吀栀攀

漀爀椀
攀猀 
伀昀 
䰀攀愀
爀渀椀
渀最
 Semester – II
THEORIES OF LEARNING

i
All rights are reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced in any form,
by any means, without written permission from JAIN (Deemed-to-be
University)

This material is developed and published for faculty and students of Distance
Education of JAIN (Deemed-to-be University)

Edition: 2019

Developed By:
The Center for Distance Education and Virtual Learning
JAIN (Deemed-to-be University)

ii
 PREFACE

Education is an essential component for the development of the country. Faculties of

Arts and Humanities, Commerce, Computer Science & Information Technology,
Management and Sciences are growing and updating at a rapid pace. Learners must
necessarily meet this pace to survive and excel in this era.

JAIN (Deemed-to-be University) has given emphasis in providing quality education

for all in the regular learning mode. The launch of Distance Education has provided
us with an opportunity to provide education and reach larger learner ecosystem
through our programmes.

The self-learning material is a supplement to the online and contact sessions, which is
enriched with assessments, assignments, practice papers and other learning support
resources to enhance the process of acquiring knowledge required for a student‟s
preparedness to accept challenges and society either by employment or self-
employment.

I place on record the excellent persuasive effort in developing this volume. I

congratulate the Center for Distance Education and Virtual Learning.

All the best for the teachers and learners!

Dr. N. Sundararajan
Vice Chancellor,
JAIN (Deemed-to-be University)

iii
 FOREWORD

The Center for Distance Education and Virtual Learning of JAIN (Deemed-to-be
University) has launched Distance Learning programmes to promote seamless
learning across various faculties with the vision – “Enable Enthusiasts to Learn and
Attain Higher Degrees of Knowledge – Anywhere, Anytime and in Any Domain”.

In order to facilitate the learners of the distance mode, The Center for Distance
Education and Virtual Learning of JAIN (Deemed-to-be University) follows its
mission:
To Impart Knowledge to All Learners Via
 Enabling them to Acquire Degrees in Their Own Home Towns
 Communication Systems – Print, Web / Mobile Devices
 Conventional and modern programmes

One of the strategies to provide quality and focused education is to develop and
provide is providing both SLMs for reading and Virtual Learning resources to suit the
learning freedom of students. Virtual learning is an important method of imparting
knowledge to our students. It provides the audio, graphics, animation & digital lecture
videos to all students based on the programme curriculum.
The Study materials are developed using instructional design mode. The content
developed for each subject module has the following features:

 Structure at the beginning of the module

 Introduction of the module, which stimulates the student‟s learning capability
 Clearly stated objectives or statements of intended learning outcomes
 Each learning objectives covered in the form of sections and subsections, self-
assessment questions and activities
 Readable, fluent and unambiguous text
 Examples, references to prior learning, case studies, diagrams, illustrations
etc.,
 Summary that is concise, clear and useful
 Adequate suggested further references and readings

Developing quality books and virtual learning resources has been a wonderful
process. Our Joint Registrar Prof M S Santhosh has been a constant source of
inspiration in these endeavors. So it‟s a “Team Work”. Our sincere „THANKS‟ to all
personnel who have contributed their intellect and might to develop this edition.
Valuable feed backs solicited from the readers.

Dr. B.T.Venkatesh
Director
The Center for Distance Education and Virtual Learning
JAIN (Deemed-to-be University)

iv
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Providing “Quality education for all” has been one of the most cherished dreams of
our honorable President of JGI, Sri Chenraj Roychand. It is well-known fact that he
has a great concern for the youth and he wants JGI to do its best to help the students.

One of the strategies to provide quality and focused education is to develop and
provide good reading material to the students. The university has teachers of good
repute. It is on account of this that JAIN (Deemed-to-be University) and Jain Group
of Institutions have been perceived as the most sought after institutions for
employment, by corporates and other institutions.

Developing the book has been a journey which has been cherished. The books for the
distance education programmes are designed under instructional mode to meet the
needs of the students.

Getting the book into the hands is a team effort. The talented and experienced authors
have taken time to develop this book and a team of faculty has also reviewed the work
to make this book suit the needs of the students.

We express our sincere appreciation for all the persons who have supported in
developing the book. We owe a debt of gratitude to our Vice Chancellor, Heads of
Departments and the Center for Distance Education and Virtual Learning team who
have worked hard in developing this edition.

We thank you for the attention given for the development of this book.

We appreciate your valuable feedback

The Center for Distance Education and Virtual Learning

JAIN (Deemed-to-be University)

v
 INDEX

SI. No Modules Pages

1 Syllabus 01

2 Books for References 02

3 Module I 03-32

4 Module II 33-61

5 Module III 62-67

6 Module IV 68- 103

7 Module V 104-122

vi
 THEORIES OF LEARNING

Subject Code: 19MSPSY2OD05 Semester II

Credits: 4 Total No of Hours: 60

Objectives:
 To introduce the students to the various theories of learning and
 To sensitize them to the various applications of these theories.

MODULE-I: Nature of Learning Theories: 10 Hours

Need for a theory, variables, and laws of learning, problems and issues, determinants of
learning, applications of learning research.

MODULE-II: S-R Theories: 12 Hours

Thorndike, Pavlov, Guthrie, Skinner, Harlow. Current status of research and applications

MODULE-III: Drive Reduction Theories: 12 Hours

Hull, Mowrer, Spence, Miller, Current status of research and applications

MODULE-IV: Cognitive, Constructivist and Gestalt Theories: 12 Hours

Tolman, Piaget, Vygotsky; Gestalt theories- Kohler, Koffka, Current status of research and
applications

MODULE-V: Mathematical Models and Adult Learning: 14 Hours

Simulated learning models- human learning models. How adults learn? Principles of adult
learning; Kolbe’s Model. Current status of research and applications

1
Books for References:

1. Sahakian. Introduction to Psychology of Learning, Rand McNally College Publishing Co.

2. Bower &Hilgard. Theories of Learning. Prentice Hall Publication.
3. Hergenhahn, B.R & Olson M H (1998). An introduction to theories of learning, Prentice
Hall, International Ed.
4. http://www.learning-theories.com/

2
 MODULE I
NATURE OF LEARNING THEORIES
STRUCTURE:

1.1 Introduction
1.2 Need for a theory
1.3 Variables
1.4 Laws of learning
1.4.1 Characteristics of the learning process
1.5 Problems and issues
1.6 Determinants of learning
1.7 Applications of learning research
1.8 Summary
1.9 Questions

LEARNING OBJECTIVES:

 To know the learning processes and to understand its applications.

1.1 INTRODUCTION

In the field of neuropsychology, personal development and education, learning is one of the most
important mental function of humans, animals and artificial cognitive systems. It relies on the
acquisition of different types of knowledge supported by perceived information. It leads to the
development of new capacities, skills, values, understanding and preferences. Its goals is the
increasing of individual and group experience. Learning functions can be performed by different
brain learning processes, which depend on the mental capacities of learning subject, the type of
knowledge which has to be acquitted, as well as on socio-cognitive and environmental
circumstances.

Learning ranges from simple forms of learning such as habituation and classical conditioning
seen in many animals species, to more complex activities such as play, seen only in relatively
intelligent animals and humans. Therefore, in general, learning can be either a conscious or non-
conscious process.

1.2 NEED FOR A THEORY

Need for a theory, also known as Three Needs Theory, proposed by psychologist David
McClelland, is a motivational model that attempts to explain how the needs for
achievement, power, and affiliation affect the actions of people from a managerial context. This
model was developed in the 1960s; two decades after Maslow's hierarchy of needs was first
proposed in the early 1940s. McClelland stated that we all have these three types of motivation
regardless of age, sex, race, or culture. The type of motivation by which each individual is driven
derives from their life experiences and the opinions of their culture. This need theory is often
taught in classes concerning management or organizational behavior.

