is the ability to understand others in three domains: (1) social understanding, (2) social intuition, and (3) social interactions, as it improves students’ ability to understand others and helps them effectively communicate their ideas (Gasong & Toding, 2020).

Humanistic theory is implemented in schools to ensure learning occurs through students’ ability to maintain their attitudes and values. Humanistic education also emphasizes that educators are not the only teaching experts in the classroom—students benefit most when engaging with educators to integrate thoughts, ideas, and personal meaning. Humanistic learning is shown in Jenkins and colleagues’ (2003) study. The authors used cooperative learning to discover the best strategies for learners using group work and peer interactions. They found that cooperative learning was related to humanistic education since learners can express their values and perspectives in an environment that promotes positive interactions. These interactions are facilitated with transformational teaching, which will be discussed next in the chapter.

Connectivism

Connectivism is a theoretical framework that involves the modern era of learning, which can help educators adapt to constantly evolving educational systems. This theory emphasizes that a critical element of learning is acquired through improving a learner’s ability to source and critique information to fill in gaps in knowledge. Eight key concepts define connectivism. The first is that learning is established only when connectedness is a critical component of information transference. This information can be integrated into the learner’s community through connecting nodes. Connecting nodes are defined as a learning community connected to a greater network. Second, learning can be developed through outside entities (information sources) beyond the learner and can be stored in digital formats; third, learning can transpire across cognitive and emotional domains, which impact learning processes; fourth, the ability to know is more valuable than what is known; fifth, continuous connection building is imperative to continue the learning process; sixth, connections should be made across fields, ideas, and concepts; seventh, decision-making is a learning process; and eighth, knowledge should be current and constantly evolving (Goldie, 2016).

The latter point is noteworthy because, in an era where information is changing rapidly, learners are encouraged to be aware of current information, which can be used to filter out irrelevant information. Thus, teachers must be aware of how they introduce connectivism to ensure that they provide information that can benefit students’ success. Connectivism should increase accessibility and diverse understanding of the changing world surrounding learners (Goldie, 2016).

History of Connectivism

Connectivism is a relatively new learning theory. It was first acknowledged in 2005 when Siemens published a paper called ‘Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age’ (Siemens, 2004). Similarly, Downes (2005) developed an understanding of connections (Kotzee & Palermos, 2021). Moreover, Clara and Barbera (2014) argued that Siemens wanted to find an alternative learning theory apart from behaviourism, cognitivism, and constructivism to devise a theory that aligned with the rapidly evolving digital age. Emphasis on diversity, learners’ autonomy, openness, and connectivity between nodes underscores connectivism. Proponents view knowledge as a constantly evolving, dynamic process.

Use of Connectivism in the Classroom (Indigenous Perspectives)

Connectivism can be applied in an array of classroom settings to increase students’ understanding of the changing world from ‘knowledgeable others.’ Moreover, connectivism is related to culturally sensitive practices to ensure ideas are communicated respectfully, and diverse teachings are incorporated to increase engagement and build a safe space for all children. In these classrooms, students can demonstrate their cultural practices and gain respect for other cultures. Marule (2012) found that when educators were trained to speak Indigenous (i.e., Blackfoot) words, students felt more connected to their cultures, which enhanced the relationship between teacher and student. Thus, teachers extending this format to diverse cultures and teachings can significantly increase student motivation.

Teaching Theories

[(Photo placement) Katrina Holmes: Black teacher answering questions of pupil]

Transmission

Transmission in the classroom involves sharing information and knowledge from teachers to students. Transmission is typically a one-directional sharing of information from the individual containing knowledge (typically the teacher) to individuals who lack knowledge (typically students). Transmission in the classroom can look like teachers transmitting information in small portions to teachers transmitting information to most of the class, typically in lecture form. Research has shown, year by year, that educators report that the amount of content required in course curricula is increasing (Wells, 1998). With this continual increase in the amount of information educators are required to cover, there is an emphasis on the transmission style of teaching. Schools tend to put more emphasis on students memorizing many facts for testing purposes than applying class content to real-world situations; this former view lending well to transmission (Wells, 1998).

