This article was downloaded by: [University of Nebraska, Lincoln]

On: 07 April 2015, At: 22:57

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Theory Into Practice

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/htip20

Theories of Learning and Teaching in TIP

a b a
Anita Woolfolk Hoy , Heather A. Davis & Eric M. Anderman
a
The Ohio State University
b
North Carolina State University
Published online: 25 Jul 2013.

To cite this article: Anita Woolfolk Hoy , Heather A. Davis & Eric M. Anderman (2013)
Theories of Learning and Teaching in TIP , Theory Into Practice, 52:sup1, 9-21, DOI:
10.1080/00405841.2013.795437

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2013.795437

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
 Theory Into Practice, 52:9–21, 2013
Copyright © The College of Education and Human Ecology, The Ohio State University
ISSN: 0040-5841 print/1543-0421 online
DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2013.795437

Anita Woolfolk Hoy

Heather A. Davis
Eric M. Anderman

Theories of Learning and

Downloaded by [University of Nebraska, Lincoln] at 22:57 07 April 2015

Teaching in TIP
Developmental Editors: Amanda R. Baker, DeLeon L. Gray, and
Megan Sanders

Research on learning theories is central to most
of the articles that have appeared in Theory Into
Practice (TIP) over the past 50 years. Scholarship
on this topic in many ways undergirds all articles
that provide discussions of ways of moving theory
into practice within the broad field of education.
Indeed, one could easily argue that all research
focusing on improving the education of learners
at some level encompasses assumptions based on
learning theory.
Anita Woolfolk Hoy is professor emerita of The
Ohio State University, Heather A. Davis is a faculty
member at North Carolina State University, and Eric
M. Anderman is chair and professor at The Ohio State
University.
Correspondence should be addressed to Anita
Woolfolk Hoy, 7687 Pebble Creek Circle, Unit 102,
Naples, FL 34108. E-mail: anitahoy@mac.com.
Learning theory has been covered in TIP
throughout the journal’s history. As we review
in this article, coverage within TIP has varied,
and has included a wide array of perspectives
on human learning within diverse educational
contexts. Although learning theories often are
taught and discussed along a historical con-
tinuum (e.g., behavioral theories lead to more
cognitive theories), coverage in TIP has been
broad. Indeed, scholarship from diverse theoret-
ical perspectives has been published throughout
the journal’s history.
A Brief Overview of Approaches to
Learning
B ECAUSE LEARNING IS A COMPLEX cogni-
tive process, there is no single best expla-
nation of learning. Different theories of learning