3
Need for achievement

They prefer working on tasks of moderate difficulty, prefer work in which the results are based
on their effort rather than on anything else, and prefer to receive feedback on their work.
Achievement based individuals tend to avoid both high-risk and low-risk situations. Low-risk
situations are seen as too easy to be valid and the high-risk situations are seen as based more on
the luck of the situation rather than the achievements that individual made. This personality type
is motivated by accomplishment in the workplace and an employment hierarchy with
promotional positions.

Need for affiliation

People who have a need for affiliation prefer to spend time creating and maintaining social
relationships, enjoy being a part of groups, and have a desire to feel loved and accepted. People
in this group tend to adhere to the norms of the culture in that workplace and typically do not
change the norms of the workplace for fear of rejection. This person favors collaboration over
competition and does not like situations with high risk or high uncertainty. People who have a
need for affiliation work well in areas based on social interactions like customer service or client
interaction positions.

Need for power

People in this category enjoy work and place a high value on discipline. The downside to this
motivational type is that group goals can become zero-sum in nature, that is, for one person to
win, another must lose. However, this can be positively applied to help accomplish group goals
and to help others in the group feel competent about their work. A person motivated by this need
enjoys status recognition, winning arguments, competition, and influencing others. With this
motivational type comes a need for personal prestige, and a constant need for a better personal
status.

Effect on management

McClelland's research showed that 86% of the population is dominant in one, two, or all three of
these three types of motivation. His subsequent research, published in the 1977 Harvard Business
Review article "Power is the Great Motivator", found that those in top management positions
had a high need for power and a low need for affiliation. His research also found that people with
a high need for achievement will do best when given projects where they can succeed through
their own efforts. Although individuals with a strong need for achievement can be successful
lower-level managers, they are usually weeded out before reaching top management positions.
He also found that people with a high need for affiliation may not be good top managers but are
generally happier, and can be highly successful in non-leadership roles such as the Foreign
Service.

4
1.3 VARIABLES

In computer programming, a variable or scalar is a storage location (identified by a memory

address) paired with an associated symbolic name (an identifier), which contains some known or
unknown quantity of information referred to as a value. The variable name is the usual way
to reference the stored value, in addition to referring to the variable itself, depending on the
context. This separation of name and content allows the name to be used independently of the
exact information it represents. The identifier in computer source code can be bound to
a value during run time, and the value of the variable may thus change during the course
of program execution.

Variables in programming may not directly correspond to the concept of variables in

mathematics. The latter is abstract, having no reference to a physical object such as storage
location. The value of a computing variable is not necessarily part of an equation or formula as in
mathematics. Variables in computer programming are frequently given long names to make them
relatively descriptive of their use, whereas variables in mathematics often have terse, one- or
two-character names for brevity in transcription and manipulation.

A variable's storage location may be referred by several different identifiers, a situation known
as aliasing. Assigning a value to the variable using one of the identifiers will change the value
that can be accessed through the other identifiers.
Compilers have to replace variables' symbolic names with the actual locations of the data. While
a variable's name, type, and location often remain fixed, the data stored in the location may be
changed during program execution.

Actions on a variable
In imperative programming languages, values can generally be accessed or changed at any time.
In pure functional and logic languages, variables are bound to expressions and keep a single
value during their entire lifetime due to the requirements of referential transparency. In
imperative languages, the same behavior is exhibited by (named) constants (symbolic constants),
which are typically contrasted with (normal) variables.

Depending on the type system of a programming language, variables may only be able to store a
specified datatype (e.g. integer or string). Alternatively, a datatype may be associated only with
the current value, allowing a single variable to store anything supported by the programming
language.

Variables and scope: - (A) Automatic variables: - Each local variable in a function comes into
existence only when the function is called, and disappears when the function is exited. Such
variables are known as automatic variables. (B) External variables: - These are variables that are
external to a function on and can be accessed by name by any function. These variables remain
in existence permanently; rather that appearing and disappearing as functions are called and
exited, retain their values even after the functions that set them have returned.

5
Identifiers referencing a variable
An identifier referencing a variable can be used to access the variable in order to read out the
value, or alter the value, or edit other attributes of the variable, such as access
permission, locks, semaphores, etc.

For instance, a variable might be referenced by the identifier "total cows" and the variable can
contain the number 1956. If the same variable is referenced by the identifier "r" as well, and if
using this identifier "r", the value of the variable is altered to 2009, then reading the value using
the identifier "total count" will yield a result of 2009 and not 1956.

If a variable is only referenced by a single identifier that can simply be called the name of the
variable. Otherwise, we can speak of one of the names of the variable. For instance, in the
previous example, the "total cows" is a name of the variable in question, and "r" is another name
of the same variable.

Scope and extent

The scope of a variable describes where in a program's text the variable may be used, while
the extent (or lifetime) describes when in a program's execution a variable has a (meaningful)
value. The scope of a variable is actually a property of the name of the variable, and the extent is
a property of the variable itself. These should not be confused with context (also
called environment), which is a property of the program, and varies by point in the source code
or execution – see scope: overview. Further, object lifetime may coincide with variable lifetime,
but in many cases is not tied to variable lifetime.

A variable name's scope affects its extent.

Scope is an important part of the name resolution of a variable. Most languages define a
specific scope for each variable (as well as any other named entity), which may differ within a
given program. The scope of a variable is the portion of the program code for which the
variable's name has meaning and for which the variable is said to be "visible". Entrance into that
scope typically begins a variable's lifetime (as it comes into context) and exit from that scope
typically ends its lifetime (as it goes out of context). For instance, a variable with "lexical scope"
is meaningful only within a certain function/subroutine, or more finely within a block of
expressions/statements (accordingly with function scope or block scope); this is static resolution,
performable at parse-time or compile-time. Alternatively, a variable with dynamic scope is
resolved at run-time, based on a global binding stack that depends on the specific control flow.
Variables only accessible within a certain functions are termed "local variables". A "global
variable", or one with indefinite scope, may be referred to anywhere in the program.

Extent, on the other hand, is a runtime (dynamic) aspect of a variable. Each binding of a variable
to a value can have its own extent at runtime. The extent of the binding is the portion of the
program's execution time during which the variable continues to refer to the same value or
memory location. A running program may enter and leave a given extent many times, as in the
case of a closure.

Unless the programming language features garbage collection, a variable whose extent
permanently outlasts its scope can result in a memory leak, whereby the memory allocated for

6
the variable can never be freed since the variable which would be used to reference it for
deallocation purposes is no longer accessible. However, it can be permissible for a variable
binding to extend beyond its scope, as occurs in Lisp closures and C static local variables; when
execution passes back into the variable's scope, the variable may once again be used. A variable
whose scope begins before its extent does is said to be uninitialized and often has an undefined,
arbitrary value if accessed (see wild pointer), since it has yet to be explicitly given a particular
value. A variable whose extent ends before its scope may become a dangling pointer and deemed
uninitialized once more since its value has been destroyed. Variables described by the previous
two cases may be said to be out of extent or unbound. In many languages, it is an error to try to
use the value of a variable when it is out of extent. In other languages, doing so may
yield unpredictable results. Such a variable may, however, be assigned a new value, which gives
it a new extent.

For space efficiency, a memory space needed for a variable may be allocated only when the
variable is first used and freed when it is no longer needed. A variable is only needed when it is
in scope, thus beginning each variable's lifetime when it enters scope may give space to unused
variables. To avoid wasting such space, compilers often warn programmers if a variable is
declared but not used.