How Cognitivism Applies

Cognitivism can be applied to transmission teaching theory. Cognitivism focuses on the mental processes required for learning (Agarwal & Roediger, 2018; Ertmer & Newby, 2013). This major learning theory emphasizes the importance of cognitive processes, not student performance alone. When teachers use transmission theory within the classroom, they can direct and shape how students engage with the content and implore a wide variety of mental processes. How a teacher chooses to transmit information can provide students with the space to engage with content in a specific and unique way.

Direct Instruction in the Classroom

Ann example of transmission within a classroom setting is direct instruction. Direct instruction is the transparent transmission of information from teacher to student. Many classes contain 25 to 35 students for one teacher—a lot of students for one person to transmit information to. Thus, direct instruction can be a crucial resource to ensure clarity and structure within the classroom (Wells, 1998). Typically, educators who primarily use direct instruction within the classroom emphasize knowledge more than knowing (Wells, 1998). Therefore, direct instruction is employed to efficiently pass along a large quantity of knowledge to a large population of students.

While lecturing is one clear example of direct instruction, there are other ways to incorporate direct instruction into the classroom in a smaller capacity. For example, giving students step-by-step directions for completing an assignment, small group discussions, or activities. With large class sizes, providing individual students or small groups one-on-one time for clarification and instruction can be difficult. However, suppose a teacher uses clear, direct instructions for the entire class, followed by time to work individually or with small groups. In that case, the teacher has more time to work specifically with students who may be struggling (Wells, 1998).

Transaction

The teaching theory of transaction focuses on a bidirectional transfer of information between students and teachers. Transaction in the classroom helps teachers gauge student progress and gives students authority. Transaction places teachers and students as equal contributors. It emphasizes open conversations and discourages lecture-based classes. Small groups and class discussions are often employed within the transaction framework of teaching.

How Constructivism Applies

Constructivism is most closely associated with transaction theory. Constructivism believes that knowledge does not exist without personal reflection and construction (Bada & Olusegun, 2015; Hein, 1991). Because of this view, a transactional approach to sharing knowledge is necessary for students to learn new information. As Vygotsky noted, constructivist learning is a highly collaborative and social process (Weegar & Pacis, 2012). Co-construction emphasizes collaboration in the classroom, not only between peers but between students and teachers; this can be seen with transaction theory. Through a transactional approach to learning, students and teachers are given the space and time to share their thoughts. This allows for exposure to different perspectives and provides a safe space for discussing conflicting viewpoints in the classroom.

Cooperative Learning

An example of transition theory in the classroom is cooperative learning. Cooperative learning uses small groups with the goal of students working together to understand their own and others’ learning (Jenkins et al., 2013). Teachers who employ cooperative learning do so because 1) it facilitates academic learning, 2) it encourages active participation, and 3) it allows students the opportunity for social learning (Jenkins et al., 2013). When incorporating cooperative learning into the classroom, teachers must be direct about their expectations for the small groups. For cooperative learning to be effective, students must participate in small group discussions and help peers learn. For this to be done effectively, it is recommended that all members of the group receive the same evaluation to solidify coherence within the group (Jenkins et al., 2013).

Notable benefits of cooperative learning include boosting student comprehension, knowledge, and overall learning speed. Students learn effectively from their peers, often without recognizing it; this is due to children speaking in terms that other students more easily relate to and understand (Jenkins et al., 2013). When effective cooperative learning is used, teachers have more time to work one-on-one with struggling students (Jenkins et al., 2013). Cooperative learning has also been shown to boost self-esteem and offer students security (Jenkins et al., 2013).