9
 Fifty Years of Theory Into Practice
offer more or less useful explanations depending
on what is to be explained. Drawing upon sum-
maries from Woolfolk Hoy and Hoy (2013), the
general categories of learning theories examined
in this article are behavioral, cognitive, construc-
tivist, and sociocultural.
Behavioral theories of learning stress observ-
able changes in behaviors, skills, and habits.
Attention is clearly on behavior. Learning is seen
as a change in behavior brought about by experi-
ence, with virtually no concern for the mental
or internal processes of thinking. Behavior is
Downloaded by [University of Nebraska, Lincoln] at 22:57 07 April 2015
what people do. The intellectual underpinnings of
behavioral theory rest with Skinner’s (1950) op-
erant conditioning. Functional behavioral assess-
ment, positive behavior supports (Soodak, 2003),
and, to a certain extent, deliberate practice in
developing expertise (Ericsson, 2006) are current
applications of this perspective. When specific
skills and behaviors need to be learned, teaching
approaches consistent with behavioral learning
theory are quite effective. These approaches have
been particularly useful in the development of
interventions for learners with special needs.
Cognitive theories of learning deal with think-
ing, decision making, remembering, creating,
and problem-solving. How information is re-
membered and processed, as well as how in-
dividuals use their knowledge to regulate their
thinking, are critical in this perspective. Some
of the most important applications of cogni-
tive theories are teaching students how to learn
and remember by using learning tactics such as
note-taking, mnemonics, and visual organizers.
Teaching strategies based on cognitive views of
learning, particularly on information processing,
highlight the importance of attention, organiza-
tion, practice, and elaboration in learning. These
strategies also provide ways to give students
more control over their own learning by develop-
ing and improving their metacognitive skills and
self-regulated learning strategies. The emphasis
of the cognitive approach is on what is happening
inside the head of the learner.
Constructivist theories of learning are con-
cerned with how individuals make meaning of
events and activities; hence, learning is seen
10
as the construction of knowledge. In general,
constructivism assumes that people create and
construct knowledge, rather than internalize it
from the external environment; additionally, it
is important to note that there are different
approaches to constructivism. Some construc-
tivist views emphasize the shared and social
construction of knowledge, whereas others do
not emphasize social forces. Constructivist per-
spectives on learning and teaching, which are
increasingly influential today, are grounded in the
research of Piaget, Bruner, Dewey, and Vygot-
sky. Inquiry and problem-based learning, cog-
nitive apprenticeships, and cooperative learning
are typical teaching strategies that are consis-
tent with constructivist approaches. The essence
of the constructivist approach is that it places
the students’ own efforts at the center of the
educational process, thus the notion of student-
centered teaching (Bruning, Schraw, & Norby,
2011).
Sociocultural theories of learning acknowl-
edge the centrality of social and cultural con-
texts in learning. These perspectives often are
called social constructivist theories. In the past
25 years, these theories of learning have be-
come more prominent as concerns about diver-
sity, multicultural education, and social justice
increase. Concepts of culturally relevant peda-
gogy and racial identity emphasize the need to
consider social and cultural factors in theories of
learning.
Each of these approaches to learning has
much to offer; in fact, each brings with it ad-
vantages and disadvantages. We think of these
main dimensions of learning theories as four pil-
lars for teaching. Students must first understand
and make sense of the material (constructivist);
then they must remember what they have un-
derstood (cognitive–information processing); and
then they must practice and apply their new
skills and understanding to make them more fluid
and automatic, and a permanent part of their
repertoire (behavioral). All of these processes are
embedded in social and cultural settings. Failure
to attend to any part of the process may yield
lower-quality learning.
 Woolfolk Hoy, Davis, Anderman
Historical View of Learning Theories
Through the Lens of TIP
Fifty years ago, learning was largely
equated with performance. Behaviorist theories
(Stephens, 1974) essentially painted teachers and
children as machines (Briggs, 1962) capable of
being trained or programmed toward optimal per-
formance. Teachers were encouraged to consider
the ways in which they structured the classroom
and their lesson plans to shape students’ moti-
vation to learn (Stephens, 1974). This narrow
Downloaded by [University of Nebraska, Lincoln] at 22:57 07 April 2015
definition of learning proved disappointing for
applied researchers who tried to adapt these
methods to classroom learning. Bayles (1966)
was among the first TIP authors to voice a strong
dissent to behaviorist views of learning, arguing
for the inherent value of discovery and creativity
in the learning process. Bayles broadened that
narrow definition of learning to include the devel-
opment of insight and the detection of patterns.
Contributors to TIP in the 1970s (e.g., Mi-
nor, 1973) and 1980s (e.g., Webb, 1980) argued
that learning theories should make sense of the
ways in which the learner contributes to his
or her own learning process. As such, they
served as advocates for the new definitions of
learning as processes of meaning-making and
understanding. Working to understand the learn-
ing process, cognitive psychologists developed
models to explain how information could be pro-
cessed, how knowledge could be stored, and how
individual differences and learner preferences
could be manifest in the learner’s knowledge,
strategies, and deployment of cognitive resources
(Shuell, 1990). Both cognitive and constructivist
perspectives on learning described learning as
an active, ongoing process that relied on the
investment of the learner in wanting to learn
the task (Commeyras, 1995). Moving from the
1990s into the 21st century, sociocultural learning
theories incorporated considerations of culture,
race, and ethnicity (Ford & Grantham, 2003; Gay,
1994; Ogbu, 1992).
Given this very brief and general history of
learning theories, it is tempting to think that, as
evidenced in some other articles in this issue,
Theories of Learning and Teaching
there has been a distinctly dominant theory or
emphasis each decade or so that gives way, in
time, to a successor theory (e.g., behavioral to
cognitive to constructivist to sociocultural). In
truth, articles in TIP have long reflected the
valid applications of all these views, as well
as intelligent integrations of several theories to
guide practice, as Table 1 indicates. In the next
section, we explore the ways that different learn-
ing theories have been represented in TIP over
the past 50 years. Note that no one decade in
TIP has featured a single theory of learning.
Behavioral Approaches To Learning
Across The Years In TIP
As early as the first issue of TIP in 1962, a
behavioral approach to learning was the founda-
tion for the entire issue on “Teaching Machines
and Language Laboratories.” An example article
in that issue by Briggs (1962) began with the as-
sumption that teaching machines operate accord-
ing to established principles of learning. Briggs
outlined three distinct types of programming
that served different educational purposes, and
then highlighted other factors that are important
for educators to consider when using teaching
machines in the classroom. Briggs’ article is an
early example of behaviorist theories of learning
applied to classroom practice. However, Briggs’
account also suggested the very beginning of a
theoretical shift. Although grounded in behavior-
ist theories, Briggs raised important issues, such
as individual differences and student motivation,
that became more prominent in later theories of
learning (e.g., cognitive approaches).
A decade later, Stephens (1974) discussed the
potential of behavioral approaches to accelerate
students’ academic and social learning, beyond
its more traditional use as a way of disciplining
and controlling students. He described this sort
of behavior modification as directive teaching,
and systematically broke down the process of
developing a directive teaching lesson plan into
seven questions the teacher must consider. Be-
sides providing a clear example of behaviorist
11
 Fifty Years of Theory Into Practice

Table 1
24 Most Relevant Articles on Theories of Learning
(of the 65 Identified as Related to the Topic)