It is considered good programming practice to make the scope of variables as narrow as feasible
so that different parts of a program do not accidentally interact with each other by modifying
each other's variables. Doing so also prevents action at a distance. Common techniques for doing
so are to have different sections of a program use different name spaces, or to make individual
variables "private" through either dynamic variable scoping or lexical variable scoping.
Many programming languages employ a reserved value (often named null or nil) to indicate an
invalid or uninitialized variable.

Variables often store simple data, like integers and literal strings, but some programming
languages allow a variable to store values of other datatypes as well. Such languages may also
enable functions to be parametric polymorphic. These functions operate like variables to
represent data of multiple types. For example, a function named length may determine the length
of a list. Such a length function may be parametric polymorphic by including a type variable in
its type signature, since the amount of elements in the list is independent of the elements' types.

1.4 LAWS OF LEARNING

Anyone who intends to guide and direct the learning activities of others requires a detailed
understanding of the nature and processes of learning. Instructors are masters of many skills.
What they teach demands a high degree of competence in presenting subject matter.
Nevertheless, HOW they teach depends largely on their understanding of the learning process
and the ability to apply this understanding.

What is "learning?" Learning takes place when there is a change in a student's behavior. It may
not be directly observable. Learning is based on observation of behavior changes that result from

7
a person's interaction with their environment. An individual's learning may involve changes in
any of three areas:
1. Manner of perceiving and thinking.
2. Physical behavior (motor skills).
3. Emotional reactions or attitudes.
Learning refers to any of these changes when they occur as a result of an experience. Thus,
learning cannot be literally described but the conditions under which it occurs can be identified.
The instructor should understand these conditions and apply them when teaching.

1.4.1 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LEARNING PROCESS

 Purposeful Process. Most people have definite ideas about what they want to achieve.
They have goals or clear objectives. Effective instructors seek ways to create new learning
situations to meet the trainees' goals. Motivation, the force that impels a person toward a
goal, is the instructor's most effective tool to encourage learning. This can be either weak or
strong motivation depending on the situation.

 Internal Experience. The instructor cannot learn for the trainee, nor can he or she pour
predigested learning into the trainee's head. The trainee can learn only from his or her own
experiences. A person's knowledge is a result of their experiences and manner of perceiving
them and reacting to them. No two people have exactly the same experiences. All learning
stems from experience. For example, by repeated drill, a trainee can learn to repeat a list of
words or to recite the principles of leadership. However, trainees can make the list an actual
part of their lives only if they understand them well enough to apply the ideas that they
represent correctly in real situations.

 Active Process. Since learning comes only through experience, the trainee must be actively
involved in the experience. This activity can take many forms. Learning is more than
simply exposing a trainee to an idea or a skill. Likewise, one cannot safely assume that
trainees can apply what they know just because they correctly quote a paragraph from a
textbook. The trainee must become actively involved in the learning situation, but just any
kind of involving activity will not suffice. The trainee must engage in the appropriate
activity. Obviously, learning a physical skill requires experience in performing that skill.
The instructor should understand, however, that mental habits are always learned through
practice. Even attitudes are developed or modified as an individual reacts emotionally to a
stimulus.

 Multidimensional. Learning is multidimensional. Multidimensional develops new concept.

In other words, it is possible to learn other things while concentrating on or practicing the
main subject. While practicing drill, the trainees learn teamwork and cooperation. While
learning dormitory arrangement, they learn attention to details and following explicit
instructions.

 Individual Process. All trainees do not learn at the same rate. New instructors are likely to be
discouraged when they discover that a well-planned lesson does not enable them to teach all
the trainees with equal effectiveness. They soon recognize this as a natural and predictable

8
 problem because trainees seldom learn at the same rate. Differences in rates of learning are
based on differences in intelligence, background, experience, interests, desire to learn, and
countless other psychological, emotional and physical factors. Instructors must recognize
these differences in determining the amount of subject matter to teach, the rate of which they
will cover the material, and the appropriate time to teach it. Once the slower trainees are
identified, it is up to the instructor to bring them up to the level of the rest of the flight. You
must identify their weak areas, bring the areas to their attention, and show them how to
correct them. You may be fortunate and have some trainees who excel. These trainees may
be used to help others during their practice. This serves a twofold purpose. The fast learning
trainees are relieved from boredom and the slow learning trainees receive the benefit of the
peers' expertise.

LAWS OF LEARNING

Edward L. Thorndike in the early 1900's postulated several "Laws of Learning," that seemed
generally applicable to the learning process. Since that time, other educational psychologists
have found that the learning process is indeed more complex than the "laws" identified.
However, the "laws" do provide the instructor with insight into the learning process that will
assist in providing a rewarding experience to the trainee.

The laws that follow are not necessarily stated as Professor Thorndike first stated them. Over the
years, they have been restated and supplemented, but, in essence, they may be attributed to him.
The first three are the basic laws: the law of readiness, the law of exercise, and the most famous
and still generally accepted, the law of effect. The other three laws were added later as a result of
experimental studies: the law of primacy, the law of intensity, and the law of recency.

As with anything else relative to the instruction and learning process, nothing that we do is a
singular item; a combination of activities occurs at the same time to make the experience
complete.

 Law of Readiness
The Law of Readiness means a person can learn when physically and mentally adjusted (ready)
to receive stimuli. Individuals learn best when they are ready to learn, and they will not learn
much if they see no reason for learning. If trainees have a strong purpose, a clear objective and a
sound reason for learning, they usually make more progress than trainees who lack motivation.
When trainees are ready to learn, they are more willing to participate in the learning process, and
this simplifies the instructor's job. If outside responsibilities or worries weigh heavily on trainees'
minds or if their personal problems seem unsolvable, they may have little interest in learning.

 Law of Exercise
The Law of Exercise stresses the idea that repetition is basic to the development of adequate
responses; things most often repeated are easiest remembered. The mind can rarely recall new
concepts or practices after a single exposure, but every time it is practiced, learning continues
and is enforced. The instructor must provide opportunities for trainees to practice or repeat the
task. Repetition consists of many types of activities, including recall, review, restatement,

9
manual drill and physical application. Remember that practice makes permanent, not perfect
unless the task is taught correctly.

 Law of Effect
This law involves the emotional reaction of the learner. Learning will always be much more
effective when a feeling of satisfaction, pleasantness, or reward accompanies or is a result of the
learning process. Learning is strengthened when it is accompanied by a pleasant or satisfying
feeling and that it is weakened when it is associated with an unpleasant experience. An
experience that produces feelings of defeat, frustration, anger or confusion in a trainee is
unpleasant. Instructors should be cautious about using negative motivation. Usually it is better to
show trainees that a problem is not impossible, but is within their capability to understand and
solve.

 Law of Primacy
This law states that the state of being first, often creates a strong, almost unshakeable impression.
For the instructor, this means that what they teach the first time must be correct. If a subject is
incorrectly taught, it must be corrected. It is more difficult to un-teach a subject than to teach it
correctly the first time. For the trainees' first learning experience should be positive and
functionally related to training.

 Law of Intensity
The principle of intensity states that if the stimulus (experience) is real, the more likely there is to
be a change in behavior (learning). A vivid, dramatic or exciting learning experience teaches
more than a routine or boring experience. A trainee will learn more from the real thing than from
a substitute. Demonstrations, skits, and models do much to intensify the learning experiences of
trainees.