Transformation

Transformation theory addresses the phenomena of disorientating dilemma, which stems from a disconnect between the self and the world (Howie & Bagnall, 2015). Most importantly, transformative teaching is the process of critical reflection and rational discourse. When educators and learners value these perspectives, it can produce new schemas that reflect the instrumental domain (i.e., gaining insight into how things work) and the communicative domain (i.e., understanding others in a social context). The first mention of transformation came from Mezirow (1998). He stated there are ten steps to transformational learning, which include (1) facing a disorienting dilemma; (2) reflecting on feelings of fear, anger, guilt or shame; (3) critically assessing assumptions; (4) recognizing that personal discontent and the process of transformation are shared; (5) exploring the possibilities of new roles, relationships, and actions; (6) planning a course of action; (7) acquiring knowledge and skills for employing personal plans; (8) tentatively engaging in new roles; (9) building competence and self-confidence in new roles and relationships; and (10) utilizing these new perspectives and capacities in one’s life (Mezirow, 1998).

How Transformation Theory Applies

In the late 1970s, Mezirow applied the theory of transformation to explain why women return to postsecondary school or the workplace after a lengthy absence (Kitchenham, 2004). Mezirow (1998) was influenced by Kuhn’s paradigm, which was relevant to transformation, frame of reference, meaning perspective, and habit of mind. Paradigms were imperative to ensure that “scientific achievements that for a time provide model problems and solutions to a community of practitioners” (p.106). Mezirow also pin-pointed that the frame of reference is relevant to how habits of mind and meaningful perspectives evolve to perspective transformation and adaptation to newly learned circumstances. Additionally, Mezirow was keen on Freire’s contribution to the field of learning, as he believed that education should be used to empower students and help students develop conscientization (Freire,1970). Freire (1970) defined conscientization as “learning to perceive social, political, and economic contradictions developing acritical awareness—so that individuals can take action against the oppressive elements of reality” (p.107). His perspective on the learning process suggests that education should include political topics to develop critical analysis, and students should be able to apply this information to broader concepts outside the classroom. Moreover, he felt that the classroom should be open to the bidirectional discourse between educators and students so students can openly express their ideas.

Similarly, Haberman (1971) influenced transformative ideologies by claiming that learning fosters communication opportunities that create a mutual dynamic between learners and educators. He proposed three different domains that include the technical (i.e., learners understand how they learn information best), the practical (i.e., how learning is facilitated in different settings) and the emancipatory (i.e., becoming critically aware of the social constructs of society). Generally, transformative teaching theory involves learning, producing change, and movement toward social justice (e.g., experiential learning, connectivism).

Use of Transformative Teaching in the Classroom

In today’s political climate, teachers are a resource to educate about the consequences of societal injustices. Earlier, we discussed that transformative teaching could facilitate critical reflection and rational discourse and promote positive interactions between learners and educators. Therefore, practical applications of this teaching strategy revolve around becoming aware of how others view the world and diversifying their perspectives. Tedford and Kitchenham (2021) used transformative teaching to influence student perspectives on racism and nonviolent protest. The results showed that learners who were initially indifferent about this topic changed their perspective on racism and non-violent protest after they were shown graphic narratives and discussed the topic in a class lecture. After the participants became more aware of injustices, they could self-reflect and understand that others do not experience the world the same as they do. This study pinpointed the importance of transformative teaching as an effective tool to facilitate discussions where assumptions are identified and changed through communication with others. Overall, this can be beneficial with Jigsaw group interactions to ensure that learners and educators have class cohesion and engagement for diverse understanding.

Micro Theories of Learning

[(photo placement) Katerina Holmes: Pensive black student with notepad and pencil]

Mindset Theory

A key research component in learning is student motivation (Kapasi & Pei, 2022). Mindset theory is a social-cognitive learning approach regarding student motivation and beliefs about intelligence. Some students view their success based on performance goals, such as scoring high on tests, while others view success based on learning opportunities and increased understanding (Kapasi & Pei, 2022). How a student views their success is crucial as it impacts how they respond to challenges and failures throughout their schooling (Kapasi & Pei, 2022). Mindset theory puts students’ views of learning into two categories: fixed mindsets and growth mindsets (Kapasi & Pei, 2022).