Volume
Authors Title Year (Issue) Issue Theme

Behaviorism
Guba, Egon Teaching machines and language 1962 1 (1) Entire issue
laboratories
Stephens, Directive teaching in the classroom 1974 13 (2) Learning: An individual
Thomas experience
Mader, Cynthia “I will never teach the old way 2009 48 (2) A person-centered approach to
Downloaded by [University of Nebraska, Lincoln] at 22:57 07 April 2015

again”: Classroom classroom

management and external
incentives

Cognitive science
Bayles, Ernest Theories of learning and classroom 1966 5 (2) Methodology: Its impact on
methods learning
Minor, Frances Cognitive development: Some 1973 12 (2) The early years of childhood
pervasive issues
Shuell, Thomas Teaching and learning as problem 1990 29 (2) Metaphors we learn by
solving
Marzano, Robert How classroom teachers approach 1993 32 (3) Teaching for higher order
the teaching of thinking thinking
Pintrich, Paul The role of metacognitive 2002 41 (4) Revising Bloom’s taxonomy
knowledge in learning,
teaching, and assessing
Zimmerman, Becoming a self-regulated learner: 2002 Becoming a self-regulated
Barry An overview learner

Constructivism
Torrance, E. Paul Independent study as an 1966 5 (5) Independent study
instructional too
Morine, Greta Discovery modes: A criterion for 1969 8 (1) Insights—Collection of articles
teaching
Barclay Murphy, A fresh look at the child 1969 8 (3) A fresh look at the child (Child
Lois & development)
Murphy,
Gardner
Webb, Patricia Piaget: Implications for teaching 1980 19 (2) Teaching methods: Learning
applications
Commeyras, What can we learn from students’ 1995 34 (2) Learning from student voices
Michelle questions?

(continued)

theory, this article was also interesting within transition to cognitive views of learning was well
the context of TIP. At this point in time, many underway.
of the articles being published seemed to focus, Behaviorism, however, is still a viable basis
instead, on cognitive theories of learning—the for teaching applications today. For example,

12
 Woolfolk Hoy, Davis, Anderman Theories of Learning and Teaching

Table 1
(Continued)

Volume
Authors Title Year (Issue) Issue Theme

Sociocultural
Ogbu, John Adaptation to minority status and 1992 31 (4) Literacy and the African
impact on school success American learner/The
struggle between access
and denial
Gay, Geneva Coming of age ethnically: 1994 33 (3) Rethinking middle grades
Teaching young adolescents
Downloaded by [University of Nebraska, Lincoln] at 22:57 07 April 2015

of color
Ladson-Billings, But that’s just good teaching! The 1995 34 (3) Culturally relevant teaching
Gloria case for culturally relevant
pedagogy
Ford, Donna & Providing access to culturally 2003 42 (3) Teacher reflection and race in
Grantham, diverse gifted students: From cultural contexts
Tarek deficit to dynamic thinking

Intersection of learning theories

Marshall, Beyond the workplace metaphor: 1990 29 (2) Metaphors we learn by
Hermine The classroom as a learning
setting
Furlong, John School mentors and university 2000 39 (1) New visions in mentoring
tutors.
King, Allison Structuring peer interaction to 2002 41 (1) Promoting thinking through peer
promote high-level cognitive learning
processing
McCombs, A framework for the redesign of 2003 42 (2) Learner-centered principles: A
Barbara K–12 education in the context framework for teaching
of current educational reform.
Bailey, Francis & Are ‘other people’s children’ 2005 44 (1) Closing achievement gaps:
Pransky, Ken constructivist learners too? What will it take?
Morrison & Allen Promoting student resilience in 2007 46 (2) Adolescent mental health
school contexts

Leslie Soodak’s (2003) article in TIP on “Class-
room management in inclusive settings” was
grounded in behavioral theories, but also incorpo-
rated concerns about individual differences and
motivation. Soodak described the use of func-
tional behavioral assessment (FBA) to determine
what students are getting out of their problem
behaviors—What functions do these behaviors
serve? The focus of FBA is on the why of
the behavior. If the reason for the behavior is
known, then the teacher can devise ways of
supporting positive behaviors that will serve the
same why function. Positive behavioral supports
are interventions designed to replace problem
behaviors with new actions that serve the same
purpose for the student. The Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 1997) requires
these supports for students with disabilities and
those at-risk for special education placement.
In keeping with TIP’s commitment to repre-
senting diverse viewpoints, some of the articles
on applications of behavioral views of learning
have been critical. For example, Mader (2009)
discussed the downside of contingent rewards,