Law of Recency
Things most recently learned are best remembered, while the things learned some time ago are
remembered with more difficulty. It is sometimes easy, for example, to recall a telephone
number dialed a few minutes ago, but it is usually impossible to recall a telephone number dialed
a week ago. Review, warm-ups, and similar activities are all based on the principle that the more
recent the exercise, the more effective the performance. Practicing a skill or new concept just
before using it will ensure a more effective performance. Instructors recognize the law of
recency when they plan a lesson summary or a conclusion of the lecture. Repeat, restate, or
reemphasize important matters at the end of a lesson to make sure that trainees remember them
instead of inconsequential details.

1.5 PROBLEMS AND ISSUES

The growing emphasis on a culture of evidence is reflected in this maturation of academic

technology. The profession is moving beyond the early stages of providing "novel"
implementations and random acts of progress. As academic technologists, we are increasingly
expected to become more systematic and reflective in our approaches to transforming and
assessing teaching and learning. We are also developing a richer understanding of learning and

10
how to support our campus constituents. As a result of the current educational environment,
ACTL identified the following 10 important teaching and learning issues:
1. Establishing and supporting a culture of evidence.
2. Demonstrating improvement of learning.
3. Translating learning research into practice.
4. Selecting appropriate models and strategies for e-learning.
5. Providing tools to meet growing student expectations.
6. Providing professional development and support to new audiences.
7. Sharing content, applications, and application development.
8. Protecting institutional data.
9. Addressing emerging ethical challenges.
10. Understanding the evolving role of academic technologists.

Within the list of 10 issues, themes appear. For example, questions of assessment and best
instructional practices figure prominently (issues 1, 2, 3, and 4). Similarly, changes in student,
faculty, and institutional expectations over the past 10 years emerge (issues 5 and 6).
Collaboration and how we work together is a theme across higher education (issue 7). And, as
with any evolving profession, ethics, privacy, and data stewardship issues continue to grow
(issues 8, 9, and 10). Each of the top-ten teaching and learning issues is explored below.

Higher expectations and the demand for accountability have led to the proliferation of reporting
requirements from federal, state, accreditation, trustee, and other governing boards. While not
lacking in volume or detail, the resulting reports can be overwhelming, confusing, disconnected,
and sometimes misleading. The rigid nature of the reporting requirements has left little room for
institutions to develop a meaningful and effective accountability system. The growing demands
for accountability imply a diminishing trust in higher education by policymakers and the general
public. Colleges and universities are responding by engaging in an ongoing dialogue to develop a
set of learning outcomes. They are recognizing the need for better systems that move beyond
counting objects (such as computers, books, and so on) to measuring learning outcomes.

This new focus on accountability will place demands on academic technology units by focusing
attention on how course management systems (CMSs), e-portfolios, and emerging learning
outcomes systems can be used for college, department, and program-level assessment. By
straddling the academic and information technology domains, academic IT units will either be
directly involved in the planning or directly impacted by the decisions.

As we look to academic systems to support accountability efforts, academic IT leaders must

assist the campus community in focusing the scope of the efforts, setting priorities, and
determining appropriate implementation phases. Academic technologists must catalyze frequent
exchanges between institutions on improving and measuring student learning. Based on these
discussions, academic technologists can help institutions ask the right questions and find
appropriate, scalable solutions. Academic technologists should consider the following questions
when exploring accountability:

11
 What kind of administrative leadership and support might be required?
 What learning outcomes need to be tracked at the course, program, department, college, and
institution levels? What evidence is necessary to demonstrate progress in learning and
improvement of educational quality?
 What groups on campus need to be represented during this process? What is the role of
technology? What is the role the academic IT unit?
 How do we ensure that the administrative process used to collect and manage the data is of
the highest quality and meets all regulations?
 What training will be required to assist faculty and staff to translate the data into best
practices? What kind of incentives and rewards might be required to encourage participation?
 How can the findings be communicated to key stakeholders in a clear and meaningful way?

No. 2: Demonstrating Improved Learning

Technology and its uses in learning, research, and student service are accepted as an integral part
of the higher education landscape. Active dialogue and research on technology-enhanced
teaching and learning are under way at numerous institutions. Through the efforts of educators at
institutions across the nation, our collective understanding of learning is being enhanced along
with our understanding of the value that technology brings to higher education instructional
environments. Moreover, the importance of providing a technology-rich environment will
arguably increase as members of the Net Generation bring with them new expectations and
understandings of the world that surrounds them.

Net Geners approach the educational experience much as they do the rest of their world—they
have redefined the role technology plays. They present a new set of educational challenges and
opportunities, many framed around approaches to learning that are visual, sensory, and engaged.
While few would speculate that technology's role in higher education will diminish in the future,
many question whether the comparatively large ongoing investment in technology is justified
and whether technology is delivering on the promise of improved learning. As educators have
gained new insights into learning, questions about the effectiveness of technology in learning
have morphed into discussions focused more on learning styles and pedagogy and less on
technology. Today, we understand more about the intersection of learning and technology.
Rather than seeing technology-enhanced learning as "something different" from the norm,
recognition of the value technology brings to the learning experience—whether in a face-to-face
or distance setting—is growing.

IT can provide access to media- and content-rich material, create interactive learning
environments that engage students in new and exciting ways, and enhance the learning
experience by visually portraying conceptual thoughts while offering convenience, access, and
scalability. Technology has effectively redefined both access to education and the educational
process.

The importance of evaluating learning outcomes vis-?-vis technology use is evidenced by scores
of educators around the country who are actively engaged in classroom and learning assessment.
Assessment often focuses on
 evidence of improved learning,

12
 Strategies that support and improve teaching, and
 Improvement of learning technology tools.

As we continue to explore and document the integration, effectiveness, and value of technology
in education, it is important to ask questions such as:
 How does technology augment learning? How can be it used while preserving the quality
associated with traditional faculty-student interaction?
 What roles can virtual environments play in the lives of our faculty (such as facilitating
office hours and improving student communication)?
 How should our instructional and living spaces and technology evolve to further support and
enhance learning as well as personal and professional growth?
 How can technology be used to assist faculty in addressing "administrative"?
 How can technology improve the lives of our students and prepare them for a future that is
increasingly defined within the context of globalization and technology?

No. 3: Translating Learning Research into Practice

Research related to learning, teaching methods, and cognitive science has exploded during the
past few decades. New neuroscience techniques "can reveal learning in an alive, awake brain,
detecting the impact of experiential learning before it can be observed in behavior."4 Yet as the
research base about learning has grown, our ability to stay abreast of the research and translate it
into teaching practice seems inadequate.

Perhaps our greatest challenge as academic technologists in moving learning research into
practice is finding active learning techniques that meet faculty's needs. Rather than telling faculty
about the learning research, perhaps we should create ways for them to experience it.
Part of the challenge is raising awareness of the research available. The communities of learning
researchers—and their conferences and journals—do not necessarily overlap with those of
learning practitioners (and they rarely overlap with those of faculty). Academic technologists
must therefore make a special effort to locate and understand the research.

Once located, "translating" the research into something faculty can easily use becomes the focus.
Faculty are pressed for time—they need materials to be as brief and relevant as possible.
Materials must be synthesized and summarized in a jargon-free way. They will not use anything
that sounds too complex, involves too many caveats, or does not relate to the classroom. Some
are motivated by a "what's in it for me" attitude: they want to understand how something will
benefit their course and their professional development.

Learning is a terribly complex process that is influenced by the conditions under which it occurs.
Summarizing, simplifying, and shortening information without distorting the facts is an
extremely difficult and time-consuming endeavor. Even with well-crafted summaries, capturing
the faculty's attention is challenging. Finding the right method to reach faculty amid the constant
flood of training opportunities, e-mail messages, and flyers they receive can be difficult.