A fixed mindset (originally called entity theory) is the belief that intelligence is stable and cannot be changed. Individuals with fixed mindsets judge their success based on performance ability (Kapasi & Pei, 2022; Rissanen et al., 2019). Those with this mindset also tend to believe that they have a set amount of potential for tasks, and once they reach that set level of competency, they can no longer improve their skills (Kapasi & Pei, 2022). Fixed mindset individuals tend to show a helpless response when faced with a challenge or failure. They often do not benefit from struggles and mistakes because they fear showing inadequacy reveals a personal deficit. Research shows that individuals with a fixed mindset react more when they are told if they are right or wrong than when they are given feedback (Kapasi & Pei, 2022).

A growth mindset (originally called incremental theory) is the belief that intelligence is not fixed and can develop and grow with effort and experience (Kapasi & Pei, 2022; Rissanen et al., 2019). This mindset reacts to failure or challenges with a willingness to keep trying and continue learning until the challenge is overcome. Students with a growth mindset tend to benefit from mistakes and constructive feedback as they learn from these experiences (Kapasi & Pei, 2022). A growth mindset is associated with higher academic achievement, taking more risks, and college retention.

While individuals tend to have one of the two mindsets, all individuals have experienced both growth and fixed mindsets at different times. For example, the same individual may have a fixed mindset about their math skills but a growth mindset regarding musical ability. Mindsets are dependent on the environment and the situation. When individuals feel that they are being judged or are in a high-pressure situation, they may be more likely to have a fixed mindset. This is important to consider as it means that individuals are not stuck in one mindset, and intervention can help individuals attain a growth mindset.

How Does it Apply to the Classroom?

Mindset theory is vital in the classroom as it impacts students’ academic success and helps teachers understand how students respond to setbacks (Kapasi & Pei, 2022). A growth mindset has been associated with higher academic achievement, while a fixed mindset has been associated with lower academic effort as individuals believe it will protect their ego. Growth mindsets are very beneficial, especially for female students and those with low socioeconomic statuses. A growth mindset can help students succeed in school and lessen the impact of sexism and socio-economic status (Kapasi & Pei, 2022). A difference in mindset can explain why students with equal abilities show differences in behaviour, learning processes, and achievement.

Teachers play a huge role in mindset interventions with students (Rissanen et al., 2019). Educators can demonstrate a growth mindset through subtle cues such as the use of language and demonstrating learning strategies, coping mechanisms, and emotion regulation. Teachers can also promote academic persistence and identify students at risk for fixed mindsets.

What is the Role of a School Psychologist?

Mindset interventions, even brief ones, are shown to have lasting effects on students (Rissanen et al., 2019). School psychologists are instrumental in providing interventions and supporting students, staff, and parents (Kapasi & Pei, 2022). Interventions can be done through videos, workshops, and written materials (Kapasi & Pei, 2022).

There are a few key points to consider for mindset interventions to be beneficial. School psychologists should emphasize that the brain has a capacity for growth and explain neuroplasticity (Kapasi & Pei, 2022; Rissanen et al., 2019). Kapasi and Pei (2022) say, “The brain is like a muscle—it gets stronger (and smarter) when you exercise it.” It is also important for school psychologists to discuss development and growth potential with students, although they should avoid mentioning how easy or difficult growth may be. Intervention is most beneficial when only a growth mindset is mentioned; the concept of a fixed mindset should not be noted (Kapasi & Pei, 2022).