13
 Fifty Years of Theory Into Practice
specifically explaining that the presence of con-
tingent rewards, including stickers and grades,
undermines intrinsic motivation, and the removal
of contingent rewards in the classroom may
actually enhance learning. Mader introduced a
self-grading policy in a graduate course on class-
room management. She found graduate students
(who also were teachers) engaged in the course
due to genuine interest in the subject. Mader’s
article also spoke to a constructivist perspective
in the sense that allowing students to self-grade
(a) reduces teacher–student power inequalities,
Downloaded by [University of Nebraska, Lincoln] at 22:57 07 April 2015
and (b) places students at the center of their own
learning experience.
Cognitive Approaches to Learning
Across the Years in TIP
Even though discussions of the nature of
knowledge, the value of reason, and the contents
of the mind date back at least to the ancient Greek
philosophers (Gluck, Mercado, & Myers, 2008),
from the late 1800s until several decades ago,
cognitive studies fell from favor and behaviorism
thrived. Then, research during World War II
on the development of complex human skills,
the computer revolution, and breakthroughs in
understanding language development all stimu-
lated a resurgence in cognitive research at about
the time TIP was founded in 1962. Bayles’
(1966) article in TIP suggested a strong reaction
against a behaviorist theory of learning, with
a shift toward a theory that seemed to have
aspects in common with both cognitivism and
constructivism. Bayles’ description of learning
as insight emphasized a cognitive process of
pattern-finding, and also stressed the importance
of discovery and creativity. This article was a
departure from behaviorist theories of learning.
As the dominant learning theories turned
toward cognitive perspectives, educational psy-
chologists became interested in how people
think, learn concepts, and solve problems (e.g.,
Ausubel, 1963; Bruner, Goodnow, & Austin,
1956). An example of this emphasis in TIP was
“Actualizing concept learning: The challenge to
curriculum planning” (Toepher, 1971). Toepfer
14
explored both the potential of, and the problems
with, concept learning, focusing on its imple-
mentation in the context of curriculum planning.
The article framed concept learning as a recent
innovation, based on the stages of human de-
velopment and concerned with helping students
enact “intelligent behavior in a specific instance”
(p. 135). He concluded the article with a number
of recommendations for putting concept learning
into practice. This discussion of concept learning
is interesting for a few reasons. First, based
on the way Toepfer discussed it, concept learn-
ing seemed to be a new and developing tech-
nique when this article was published. Second,
Toepfer’s discussion of the strategy’s limitations
also suggested that a shift or reconceptualization,
either of the strategy itself or the content being
taught, may be necessary if concept learning is
to be appropriate and effective.
In the 1970s, this focus on concept learning
in cognitive approaches gave way to the study of
how knowledge is represented in the mind and
particularly how it is remembered. Remembering
and forgetting became major topics for investi-
gation in cognitive psychology in the 1970s and
1980s, and the information processing model of
memory dominated research. One application of
this model in TIP was “Teaching students how to
learn” (Letteri, 1985). Letteri framed learning as
information processing and argued that improv-
ing students’ cognitive processes, or controls,
was the best way to help them learn how to
learn. His article typified a cognitivist approach
to learning, emphasizing information processing,
cognitive structure, and specific strategies to in-
crease cognitive control. However, Letteri also
highlighted the importance of individual differ-
ences in his discussion of profiles. Although still
grounded in cognitivist theory, acknowledging in-
dividual differences beyond those that are purely
developmental seems to move in the direction of
constructivism. Thus, Letteri’s article represents
a refinement of more general cognitivist theory.
In the 1990s and on to today, cognitive theo-
ries have again added concerns about thinking,
decision making, problem solving, knowledge
acquisition, and metacognition to the informa-
tion processing focus on memory. For example,
 Woolfolk Hoy, Davis, Anderman
Shuell (1990) discussed why problem solving
is a good metaphor for teaching and learning.
Problem solving as a metaphor suggests that both
teaching and learning are complex processes that
involve: (a) identifying a problem and setting
a goal, (b) actively searching for possible al-
ternatives to solve the problem, (c) evaluating
those alternatives, and (d) making a decision
as to which course of action to follow. Factors
affecting the teaching and learning as problem
solving metaphor include mental representations
of the problem, prior knowledge (both propo-
Downloaded by [University of Nebraska, Lincoln] at 22:57 07 April 2015
sitional and procedural), mental strategies, and
time constraints, all of which can lead to differen-
tial learning outcomes. Shuell’s article also noted
that problem-solving is domain-specific, and it
also includes an element of self-management or
metacognition on behalf of the student, which
foreshadowed constructivist concerns with stu-
dents taking responsibility for their own learning.
In a second example, Marzano (1993) dis-
cussed how teachers use a number of powerful
cognitive strategies to teach thinking, such as
questioning techniques, writing techniques, and
basic information-processing strategies. How-
ever, Marzano also asserted that teachers fail
to teach other, even more powerful, cognitive
strategies to students, such as self-regulation and
critical/creative thinking. Marzano’s commentary
served as a strong precursor to the increased em-
phasis on the teaching of cognitive strategies that
merged over the next decade (Pressley & Harris,
2006). Incorporating these cognitive strategies, in
addition to the ones already utilized by teachers,
would enhance the higher-order thinking of stu-
dents.
In the 2000s, cognitive theories of learning
focused increasingly on metacognition and self-
regulation of learning. Pintrich’s (2002) “The