13
In translating learning research into practice, academic technologists face issues such as:
 How do we develop a common vocabulary? What exchanges will facilitate communication
and enable the research and practitioner communities to "speak the same language"?
 What kinds of experiences will allow faculty and staff to bridge research and practice? Are
traditional face-to-face events effective? Or do learning experiences need to incorporate
hands-on demonstrations along with discussion and reflection? Can online resources provide
just-in-time support as individuals have questions?
 What evidence is required to make a case for attending to learning research and practice?
Can discussions with students provide the impetus? Are institutional research or assessment
data necessary? What kind of administrative leadership might be needed?
 When and where should this research-to-practice mind-set be developed? Should graduate
student professional development programs inculcate this mind-set in future faculty? What
rationale will encourage graduate students to devote time to the endeavor?
 How does bridging research and practice become part of the institution's culture? Does it
require data? Discussion? Rewards?

No. 4: Selecting Models and Strategies for E-Learning

Higher education is inundated with ever-changing e-learning methods and strategies. The
learning curve and long-term investment vary significantly from model to model. Amid changing
requirements, institutions struggle to make sense of how to balance the different approaches
while operating within constrained budgets and resources. They must take an iterative approach
to implementation to determine which models produce quantifiable results and positive learning
outcomes.

As an institution considers implementing an e-learning model, academic technologists must work

within the institutional culture and determine the key constituents, whose involvement will
ultimately determine the success of the project, as will effective communication of the final
strategy. Constituents may include students or consumers of the service or product, faculty,
information and learning technology experts, support personnel, and administrators.

Academic technologists must consider organizational needs and align e-learning strategies to
address them while recognizing faculty's diverse needs. Sustainability, central support, and
mainstream adoption must be balanced with individual needs and sound pedagogy. Our role is to
help advance the use of technology to support the institution's instructional mission, with the
priority of matching solutions with faculty needs. We also need to empower faculty to progress
in a self-directed manner. In addition, we must proactively identify tools and strategies before
they are widely needed by faculty.

A successful e-learning strategy does not exist in isolation it should address a number of
organizational goals while being both sustainable and scalable. Academic technology units will
be asked to select strategies that focus on problem areas that can be addressed via e-learning. For
instance, they may be expected to provide additional support for key program areas or assistance
with institutional issues such as access, affordability, effectiveness, and accountability.

14
Questions to ask before you select a particular e-learning model or strategy include:
 What are the organization's short-and long-term goals for e-learning? How does the strategy
address them?
 What are the learners' characteristics (educational preparation, desired outcomes, preferred
delivery modality, technology skills, services and support needed)?
 What are the characteristics of the faculty we serve (interest in e-learning, understanding of
the relationship between content and learning strategies, knowledge of how students learn
and how to use technology to enhance teaching and learning)?
 What infrastructure will we need to support the e-learning strategy (technological
infrastructure, hardware, software, support personnel)?
 What organizational model best supports the e-learning strategy?
 How can we take an iterative approach? Which key stakeholders need to be involved in the
project? How can the project remain scalable and supportable?

No. 5: Providing Tools to Meet Student Expectations

As technology is integrated into contemporary society, higher education must balance the
expectations of a new generation of technology-savvy students with the perspectives of an older
generation of faculty. Often referred to as the Net Generation or Millennials, today's students
have grown up in a rich digital environment where technology is both transparent and
ubiquitous. Technology has always been part of their lives, from the Internet to laptops, iPods,
games, instant messaging (IM), cell phones, and pagers. They take technology for granted—they
expect it to be integral to their lives and to serve them, including in education.

Faculty are in a complex position: they must engage students, maintain their own technology
skills, and work within potentially change-resistant professional practices and institutional
structures. As students themselves, most faculty experienced a learning environment
characterized by face-to-face contact, print-based media, and limited interaction.

The differences in generational perspectives are striking. Student reliance on the immediacy of
IM promotes a different sense of time and availability than faculties. The Net Gen's participation
in collaborative social projects—online gaming environments, wikis, and blogs—places the
focus on participation rather than credentials, invoking the "wisdom of the crowd." Faculty self-
identification with a specific academic discipline contrasts with students' interdisciplinary
collaboration. Academic technologists who serve faculty and students are thus caught between
competing frameworks and expectations.

Instructional technologists work with many faculty who are willing to risk change and are
interested in transforming the learning environment through new communication and
collaboration modalities. To create a successful partnership between faculty, students, and
academic technologists requires understanding how each group contributes to the learning
process. The Net Gen will increasingly expect faculty to effectively integrate technology into the
learning environment—for them, collaboration is a reality, not an ideal. Faculty must leverage
technology and frequently reassess their role in the learning process. Academic technologists
must work with both students and faculty as higher education transforms our access to
information, our understanding of community, and our sense of personal space and relationships.

15
In serving the new generation of students, academic technologists should consider:
 To what degree should the institution accommodate the new generation of students
(versus teaching them additional learning strategies)?
 What type of support will the next generation of faculty expect?
 What are the most effective strategies for keeping academic technologists up-to-date with
incoming students?

No. 6: Providing Professional Development and Support to New Audiences

Approximately 20 percent of higher education faculty will retire over the next 10 years.
Consequently, academic technologists must attend to the professional development (PD) and
support of the next-generation professoriate, many of whom are currently teaching assistants and
graduate students. Most graduate programs effectively prepare students as researchers but
inadequately prepare them as teaching and learning scholars. Academic technologists have the
opportunity to examine current PD programs and resources to address these issues.

As Net Gen faculty join the academic ranks, the opportunity exists to engage them in academic
technology. This raises the question of whether faculty development is the best approach to
fostering technological literacy. An alternate approach targets a portion of our instructional
technology programs to graduate students with the goal of influencing the teaching practices of
the future professoriate by engaging graduate student teachers and their faculty mentors in
technology-enriched teaching and learning practices. We can also foster the pedagogical
paradigm shift that needs to occur across all fields of study. Broadening the scope of our
institutions' current faculty development programs to include programmatic and mentorship
opportunities for our graduate students the future faculty is critical.

Today's graduate students span the generations from late Baby Boomers in their 60s to Net
Geners in their early 20s. While the majority are Generation Xers who are familiar with a variety
of technologies, we should not assume that all graduate students have similar technology skills.
In fact, a wide range of technology-comfort-level issues exist. Among Net Gen graduate
students, some are eager to explore integrating wikis, blogs, or Tablet PCs into their teaching;
others are reluctant to explore these newer pedagogical strategies and prefer to focus on
traditional classroom technologies. New faculty may want to learn how to lecture effectively
rather than how to develop collaborative experiences.
The institutional willingness to invest significantly in graduate students varies. For some
institutions, allocating resources to PD for existing faculty members takes priority over graduate
students; for other institutions, training graduate students is a top priority.

Creating an environment that supports current and future faculty can be challenging. Offering
graduate students PD opportunities that complement and supplement the experiences they have
in their academic departments may make them more competitive in the academic job market.
Academic technologists must discover programmatic and sustainable ways to stimulate greater
collaboration between faculty mentors and their graduate students. Doing so will both help
change current teaching practices and better prepare faculty to engage 21st-century learners.

16
As academic technologists expand support for new academic professionals, questions to ask
include:
 What teaching skills do new faculty need? What technology skills do they need?
 Can we afford to wait until someone becomes a faculty member to provide professional
development?
 How do we provide support that is customized to academic disciplines and varying entering
skill levels?
 What role does the scholarship of teaching play in the institution's reward system?
 How do academic technologists blend their efforts with those of disciplinary associations?
 Are professional development programs sufficient, or do we need mentors for new faculty?