Habits of Mind

In this rapidly evolving world, teachers cannot just have the knowledge and skills to educate students; it is also essential for teachers to be aware of how their students think and behave so they can create valuable teaching lessons. To cultivate habits of mind, teachers should facilitate an enriching environment to empower students’ competence in the classroom. Uiterwijk-Luijk and colleagues (2019) identified five steps that can produce experts in the habits of mind: 1) have an inquiry habit of mind, which means that students have positive attitudes toward work, which will then produce a sense of self-efficacy to acquire knowledge; 2) be data literate, which means that teachers provide quality data analysis and interpretation so information is turned into valuable knowledge; 3) create a culture of inquiry in the classroom by supporting questions and concerns that students bring up; and 4) contribute to a culture of inquiry at the school level by collaborating with students to make sense of data and encourage a desire to share their instructional strategies. Overall, habit of mind means that students are constantly demonstrating wondering and puzzlement, constructing and testing explanations, and mastering information (Uiterwijk-Luijk et al., 2019).

Use of Habits of Mind in the Classroom

Literature on habits of mind teaching practices identifies characteristics in the educational system that help learners adapt their mindset to enable a ‘growth mindset’ rather than a ‘fixed mindset.’ Carol Dweck, a psychologist, first identified these two types of mindsets (Lucas, 2021). She states that those with a fixed mindset see mistakes as failures, avoid opportunities to learn about new things that challenge what they already know, and declare that their ideas are the best choices (Lucas, 2021). While a growth mindset is ideal for new learners as they tend to accept their mistakes and treat them as valuable lessons, think outside the box, and are more accepting of others’ opinions (Lucas, 2021). Therefore, it is recommended that teachers pique students’ curiosity by engaging them in data literacy so they can apply their knowledge outside of the classroom, create groups and guide respectful discussions on questions that come up during class, and encourage students that improvement is continually growing and not fixed.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is vital to cultivate an understanding of the different theoretical frameworks of learning to ensure that students are enriched in their classroom environments. This chapter analyzed five major learning theories: behaviourism, cognitivism, constructivism, humanism, and connectivism, as well as three teaching theories, which were: transmission, transaction, and transformation theory. Lastly, we covered micro theories of learning—mindset theory and habits of mind to—gain an understanding of the variety of perspectives in the psychology of learning. To summarize, cognitivism is learning that targets internal thought and informational processing. Humanism promotes a learner-centered approach that considers the learning environment and a learner’s needs. Connectivism strengthens a learner’s ability to source and critique information to fill gaps in knowledge. Transformational teaching theory is when educators prioritize connection and understanding in their lectures to produce change toward social justice. Lastly, habits of mind mean that students are taught to develop a sense of curiosity, where they continuously construct and test information to develop a growth mindset.

References

Agarwal, P. K., & Roediger, H. L. (2018). Lessons for learning: How cognitive psychology informs classroom practice. Phi Delta Kappan, 100(4), 8–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721718815666

Alanazi, A. (2016). A critical review of constructivist theory and the emergence of constructionism. American Research Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 2, 1-8. doi: 10.21694/2378-7031.16018

Bada, S. O., & Olusegun, S. (2015). Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for teaching and learning. Journal of Research & Method in Education, 5(6), 66-70.

Belardinelli, O. (2012). The debt of cognitive science to Ulric Neisser. Cognitive Processing, 13(3), 189–191. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-012-0506-4

Braat, M., Engelen, J., van Gemert, T., & Verhaegh, S. (2020). The rise and fall of behaviourism: The narrative and the numbers. History of Psychology, 23(3), 252–280. https://doi-org. /10.1037/hop0000146

Buhler, C. (1971). Basic theoretical concepts of humanistic psychology. The American Psychologist, 26(4), 378–386. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0032049

Clarà, M., & Barberà, E. (2014). Three problems with the connectivist conception of learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(3), 197–206. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12040

DeRobertis, E. M. (2006). Deriving a humanistic theory of child development from the works of Carl R. Rogers and Karen Horney. The Humanistic Psychologist, 34(2), 177–199. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15473333thp3402_5

Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43–71. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq.21143

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Herter and Herter

Goldie, J. G. S. (2016). Connectivism: A knowledge learning theory for the digital age? Medical Teacher, 38(10), 1064–1069. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2016.1173661

Habermas, J. (1971). Knowledge of human interests. Boston: Beacon

Hayes, S. C. (2012). Humanistic psychology and contextual behavioral perspectives. Psychotherapy (Chicago, Ill.), 49(4), 455–460. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027396

Hein, G. E. (1991). Constructivist learning theory. Institute for Inquiry.