role of metacognitive knowledge in learning,
teaching, and assessing” discussed the revision
of Bloom’s taxonomy, which had historically
emphasized factual, conceptual, and procedu-
ral knowledge. The revised taxonomy added
metacognitive knowledge, or the understanding
of our own thought patterns, as a fourth dimen-
sion. Pintrich outlined three types of metacogni-
tive knowledge: (a) strategic knowledge of broad
Theories of Learning and Teaching
learning, thinking, and problem solving strategies
applicable to many academic subjects; (b) knowl-
edge about specific cognitive tasks to apply in
particular situations and why (and when) these
tasks should be employed; and (c) self-knowledge
about how the individual’s own strengths may
be accentuated in order to optimize performance.
This article represented an advance in cognitive
perspectives on classroom instruction because it
encouraged educators to teach students to think
about their own thinking. Specifically, Pintrich
advocated for the explicit instruction of metacog-
nitive knowledge as an integral aspect of effec-
tive of classroom instruction. Kuhn and Dean
(2004), in their TIP article “Metacognition: A
bridge between cognitive psychology and educa-
tional practice,” also emphasized the importance
of metacognition and added considerations of
epistemology in understanding when and why
students use critical thinking.
Constructivism Approaches to Learning
Across the Years in TIP
Constructivist scholars, meanwhile, were scru-
tinizing the extent to which the pedagogies ad-
vocated by learning theorists fit the developmen-
tal needs of children (see stage-environment fit
arguments by Eccles & Midgley, 1989). As con-
structivist scholars interrogated the qualitatively
different ways in which children understood tasks
and made meaning, they came to realize that
the one-size-fits-all methods of instruction oft
advocated were minimizing the critical need
for teachers to listen to and observe children
in their classrooms and tailor and differenti-
ate instructional methods. Constructivist scholars
were among the first to call for teachers and
scholars to redefine learning as a purposeful,
developmental process that would look different
depending on the evolution and prior experiences
of the individual learner. It was during this time
that learning theory became child-centered, ac-
knowledging that children might approach tasks
and make meaning in systematically different
ways than adults (Barclay Murphy & Murphy,
1969; Webb, 1980). Constructivists argued that
15
 Fifty Years of Theory Into Practice
learning needed to be understood from the child’s
perspective.
Articles in TIP have been concerned with
child-centered learning over the entire 50 years
of publication. In 1966, Paul Torrence’s article,
“Independent study as an instructional tool,”
claimed that independent study, in combination
with more structured teaching, could alleviate
problem behavior in children, as well as chal-
lenge and motivate children of all ability levels
to learn. This is one of the earlier articles to
discuss motivational factors such as enthusiasm
Downloaded by [University of Nebraska, Lincoln] at 22:57 07 April 2015
and enjoyment of the work, and it also regarded
the social relationships between teachers and
students as more important than previous work.
The emphasis on independent study stemmed
from a realization that not all learners are the
same, nor do all learners benefit from the same
type of instruction—early constructivist ideas.
Concern with student-centered learning rever-
berated through the decades. For example, the ar-
ticle “Discovery modes: A criterion for teaching”
(Morine, 1969) acknowledged and addressed the
controversy surrounding discovery learning, ul-
timately offering readers a more nuanced un-
derstanding of the method(s) and highlighting
the implications for practice. “A fresh look at
the child” (Barclay Murphy & Murphy, 1969)
portrayed low academic achievement as the likely
result of schoolwork that seemed irrelevant and
meaningless (foreshadowing a future emphasis
on motivation research), rather than as the result
of cognitive deficiencies in the child. The em-
phasis on individualized, self-directed learning
and meaningful schoolwork suggests a transition
to more constructivist views of teaching and
learning. “Freedom, the child, the teacher: The
gap between ideas and action” (Roberts, 1976)
illustrated a theme within TIP that seemed to
become more established in the 1970s: that of the
social context of classrooms and the importance
of relationships in learning and teaching. Here,
students were addressed as individuals within
a group—recognizing both the individuality of
learners and also their social ties. These social
ties were seen as crucial to learning outcomes.
In a final example, “What can we learn from
students’ questions?”, Commeyras (1995) con-
16
tended that, although cognitivism contributed to
the understanding of learning, this psychology
of instruction needed to be further developed
into a constructivist psychology of inquiry that
incorporated students’ interests. To this end,
Commeyras argued that letting students, rather
than the teacher, guide the class questioning
and discussion would not only result in more
meaningful learning for the students, but also
in opportunities for the teachers to learn. Com-
meyras’s article represented a clear example of
constructivist learning theory applied to prac-
tice, and also directly addressed the alternative
theory of cognitivism. In addition, Commeyras
extended the implications of constructivism be-
yond a change in content that simply integrated
children’s own interests into the curriculum, to a
reframing of the entire process of teaching.
Sociocultural Approaches to Learning
Across the Years in TIP
In the 1990s, a major shift was brewing as
scholars began to realize the systematic ways in
which children’s investment in school varied as
a function of societal influences. For example,
Ogbu (1992) outlined four reasons for academic
underperformance of students of color: cultural
models (worldview), culture and language frames
of reference (students’ perceptions of whether
their home and school identities are in co-
existence or conflict), the degree of institutional
trust (mistrust of the majority culture that also
controls the school system), and students’ re-