No. 7: Sharing Content, Applications, and Application Development

The issues facing academic technology units are increasingly complex and interdependent,
requiring individuals and institutions to work together. Collaboration allows us to benchmark
with our peers, develop affinity groups and consortia, and use resources more effectively.
Collaboration can be a fundamental strategy in higher education. Creating a culture of openness
and sharing builds productive individual and institutional relationships that result in mutual
benefit. In higher education, technologies that reduce barriers encourage collaboration. As
technology continues to advance, the types of collaboration possible will expand. Current
collaboration includes sharing library catalogs across institutions, exchanging faculty expertise,
and trading instructional tools (such as CMSs).

Technology has generated many new opportunities for collaboration such as social bookmarking,
IM, and easy-to-create personal Web profiles. These "digital incunabula" are experimental
technologies that impact our lives faster than we can understand them. Ultimately, it is our
deeply embedded sociocultural values that determine the success of any technology-enabled
collaboration collaboration thrives when it offers measurable and mutual benefits, the perception
of balance and reciprocity, and a high degree of personal or institutional compatibility.

Two of the most compelling examples of successful collaboration are open source software and
the open content movement. The development of open source software is a good example of a
chaotic meritocracy among individuals who may not even know each other but whose needs are
met and work recognized by using digital technologies such as listers, Web sites, bug tracking,
version control, and co-browsing.

Educational community source has arisen as a particularly successful branch of the open source
movement in which universities organize and lead software development tailored to higher
education's specific needs. This collaboration promises to be one of the most productive as the
innovative products of these open source movements mature and continue to achieve greater
acceptance. Forward-thinking institutions also embody this culture of openness by freely sharing
their work products as open courseware, which makes curricular content available free of charge
under a license that permits use and adoption by others.

As institutions begin to examine the potential of collaborations, they should consider the
following questions:
 What problems are being faced by multiple institutions?

17
 What are the expectations of the collaboration (information sharing, content sharing,
application development)?
 How would your institution judge the collaboration a success? What criteria will be used to
evaluate collaborations and measure success?
 Who are the most likely collaboration partners?
 How much effort is your institution (and your partnering institutions) willing to spend on the
collaboration project (time, money, people)?
 Are there existing collaborations that your institution should join?

No. 8: Protecting Institutional Data

Information is recognized as an important asset in business. Competitive, economic, and

strategic intelligence all begin with the aggressive collection and effective use of information.
The academic world has joined the information movement and is finding innovative and
productive ways to analyze and mine its information resources, combining data from heretofore
unrelated sources to yield insights, early alerts to new trends, decision support, better targeting of
"products," and increased productivity.

Access and integration are key to the effective use of information in higher education. Access
involves technology and "ownership," which is often the biggest barrier to the effective use of
institutional data; integration involves combining information from a variety of often unrelated
sources to yield new information. Crossing boundaries between the registrar, the CMS, and the
financial aid system, for example, may involve multiple reporting paths and new collaborations.

Academic technologists have unprecedented access to information. Over the past decade they
have adopted applications that not only facilitate instruction but also collect a wide range of data
in the process. As technology has evolved and the number of users has increased, they manage
an enormous amount of diverse educational data student grades, assignments, and tracking
information stored in the CMS, e-portfolios, audience response systems, file systems, online
collaboration systems, and more making them in effect data stewards.

Many academic technologists, however, still view themselves not as data stewards but as student
information system data users charged with creating and populating course-centered tools.
Language informs many things, including attitude, and can help effect a shift in mentality. If
those who have responsibility for information systems on campus can view their role as
information stewards rather than owners, it becomes easier to share information. The idea of
being a caretaker of information implies using that data for the common good. Stewardship
fosters a higher degree of receptivity and cooperation than ownership. Nevertheless, institutions
must continue to seek assurances of appropriate use of information and advocate for its best
institutional use.

With the push for accountability, academic technology units are positioned to become good
stewards of the data they oversee—they can develop innovative and productive ways to use this
information to benefit the institution. To be effective, they must understand the nature of the data
and commit time to develop new methods, support systems, and benchmarks to address
institutional needs.

18
Academic technologists' evolving role as data stewards raises questions institutions should
examine, including:
 What sources of data are currently housed within the academic technology unit? What data
should be retained?
 How can the data be used to improve teaching and learning? How should other parts of the
university be made aware of this data?
 How will staff be trained on proper data handling? What training is necessary for academic
technology staff? How will access to the data be provided?
 What policies and procedures must be established for data storage, backup, retrieval, mining,
and retention?
 What data falls under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)?
 What data should be placed in the data warehouse for analysis? How frequently should the
data be updated?

No. 9: Addressing Emerging Ethical Challenges

Ethical issues are perennially debated in higher education, yet the academy has not taken a
systematic look at ethical issues related to teaching or the support of teaching. As the demands
for accountability increase and as technology provides unique insights into students' efforts and
aptitudes, the ethical issues associated with academic success and retention will likely move to
the forefront.

Institutions' use of data from various academic technology solutions such as the CMS will have
significant ramifications. The analysis of academic data necessitates a dialogue on our ethical
responsibility to the learning process. Empowered with new information, faculty, administrators,
and academic technologists will struggle to find a balance between making students too reliant
on external help and encouraging them to become independent learners.

While academic technology has a significant impact on the lives of students, the literature
remains silent on the ethical implications of actions that promote—or ignore—student retention
and academic success. Academic technologists will be among those who must engage in this
debate.

For example, CMSs automatically collect a wide array of data on student usage. Emerging
analytic techniques using the CMS data will reveal which students are performing well and
which need additional help. In addition, using analytics to predict academic success will force
many faculty and academic technologists to examine issues that have ethical implications such as
accountability and the distribution of resources. Access to formulas that predict students' failure
and success will place academic technologists in the middle of an ethical debate as faculty,
students, and institutions examine their responsibilities related to academic success and retention.

The ethical issues are best examined and framed as how to interact with the new knowledge and
technology rather than what the right answer is. This pragmatic view focuses on using
information in a meaningful and effective manner. Faculty, students, and institutions alike must
examine the implications of data that predict academic performance. The question of how to use

19
this information cannot be answered just once—it must be weighed against higher education's
changing environment and key stakeholders' shifting expectations.

No. 10: Understanding Our Evolving Role

The traditional roles of academic technologists on campuses are changing. Once a position
focused on assisting the early adopters in instructional design or educational technology, the
academic technologist today faces an increasing set of expectations. The rapidly changing nature
of technology, students, and faculty require us to look at new paradigms for providing
sustainable and scalable teaching and learning support.

After decades of promises that instructional technology can improve instruction, institutions
want results. They've become skeptical of large investments and expect a more complete
assessment of performance. Academic technology is also a victim of its own success: once seen
as a competitive advantage or "nice" activity, it is now a fundamental campus component. To
meet these new demands for accountability and usability, the role and skills of academic
technologists must evolve.

First and foremost, the academic technologist is expected to act as an expert resource on best
practices in educational technology. Awareness of a broad research base is essential to working
with faculty. In addition to developing computer workshops, learning materials, and Web-based
multimedia resources, the academic technologist is expected to provide executive summaries to
administrators and serve on key institutional committees.

The traditional role of providing knowledge and leadership in instructional development and
delivery will persist academic technologists must maintain knowledge of online methodologies,
instructional design, Web and multimedia design, accessibility and adaptive learning
technologies, and learning styles plus acquire new knowledge of emerging technologies and
student preferences.

With the trend toward increased accountability, academic technologists must also occasionally
serve as assessment specialists, defining the standards by which learning materials and tools are
evaluated. They may lead efforts to evaluate large, complex, or highly specialized systems
related to the teaching and learning enterprise. They may also be asked to conduct independent
research on instructional design, learning theory, or instructional technology topics and evaluate
effectiveness on an organizational level.

