JEREMY’S MODEL OF HOW PEOPLE LEARN

Jeremy Wang

Epsy 5114

10 December 2008

My Approach

Many different models of how people learn already exist Information Processing, Conceptual

Change, Constructivism, etc. While many theories exist, there is not

one that alone explains all aspects of learning

How do I make sense of these different theories?

My Approach

Learning is a complex, dynamic system Various components and processes Cyclical and dynamic Emergent properties (learning)

Current research and theory tells us how these parts are related

Future research can benefit from being framed as part of a “learning system”

My Framework

My Framework

Prior Knowledge

and Experience

My Framework

Prior Knowledge

and Experience

Learning Environment

My Framework

Prior Knowledge

and Experience

Learning Environment

Internal Cognitive Processes

My Framework

Prior Knowledge

and Experience

Learning Environment

Application and

Assessment

Internal Cognitive Processes

My Framework

Prior Knowledge

and Experience

Learning Environment

Application and

Assessment

Internal Cognitive Processes

Prior Knowledge and Experience Examples of factors:

Socio-economic factors Age Gender Race/ethnicity Special education status English language learning (ELL) status Prior learning experiences/prior knowledge Motivation to learn

Learning Environment

Examples of factors: Teacher training/dispositions (PCK) Pedagogical methods (lecture, activities,

etc.) Classroom/school environment (safety,

classroom management, discipline issues) Technology use (TEL) Grouping of students (individual,

small/large group)

Internal Cognitive Processes

Examples of Factors: Brain development Brain disorders Synapse formation Patterns of neural activity Functional organization of the brain

Application and Assessment

Examples of factors: Timing (formative, summative) Type (MC, short answer, extended

response) Authenticity Proximity to learning experience (near/far

transfer) Difficulty Measurement/Psychometric issues

Tools for Research

Prior Knowledge and Experience Surveys, interviews, pretests

Learning Environment Teacher studies, classroom observations,

technology Internal Cognitive Processes

EEG, fMRI, MEG Application and Assessment

Psychometrics, validity studies

How does research apply to this framework? 3 Examples:

1. Berkeley Brain Study (2008) Kishiyama, Knight, Boyce http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases

/2008/12/02_cortex.shtml

2. 30 Million Word Gap by Age 3 (1995) Hart and Risley (University of Kansas) http://www.aft.org/pubs-reports/american_ed

ucator/spring2003/catastrophe.html

4,000 Word Intervention (2008) Pilot Study – Davison, et. al. (University of

Minnesota)

Example #1: Berkeley Brain Study Study:

Normal 9- and 10-year olds Differed only in SES EEG used to measure brain function

Result: Detectable differences between high- and

low-income students in response in prefrontal cortex (critical for problem solving)

Example #1: Berkeley Brain Study

Prior Knowledge

and Experience

Learning Environment

Application and

Assessment

Internal Cognitive Processes

Example #1: Berkeley Brain Study Prior Experience:

Socio-economic Status Internal Cognitive Process:

Activity in prefrontal cortex

Note: Interventions (teaching, etc.) can help overcome these differences

Example #2: 30 Million Words Study:

42 families; upper-, middle-, and lower-SES 2-1/2 years of monthly, hour-long

observations (Age 1-3) Tested at Grade 3 on receptive vocabulary,

language development, and basic skills

Example #2: 30 Million Words Results:

Approximately 30 million word gap between upper- and lower-SES students

Strong correlation between accomplishments at age 3 and test results at Grade 3

Example #1: Berkeley Brain Study

Prior Knowledge

and Experience

Learning Environment

Application and

Assessment

Internal Cognitive Processes

Example #2: 30 Million Words Prior Experience:

30 million word gap between upper- and lower-SES students

Application and Assessment: Results of PPVT-R, TOLD, and CTBS/U

Connection: Gap in vocabulary affects later achievement

in school

Note: Interventions that improve language exposure are important

Example #3: 4,000 word intervention Study:

Computer-based intervention to enhance vocabulary

1st – 4th Grade Students Pre- and Post-test on vocabulary

Example #3: 4,000 word intervention Results:

Still in pilot stages Possible that intervention has an effect on

vocabulary

Example #3: 4,000 word intervention

Prior Knowledge

and Experience

Learning Environment

Application and

Assessment

Internal Cognitive Processes

Example #3: 4,000 word intervention Learning Environment:

Computer-based intervention Application and Assessment:

Vocabulary tests

Note: Intervention may help students “catch up.”

How do these examples relate to my theory of learning? My theory/framework for learning can

help… make sense of multiple lines of research evaluate claims made by research based

on its robustness suggest research or interventions that

improve learning

How do these examples relate to my theory of learning? Multiple lines of research

Example #1: Differences in prior experience (SES) affects cognitive processes (EEG results)

Example #2: Differences in prior experience (SES) affects later achievement (vocabulary tests)

Example #3: Learning environment (computer-based intervention) may affect later achievement (vocabulary tests)

Davis et.al.: Cognitive processes (emotions, regulation, goals) affect assessment (testing situations)

How do these examples relate to my theory of learning? Robustness of research/theory

Which categories of learning factors does the research/theory take into account? Focus in one area or one relationship

How does the research relate to prior research on how different factors are related? Strategies improve positive relationships in

learning or compensate for other factors

How do these examples relate to my theory of learning? Suggesting future research

How to build on prior research with a category

What interventions may be effective in positive learning gains

Ex. 4,000 word intervention

Conclusions

Learning is a complex, dynamic process involving many interacting systems

Learning is an emergent property of the interactions of these systems

A framework for these interactions may be fruitful for gaining a deeper understanding of those relationships

My Framework

Prior Knowledge

and Experience

Learning Environment

Application and

Assessment

Internal Cognitive Processes