THEORIES OF LEARNING

Assessment, Teaching and Theories of Learning

            The alignment of assessment with learning, teaching and content knowledge is a basis of claims for the validity of assessment, but the relationship is not straightforward and cannot be taken for granted. Indeed, there are plenty of examples of assessment practices that have only tenuous or partial relationship with current understanding of learning within particular domain. Much assessment practice was found on the content and method of psychology, especially that deals with mental traits and their measurement. Nowadays, psychological, social-psychological, sociological and epistemological dimensions are all needed to be taken into consideration at some level in the framing of assessment practice. In reality, the differences of approaches are unlikely to be so stark and teachers often blend approaches.      

  

The theoretical foundation of learning and assessment practice

The theory of multiple intelligence is not theory of learning, strictly speaking, but a theory of mental traits. Bearing these cautions in mind the following account summarizes, in a schematic and necessarily brief way, the key associated with each of the three families of learning theories. First, how learning take place (the process an environment for learning) and second, how achievement (the product of learning) is construed.

i) Behaviourist Theories of Learning

According to these theories, the environment for learning is the determining factor. Learning is viewed as the conditioned response to external stimuli. Rewards and punishments, or at least the withholding of rewards, are powerful ways of forming or extinguishing habits. These theories also take the view that complex wholes are assembled out of parts, so learning can best be accomplished when complex performances are deconstructed and when each element is practised, reinforced and subsequently built upon. These theories have no concept of mind, intelligence and ego.  From this perspective, achievement in learning is often equated with the accumulation of skills and the memorization of information (facts) in a given domain, demonstrated in the formation of habits that allow speedy performance. Implications for teaching construe the teacher’s role as being to train people to respond to instruction correctly and rapidly. Besides that, implications for assessment are that progress is measured through unseen timed tests with items taken form progressive levels in a skill hierarchy.

ii) Cognitive, Constructivist Theories of Learning

Learning according to these theories, requires the active engagement of learners and is determined by what goes on in people’s heads. As the reference to ‘cognition’ makes clear, these theories are interested in ‘mind’ as a function of ‘brain’. A particular focus is on how people construct meaning and make sense of the world organizing structures, concepts and principles in schema (mental models). Prior knowledge is regarded as a powerful determinant of a student’s capacity to learn new material. So that, from this perspective, achievement is framed in terms of understanding in relation to conceptual structures and competence in processing strategies. Furthermore, cognitivist theories are complex and differentiated and it is difficult to summarize their overall implications. However, in essence, the role of the teacher is to help ‘novices’ to acquire ‘expert’ understanding of conceptual structures and processing strategies to solve problems by symbolic manipulation with ‘less search’.

iii) Social-cultural, situated and Activity Theories of Learning

According to this perspective, learning occurs is an interaction between the individual and the social environment. Thinking is conducted through actions that alter the situation and the situation changes the thinking; the two constantly interact. Especially, important is the notion that learning is a mediated activity in which cultural artefacts have a crucial role. Thus learning is by definition a social and collaborative activity in which people develop their thinking together. Group work is not an optional extra. Learning involves participation and what is learned is not necessarily the property of an individual but shared within the social group, hence the concept of ‘distributed cognition’ in which collective knowledge of the group, community or organization is regarded as greater than the sum of the knowledge of individuals. Then, the outcomes of learning that are most valued are engaged participation in ways that other find appropriate. So that, these theories provide interesting descriptions and explanation learning in communities of practice but the newer ones are not yet well worked out in terms of their implications for teaching and assessment. Moreover, if a key goal of learning is to build learning identities then students’ own self-assessments must be central. For the conclusion, clearly, more work needs to be done to develop approaches to assessment coherent with a sosio-cultural perspective on learning.

It would seem, therefore, that alignment between assessment practice and learning theory is something to be connected.  Thus, behaviourist approaches seem to work perfectly well when the focus is on the development of some basic skills or habitual behaviours. In the other hand, cognitivist approaches seem to be best when deep understanding of conceptual structures within subject domains is the desired outcome. Most importantly, the constructivist approach in both theory and practice has taken on board the importance of the social dimension of learning: hence the increasing use of the term ‘social constructivism’. In the end, however, decisions about which assessment practices are most appropriate should flow from educational judgements a s preferred learning outcomes. This forces us to engage with questions of value.