sultant educational strategy use. Ogbu explained
that an understanding of how to address these
issues—which he discussed as particularly rele-
vant to the experiences of involuntary minorities
(e.g., African Americans)—begins with an under-
standing of the historical and structural contexts
in which these events occur.
During the 1990s, TIP contributors be-
gan calling for theories of learning to for-
mally address the role of parents, teachers,
school, and society in mediating the learn-
ing process. Sociocultural/social-constructivist
researchers pushed learning theories to articulate
 Woolfolk Hoy, Davis, Anderman
the ways in which specific teaching practices
were participating in the continued marginaliza-
tion of underrepresented students. Geneva Gay
(1994) described how the learning of adoles-
cents of color could be enhanced through ex-
ploratory learning (i.e., including allowing stu-
dents to explore their ethnic identity directly),
caring and supportive learning environments, fa-
cilitating the personal development of students,
and implementing developmentally appropriate
instructional strategies. Gloria Ladson-Billings
(1995) discussed culturally relevant pedagogy
Downloaded by [University of Nebraska, Lincoln] at 22:57 07 April 2015
as an approach to educating students from eth-
nic minority backgrounds. Culturally relevant
pedagogy emphasizes academic success, cultural
competence, and critical consciousness. Ladson-
Billings explained that academic success from a
culturally relevant pedagogy perspective means
directing students’ natural skills and abilities
in ways that are academically relevant. These
emphases continued in the 2000s with arti-
cles in TIP such as Epstein’s (2001) article
on “Racial identity and young people’s per-
spectives on social education” and Ford and
Grantham’s (2003) “Providing access to cul-
turally diverse gifted students: from deficit to
dynamic thinking.”
From the sociocultural perspective, learning is
a situated activity that happens not only inside,
but also outside school, with knowledge from
across contexts and cultures informing—and
sometimes competing with—each other. Socio-
cultural/social-constructivist researchers offer re-
minders that all learners need a voice in their
education and that the country has a history of
denying voice.
Multiple and Integrated Perspectives on
Learning in TIP
In 2006, Robert Calfee called for scholars to
deal with the “really important problems that
are confronting today’s public schools” (p. 35).
Nuthall (2004) also called for research on teach-
ing that had pragmatic validity, that is “research
that actually answers the question of how teach-
ing is related to learning in a way that is com-
Theories of Learning and Teaching
prehensible and practically useful for teachers”
(p. 1). For 50 years, contributors to TIP have
attempted to use theory to address these impor-
tant problems and questions. Whereas scholars
often have the luxury of thinking from a single
world-view, teachers need to be more pragmatic;
they need to be able to work across theories and
real-world experiences in a way that allows them
to best serve all of the students in their classes.
Even though different theories of learning have
moved in and out of favor and new findings lead
to new perspectives on learning, articles in TIP
have over the last 50 years reflected applications
and interpretations for practice that draw from
all the different perspectives. In doing so, many
of them have drawn from across theories to
understand how to promote a learning/mastery
orientation in classrooms (Marshall, 1987, 1990;
McCombs, 2003), how to get peers to learn
together (Johnson & Johnson, 1999; King, 2002),
and how to best meet the needs of a diverse
student body (Bailey & Pransky, 2005; Morrison
& Allen, 2007).
Thus, TIP authors have always represented a
range of useful learning theories, because the
mission of TIP is to bring theory into practice.
But there is a second element of that mission,
to use practice to inform theory. Many theo-
rists of learning in educational psychology have
come to understand what contributors to TIP
have always valued: “Theory building in situ, in
the real world, constitutes our greatest scientific
challenge and the most exciting opportunity to
affect practice” (Berliner, 2006, p. 22). Berliner
argued that the early ‘80s presented a critical time
for learning theorists, who began to understand
that if learning theory did not begin to address
the real-world problems of the classroom, their
work would continue to be viewed as irrel-
evant and obsolete. Similar observations have
been made more recently about the overall field
of educational psychology (Patrick, Anderman,
Breuning, & Duffin, 2011). Contributors to TIP
have been, and are, leaders in this movement
to increase the relevance of learning theories.
Subsequently, the last 30 years of research on
learning theory has been devoted to developing
increasingly complex and contextualized mod-
17
 Fifty Years of Theory Into Practice
els to address the needs of specific students
and different learning contexts. Contemporary
theories spend a great deal of time elaborating
on the importance of classroom contexts (Perry,
Turner, & Meyer, 2006), relationships between
students and teachers (Davis, 2003, 2004, 2006;
Wentzel, 2009), among peers (Juvonen, 2006;
Ladd, Herald-Brown, & Kochel, 2009), and in
the community (Greenfield et al., 2006; Oka-
gaki, 2006). In the following sections, we re-
view how learning has been redefined and the
role TIP scholars played in pushing the field to
Downloaded by [University of Nebraska, Lincoln] at 22:57 07 April 2015
innovate.
The Future of Learning Theory
Into Practice
Nuthall (2004) wrote eloquently about the
need for researchers to:
produce the kind of evidence-based explanatory
theory that has the potential to guide teachers’
moment-by-moment decision making and pro-
vide a valid basis that enables them to learn
from their daily experiences. Only when teach-
ers understand the principles by which their
actions shape the learning process going on in
the minds of their students will they be able to
ensure effective learning. (p. 20)
For over 50 years, contributors to TIP have
shed light on the limitations of efforts to prepare
teachers to use theory in classroom settings.
Educators need to be more thoughtful about the