The ability to influence key stakeholders and business processes across the college or university
will become an essential skill. To achieve this influence, academic technologists must have a
thorough understanding of the institution's vision and how various educational initiatives impact
university practices. They must have a grasp of existing research, serve on university-wide
committees, and demonstrate the creativity needed to address novel educational situations.

The evolving role of academic technologists will require a new approach to staff recruitment,
selection, and professional development. An institution must consider:
 What role will academic technologists play in accountability efforts?

20
 How well do academic technologists understand the scholarship of teaching and learning?
How do they maintain current knowledge in the field?
 Can academic technologists communicate technical and nontechnical content to all levels of
the organization?
 How will academic technologists be mentored to understand the institutional culture?

Dyslexia

Dyslexia is defined as difficulty reading. When children are learning to read and write in
kindergarten and first grade, it is not uncommon for them to misinterpret a “b” as a “d,” a “6” as
a “9,” the word on as no and so forth. An important distinction is that this is not a vision
problem; rather, the brain is reversing, inverting or missequencing the information it receives
from the eyes. Most kids outgrow this condition by age seven or so. For dyslexic youngsters,
however, the reading problems persist.

In another form of dyslexia, the mind accurately identifies a word it “sees” but is slow to connect
a meaning to it. These teenagers read extremely slowly and may have to reread material several
times before they understand it. Other tasks of communication may pose difficulties as well, such
as comprehending spoken language and expressing themselves orally and in writing.
Dysgraphia

Dysgraphia is defined as difficulty writing, as a result of dyslexia, poor motor coordination or

problems understanding space. How it is manifested depends upon the cause. A report written by
an adolescent with dysgraphia due to dyslexia will contain many illegible and/or misspelled
words, whereas motor clumsiness or defective visual-spatial perception affects only handwriting,
not spelling.

Dyscalculia

Dyscalculia is defined as difficulty performing mathematical calculations. Math is problematic

for many students, but dyscalculia may prevent a teenager from grasping even basic math
concepts.

Auditory Memory and Processing Disabilities

Auditory memory and processing disabilities include difficulty understanding and remembering
words or sounds. A teen may hear normally yet not remember key facts because her memory is
not storing and deciphering them correctly. Or she may hear a phrase but not be able to process
it, especially if the language is complex, lengthy or spoken rapidly, or if there is background
noise. For youngsters with central auditory-processing disorders (CAPD), the hum of a fan or the
routine sounds of the classroom may interfere with learning.

Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) has published recommendations on guidelines for
the diagnosis and treatment of ADHD. The guidelines, developed by a panel of medical, mental

21
health and educational experts, are intended for primary-care physicians (and parents as well) to
help better understand how to recognize and treat ADHD, the most common childhood
neurobehavioral disorder.

Between 4 and 12 percent of all school-age children have ADHD. The first step, diagnosing the
condition, cannot usually be done successfully until a child is about age six.

The AAP guidelines include the following for diagnosis:

 ADHD evaluations should be initiated by the primary-care clinician for children who show
signs of school difficulties, academic underachievement, troublesome relationships with
teachers, family members and peers and other behavioral problems. Questions to parents,
either directly or through a pre-visit questionnaire regarding school and behavioral issues,
may help alert physicians to possible ADHD.
 In diagnosing ADHD, physicians should use DSM-IV criteria developed by the American
Psychiatric Association (symptoms include distractibility, hyperactivity and impulsivity).
These guidelines require that ADHD symptoms be present in two or more of a child’s
settings, and that the symptoms adversely affect the child’s academic or social functioning
for at least six months.
 The assessment of ADHD should include information obtained directly from parents or
caregivers, as well as a classroom teacher or other school professional, regarding the core
symptoms of ADHD in various settings, the age of onset, duration of symptoms and degree
of functional impairment.
 Evaluation of a child with ADHD should also include assessment for coexisting
conditions: learning and language problems, aggression, disruptive
behavior, depression or anxiety. As many as one-third of children diagnosed with ADHD
also have a coexisting condition.

Treatment guidelines include the following recommendations:

 Primary-care clinicians should establish a treatment program that recognizes ADHD as

a chronic condition. This implies the need for education about the condition and a sustained
monitoring system to track the effects of treatment and developmental changes in behavior.
 The treating clinician, parents and child, in collaboration with school personnel, should
specify appropriate goals to guide management. Goals should relate to the specific problems
of the individual child, such as school performance, difficulty finishing tasks and problems
with interactions with schoolmates.
 If appropriate, the clinician should recommend behavior therapy and/or stimulant
medication to improve specific symptoms in children with ADHD. The guideline provides a
review of the scientific evidence for recommending medication and behavior therapy.
 When the treatment for a child with ADHD has not met its goals, clinicians should reevaluate
the original diagnosis, all appropriate treatments, adherence to the treatment plan and
coexisting conditions, including learning disabilities and mental health conditions.
 The clinician should provide a periodic and systematic follow-up for the child with ADHD.
Monitoring should be directed to the child’s individual goals and any adverse effects of
treatment, with information gathered from parents, teachers and the child. The guidelines

22
 recommend areas for future research in treatment options, long-term outcomes and other
areas in the management of children with ADHD.

Although ADHD often appears to subside during puberty, “We now know that isn’t true,” says
Dr. Suzanne Boulter, a pediatrician from Concord, New Hampshire. “In reality, hyperactivity
may decrease, but the inattention and impulsivity remain unchanged. As these young people
navigate their way through high school and college, these problems may stand as their biggest
obstacle to academic success.”

Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD)/Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD)

Autism is a disorder with a variety of symptoms that range from mild to severe. Labels such as
classic autism, Asperger’s syndrome and pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise
specified are often confusing, because youngsters with these conditions share many of the same
characteristics, such as deficient social skills, hypersensitivity to sights and sounds, difficulties
adapting to change and other idiosyncratic interests. The difference between one child and
another is frequently a matter of degree. As a result, all of these diagnoses are part of autistic
spectrum disorder.

Asperger’s and autism occupy opposite ends of the spectrum; in fact, AS is sometimes referred
to as “mild” autism. Whereas most children with AS are of average or above-average
intelligence, four in five autistic boys and girls exhibit some degree of an intellectual disability.
Another key difference involves speech. Children with autism are frequently speech-delayed;
kids with Asperger’s syndrome, on the other hand, tend to be verbally precocious. And once they
begin talking, it can seem as if a dam has given way. Dr. Hans Asperger, the Austrian
pediatrician who discovered the disorder, called his patients “little professors,” on account of
their penchant for pontificating.

“They’re very dependent on their language skills to get by,” observes Dr. William Lord Coleman
of Duke University Medical Center and the University Of North Carolina School Of Medicine,
“and so they use them excessively, which can overwhelm people.” This plays a large part in their
difficulties interacting with their peers. Adolescents with Asperger’s syndrome spend an
inordinate amount of time in their own world—even for teenagers—but they’re often lonely and
want to make friends. The problem is, they’re not sure how to act in social settings. Between that
and their eccentricities, they may become victims of teasing and bullying. Parents of a child with
AS, or any other disorder, should try their best to stay attuned to their youngster’s moods. Rates
of anxiety, depression and suicide are unusually high in this group.

To distinguish classic autism from Asperger’s syndrome, pediatricians and pediatric

specialists rely on the diagnostic guidelines from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders. Most children fall somewhere in the middle of the spectrum. Only about one in one
thousand youngsters is diagnosed with classic autism. The incidence of Asperger’s is believed to
be double and possibly triple that.