Howie, P., & Bagnall, R. (2015). A critical comparison of transformation and deep approach theories of learning. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 34(3), 348–365. https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370.2014.1000409

Jenkins, J. R., Antil, L. R., Wayne, S. K., & Vadasy, P. F. (2003). How cooperative learning works for special education and remedial students. Exceptional Children, 69(3), 279-292

Jenkins, J. R., Antil, L. R., Wayne, S. K., & Vadasy, P. F. (2003). How cooperative learning works for special education and remedial students. Exceptional Children, 69(3), 279–292. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290306900302

Kapasi, A., & Pei, J. (2022). Mindset theory and school psychology. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 31(1), 57-74. https://doi.org/10.1177/08295735211053961

Kasonde Ng’andu, F. H., Haambokoma, N., & Tomaida, M. (2013). The contribution of behaviourism theory to education. Journal: Zambia Journal of Education, 4(1), 58-74.

Kitchenham, A. (2008). The evolution of John Mezirow’s transformative learning theory. Journal of Transformative Education, 6(2), 104–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344608322678

Kotzee, B., & Palermos, S. O. (2021). The teacher bandwidth problem: moocs, connectivism, and collaborative knowledge. Educational Theory, 71(4), 497–518. https://doi.org/10.1111/edth.12495

Lucas, B. (2021). Power of a growth mindset: Why certain habits of mind matter in clinical practice. In Practice, 43(8), 474–476. https://doi.org/10.1002/inpr.129

Malone, J. C., & García-Penagos, A. (2014). When a clear strong voice was needed: A retrospective review of Watson’s (1924/1930) behaviorism. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 102(2), 267–287. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.98

Marule, T. R. (2012). Niitsitapi relational and experiential theories in education. Canadian Journal of Native Education, 35(1).URL https://ojs.library.ubc.ca/index.php/CJNE/article/view/196533

Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality ([1st ed.].). New York: Harper. Chicago Style Citation Maslow, Abraham H. Motivation and Personality. [1st ed.]. New York: Harper, 1954.

Mezirow J. (1998). On critical reflection. Adult Education Quarterly, 48(3), 185 – -198. https://doi.org/10.1177/074171369804800305

Mezirow J. (2012). Learning to think like an adult: Core concepts of transformation theory.” .In Taylor E. W., Cranton P., & Associates (Eds.), The handbook of transformative learning: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 73–95). Jossey-Bass.

Moore, J. (2011). Behaviorism. The Psychological Record, 61(3), 449–463. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395771

Rissanen, I., Kuusisto, E., Tuominen, M., & Tirri, K. (2019). In search of a growth mindset pedagogy: A case study of one teacher’s classroom practices in a Finnish elementary school. Teaching and Teacher Education, 77, 204–213. https://doi-org. /10.1016/j.tate.2018.10.002

Rogers, C. R. 1. (1961). On becoming a person: a therapist’s view of psychotherapy. Boston, Houghton Mifflin.

Siemens, G. (2004) Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm

Tedford, & Kitchenham, A. D. (2021). Using the graphic narrative to stimulate Mezirow’s transformative learning theory in learners. Journal of Transformative Education, 19(4), 445–458. https://doi.org/10.1177/15413446211045174

Uiterwijk-Luijk, Krüger, M., Zijlstra, B., & Volman, M. (2019). Teachers’ role in stimulating students’ inquiry habit of mind in primary schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 86, 102894–. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102894

Weegar, M. A., & Pacis, D. (2012). A comparison of two theories of learning–behaviourism and constructivism as applied to face-to-face and online learning. Academia.

Wells, G. (1998). Some questions about direct instruction: Why? To whom? How? And when? Language Arts, 76(1), 27-35.