pedagogy they use to teach learning theory to
future teachers (see Anderman, 2011; Woolfolk
Hoy & Murphy, 2001), as well as the timing of
courses in learning theory. Whereas traditional
learning theory/educational psychology courses
in colleges of education tend to cover each of
the four grand paradigms (see Table 1), graduate
instructors often teach them chronologically with
equal representation of these theories across the
course. In many ways, this strategy may reflect
their own emerging understanding of the field of
learning theory. However, this approach does not
reflect the type of pragmatic validity and problem
18
inspired research on learning described by Calfee
(2006) and Nuthall (2004).
Moreover, in teacher education instructors
often front-load theory early in initial teacher
training programs when students may not have
the tacit knowledge and practical experiences to
really internalize and integrate each framework.
There are few resources that compare theories
in a concise way that practicing teachers can
use as a refresher tool. The challenge faced by
future contributors to TIP is that constructs from
learning theories don’t look the same in class-
rooms as they do in textbooks. Removed from
the artificial isolation of the way one discusses
them in research reports, constructs can become
difficult to see; it is complicated for practicing
teachers to classify why students are, or are not,
learning to their potential. It is even more difficult
for educators to identify the factors that fall
within the teachers’ control to change, and those
that fall outside their responsibility and reach.
For example, Mader (2009, p. 153) found that
The more teachers can experience what moti-
vates their students—or what fails to—the more
they may recognize the negative constraints of
traditional accountability and incentive systems.
The more that teacher education programs can
promote good teaching, the less we may all
rely on pizza parties, bumper stickers, behavior
points, or grade point averages as incentives.
Practicing teachers need go-to resources for
how to evaluate classroom problems in light of
contemporary learning theories. This probably
will require a pragmatic integration of useful
theories of learning with research on teaching,
motivation, deliberate practice, cognitive neu-
roscience, emotions, and a range of learning
environments including online and hybrid tech-
nologies.
Conclusion
In this article, we have acknowledged that
theories of learning emanate from different his-
torical perspectives, and have influenced differ-
ent areas of research and practice in education.
 Woolfolk Hoy, Davis, Anderman
The treatment of theories of learning through-
out the past 5 decades has not been entirely
chronological in TIP. Whereas there is some
evidence of a shift from behavioral to cognitive
to social/constructivist theories, a deeper exam-
ination of the scholarship in TIP indicates that
researchers have been thinking and writing about
diverse perspectives on learning throughout the
past half century. As the importance of interdis-
ciplinary work continues to rise in the academic
world, an appreciation of both the individual
and synergistic contributions of these theories
Downloaded by [University of Nebraska, Lincoln] at 22:57 07 April 2015
to professional practice will continue to enhance
teaching and learning.
In the forthcoming years, there undoubtedly
will be new developments in theories of learning.
In particular, the geometric rise in hybrid and
online learning environments, and more recently
in massive open online courses, suggests that
learning theories may need to be reconceptual-
ized to explain learning in virtual environments.
In addition, rapid developments in neuroscience
also will quite likely yield new insights into
how learning occurs, and undoubtedly will affect
learning theories. Articles in TIP throughout the
past 50 years have made important contributions
toward moving theories of learning into practical
applications for educators; we sincerely hope
that this trend continues, as the understanding
of human learning becomes more complex and
exciting.
References
Anderman, E. M. (2011). Educational psychology in
the twenty-first century: Challenges for our com-
munity. Educational Psychologist, 46, 185–196.
Ausubel, D. P. (1963). The psychology of meaningful
verbal learning. New York, NY: Grune & Stratton.
Bailey, F., & Pransky, K. (2005). Are ‘other people’s
children’ constructivist learners too? Theory into
Practice, 44, 19–26.
Barclay Murphy, L., & Murphy, G. (1969). A fresh
look at the child. Theory into Practice, 8, 343–349.
Bayles, E. (1966). Theories of learning and classroom
methods. Theory into Practice, 5, 71–76.
Berliner, D. (2006). Educational psychology: Search-
ing for the essence throughout a century of influ-
Theories of Learning and Teaching
ence. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.)
Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed.,
pp. 3–28). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum As-
sociates.
Briggs, L. J. (1962). The probable role of teaching
machines in the classroom. Theory into Practice,
1, 47–56.
Bruner, J. S., Goodnow, J. J., & Austin, G. A. (1956).
A study of thinking. New York, NY: Wiley.
Bruning, R. H., Schraw, G. J., Norby, M. M., &
Ronning, R. R. (2011). Cognitive psychology and
instruction (5th ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Calfee, R. C. (2006). Educational psychology for
the 21st century. In P. A. Alexander & P. H.
Winne (Eds.) Handbook of educational psychology
(2nd ed., pp. 29–42). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erl-
baum Associates.
Commeyras, M. (1995). What can we learn from
students’ questions? Theory into Practice, 34, 101–
106.
Davis, H. A. (2003). Conceptualizing the role of
student–teacher relationships on children’s social
and cognitive development. Educational Psychol-
ogist, 38, 207–234.
Davis, H. A. (2004). One cognitive–developmentalist
speaks as an educator. Theory into Practice, 43,
253–259.
Eccles, J. S., & Midgley, C. (1989). Stage-environment
fit: Developmentally appropriate classrooms for
young adolescents. In C. Ames & R. Ames (Eds.),
Research on motivation in education, Goals and
cognitions (pp. 139–186). San Diego, CA: Aca-
demic.
Epstein, T. (2001). Racial identity and young people’s
perspectives on social education. Theory into Prac-
tice, 40, 42–47.
Ericsson, K. A. (2006). The influence of experience
and deliberate practice on the development of
superior expert performance. In K. A. Ericsson, N.
Charness, P. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.).
Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert per-
formance (pp. 685–706). Cambridge, UK: Cam-
bridge University Press.
Ford, D., & Grantham, T. C. (2003). Providing access
to culturally diverse gifted students: From deficit to
dynamic thinking. Theory into Practice, 42, 217–
225.
Gay, G. (1994). Coming of age ethnically: Teaching
adolescents of color. Theory into Practice, 33, 149–
155.
Greenfield, P. M., Trumbull, E., Keller, H., Rosthstein-
Fisch, C., Suzuki, L., & Quiroz, B. (2006). Cultural
19
 Fifty Years of Theory Into Practice
conceptions of learning and development. In P. A.
Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of
educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 675–692).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gluck, M. A., Mercado, E., & Myers, C. E. (2008).
Learning and memory: From brain to behavior.
New York, NY: Worth.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Making
cooperative learning work. Theory into Practice,
38, 67–73.
Juvonen, J. (2006). Sense of belonging, social bonds,
and school functioning. In P. A. Alexander & P. H.
Winne (Eds.) Handbook of educational psychology
Downloaded by [University of Nebraska, Lincoln] at 22:57 07 April 2015
(2nd ed., pp. 655–674). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
King, A. (2002). Structuring peer interaction to pro-
mote high-level cognitive processing. Theory into
Practice, 41, 33–39.
Kuhn, D., & Dean, D., Jr. (2004). Metacognition: A
bridge between cognitive psychology and educa-
tional practice. Theory into Practice, 43, 268–273.
Ladd, G. W., Herald-Brown, S. L., & Kochel, K. P.
(2009). Peers and motivation. In K. R. Wentzel
& A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at
school (pp. 323–348). New York, NY: Routledge.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teach-
ing! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy.
Theory into Practice, 34, 159–165.
Letteri, C. A. (1985). Teaching students how to learn.
Theory into Practice, 24, 112–122.
Madar, C. (2009). “I will never teach the old way
again”: Classroom management and external incen-
tives. Theory into Practice, 48, 147–155.
Marshall, H. H. (1987). Building a learning orienta-
tion. Theory into Practice, 26, 8–14.
Marshall, H. H. (1990). Beyond the workplace
metaphor: The classroom as a learning setting.
Theory into Practice, 29, 94–101.
Marzano, R. J. (1993). How classroom teachers ap-
proach the teaching of thinking. Theory into Prac-
tice, 32, 154–160.
McCombs, B. L. (2003). Providing a framework for
the redesign of K–12 education in the context
of current educational reform issues. Theory into
Practice, 42, 93–101.
Minor, F. (1973). Cognitive development: Some per-
vasive issues. Theory into Practice, 12, 78–88.
Morine, G. (1969). Discovery modes: A criterion for
teaching. Theory into Practice, 8(1), 25–30.
Morrison, G. M. & Allen, M. R. (2007). Promoting
student resilience in school contexts. Theory into
Practice, 46, 162–169.
20
Nuthall, G. (2004). relating classroom teaching to
student learning: A critical analysis of why research
has failed to bridge the theory–practice gap. Har-
vard Educational Review, 74, 1–28.
Ogbu, J. U. (1992). Adaptation to minority status and
impact on school success. Theory into Practice, 31,
287–295.
Okagaki, L. (2006). Ethnicity, learning. In P. A.
Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.), The handbook
of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 615–634).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Patrick, H., Anderman, L. H., Bruening, P. S., &
Duffin, L. C. (2011). The role of educational psy-
chology in teacher education: Three challenges for
educational psychologists. Educational Psycholo-
gist, 46, 71–83.
Perry, N. E., Turner, J. C., & Meyer, D. K. (2006).
Classrooms as contexts for motivating learning. In
P. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook
of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 327–490).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Pintrich, P. A. (2002). The role of metacognitive
knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing.
Theory into Practice, 41, 219–225.
Pressley, M., & Harris, K. R. (2006). Cognitive strate-
gies instruction: From basic research to classroom
instruction. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne
(Eds.), The handbook of educational psychology
(2nd ed. pp. 265–286). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Roberts, J. I. (1976). Freedom, the child, and the
teacher: The gap between ideas and action. Theory
into Practice, 15, 319–325.
Skinner, B. F. (1950). Are theories of learning neces-
sary? Psychological Review, 57, 193–216.
Shuell, T. J. (1990). Teaching and learning as problem
solving. Theory into Practice, 29, 102–108.
Soodak, L. C. (2003). Classroom management in
inclusive settings. Theory into Practice, 42, 326–
333.
Stephens, T. (1974). Directive teaching in the class-
room. Theory into Practice, 13, 59–64.
Toepfer, C. R. (1971). Actualizing concept learning:
The challenge to curriculum planning. Theory into
Practice, 10, 134–137.
Torrance, E. P. (1966). Independent study as an in-
structional tool. Theory into Practice, 5, 14–18.
Webb, P. K. (1980). Piaget: Implications for teaching.
Theory into Practice, 19, 93–97.
Wentzel, K. R. (2009). Students’ relationships with
teachers as motivational contexts. In K. R. Wentzel
& A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation
 Woolfolk Hoy, Davis, Anderman
at school (pp. 301–322). New York, NY: Rout-
ledge.
Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. K. (2013). Instructional
leadership: A research-based guide to learning in
schools (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn &
Bacon.
Downloaded by [University of Nebraska, Lincoln] at 22:57 07 April 2015
Theories of Learning and Teaching
Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Murphy, P. K. (2001). Teaching
educational psychology to the implicit mind. In R.
Sternberg & B. Torff (Eds.) Understanding and
teaching the implicit mind (pp. 145–185). Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21