23
Intellectual Disability

There are about half a million adolescents with an intellectual disability in the United States.
Nine in ten are classified as having a mild intellectual disability, 1 with an intellectual-
functioning level, or IQ, between 50 and 69—some fifty-five points below average. (An IQ of 35
to 49 places a person in the category of a moderate intellectual disability; 20 to 34, a
severe intellectual disability; and under 20, a profound intellectual disability.)

Cognitively, many boys and girls with a mild intellectual disability function not that far below
their non-disabled classmates. They absorb new information and skills, only more slowly. The
problems they do have may be related to memory, problem solving skills, logical thought,
perception and attention span.

Like parents of other adolescents with special needs, mothers and fathers are probably as
concerned about their child’s social development as they are with his academic progress.
Adolescence, of course, is a time when being different can set one up as an object of teasing.
Youngsters who have an intellectual disability, in addition to their intellectual limitations, may
possess physical and/or mental health problems that also make them stand out. They are often
keenly aware of feeling set apart from their peers without learning deficits. Understandably, they
are susceptible to feelings of frustration and depression.

1.6 DETERMINANTS OF LEARNING

The important factors that determine learning are:

1. Motive: Motives also called drives, prompt people to action. They are primary energisers of
behaviour. They are the ways of behaviour and mainspring of action. They are largely
subjective and represent the mental feelings of human beings. They are cognitive variables.
They arise continuously and determine the general direction of an individual's behaviour
without motive learning cannot occur.

2. Stimuli: Stimuli are objects that exist in the environment in which a person lives. Stimuli
increase the probability of eliciting a specific response from a person.

3. Generalisation: The principle of generalisation has important implications for human

learning. Generalisation takes place when the similar new stimuli repeat in the environment.
When two stimuli are exactly alike, they will have probability of eliciting specific response.
It makes possible for a manager to predict human behavior when stimuli are exactly alike.

4. Discrimination: What is not generalisation is discrimination. In case of discrimination,

responses vary to different stimuli. For example an MBA student may learn to respond to
video teaching but not to the oral lecturing by his professor.

5. Responses: The stimulus results in responses - be these in the physical form or in terms of
attitudes or perception or in other phenomena. However, the responses need to be
operationally defined and preferably physically observable.

24
6. Reinforcement: Reinforcement is a fundamental conditioning of learning. Reinforcement can
be defined as anything that both increases the strength of response and tends to induce
repetitions of behaviour that preceded the reinforcement. No measurable modification of
behaviour can take place without reinforcement.

7. Retention: Retention means remembrance of learned behaviour overtime. Converse is

forgetting. Learning which is forgotten over time is called "extinction". When the response
strength returns after extinction without only intervening reinforcement it is called
"spontaneous recovery".

1.7 APPLICATIONS OF LEARNING RESEARCH

Encouraged by improvements in the quality of science education since the 1960s, cognitive
researchers are testing and applying theory-based research on learning in science classrooms. To
introduce faculty to research on cognition and learning, I focus on metacognition: the awareness
of one's own thinking, or “knowing what we know.” I analyze two ecology texts and describe
several active-learning strategies in the context of metacognitive theory. Information about
pedagogy and its theoretical underpinnings may well help faculty improve their teaching
practices.

Forty years ago, Novak (1963) described science education as a “poor cousin” of the sciences,
because it lacked theoretical models that could be tested in educational settings, and because it
was intellectually isolated from disciplines such as psychology and behavior. The period since
then has been marked by substantial improvements in education as a science. Ideas based in
theory have been tested in classrooms, and the outcomes of this research have been applied to
teaching practice (e.g., Chi et al. 1981, Clement 1982, Schoenfeld and Herrmann 1982, Lawson
and Thompson 1988, Holliday 2003). In addition, what some call a “cognitive revolution” is
taking place as neuroscientists, linguists, psychologists, and educators study the mind and
integrate their ideas into new conceptions of how people learn (Bransford et al. 1999). Examples
of how this learning research has influenced science teaching include the recognition that

 Experts' knowledge is integrated and organized around several essential scientific concepts,
and, as a result, experts can apply their knowledge to new contexts instead of relying on
memorization, as naive learners typically do (Chi et al. 1981, Dufresne et al. 1992, Wenk et
al. 1997).
 Students come to a course with deeply held, often predictable misconceptions based on their
understanding of the world; these ideas are so ingrained that they are often intractable to
traditional teaching (Posner et al. 1982).

Research on learning has been applied to college biology instruction to some extent; examples
include the use of computer models on topics such as Mendelian genetics (Jungck and Calley
1985, Jungck 1988) and of approaches that help students overcome misconceptions in
introductory biology (Lawson and Thompson 1988, Ebert-May et al. 1997, Udovic et al. 2002)
and physiology courses (Michael et al. 2002). These approaches to biological modeling and to
common student misconceptions can certainly be used by biologists in different fields, but as an
ecologist, I have observed that the application of cognitive research to college teaching appears

25
to be less common in ecology teaching than in other scientific fields. To assess this hypothesis, I
counted the number of articles on teaching physics, biology, chemistry, geology, and ecology
that were published from 1997 to 2002 in The Journal of Research in Science Teaching, a good
source for articles about cognition and learning. Over this period, most articles focused on
teaching physics (33), followed by chemistry (21) and biology (19) (figure 1). In these three
disciplines, about half the studies dealt with college teaching. In contrast, during the same period,
7 articles featured ecology teaching; most of these articles concerned environmental science, and
all focused on grades K–12. These results are not surprising, given the number of basic physics,
biology, and chemistry courses taught nationwide, and given that ecology is taught as a
subdiscipline of biology in introductory biology courses. However, to emphasize the point that
the “cognitive revolution” (Bransford et al. 1999) can influence all disciplines at all levels, my
focus here is on college ecology teaching.

This article is intended to introduce college faculty to theories about how people learn, with the
ultimate purpose of improving college and university science teaching. Although the examples
are ecological, they apply to science teaching in general. I first illustrate the concept of a learning
theory with a learning strategy called metacognition. Next, I analyze two ecology texts as models
of teaching in the context of metacognitive theory. Finally, I describe numerous student-active
teaching approaches as they relate to metacognition.

Metacognition and implications for college science teaching

Metacognition is a problem-solving skill in which students use strategies to monitor their

learning and control their attention (e.g., Flavell 1979, Kurfiss 1988). While reading, for
example, students use this skill to summarize main points, analyze the meaning and implications
of a text, and recognize when they fail to comprehend an idea, as opposed to simply trying to
memorize the information. Metacognition has been described as knowing what is known and not
known, using self-teaching skills, and employing student-centered as opposed to teacher-
centered learning (box 1; Bransford et al. 1999).

Knowledge about metacognitive theory is useful because it can help teachers understand and
better evaluate the effectiveness of various student-active approaches. For instance, cooperative
group work, in which students work in small groups and talk about a problem or question, is at
the center of many workshops and books on student-active learning. One likely reason that group
work is an effective way to learn is that it can help students hone metacognitive skills
(e.g., Hogan 1999). Students become more conscious of their own thinking when they talk to a
partner to summarize a text or to address assigned questions, such as “How is this concept
different from…?” (Kurfiss 1988; see examples later in this article). Although research on this
subject is limited, several studies demonstrate that students who use metacognitive approaches in
groups improve their scientific thinking (Schoenfeld and Herrmann 1982, Kramarski et al. 2002).
This work is related to the ideas of social constructivists, who propose that knowledge is
internally constructed and greatly influenced by social discourse (Steffe and Gale 1995).

Application of metacognitive learning theories to teaching has been especially fruitful in

comparisons of how experts and novices learn physics (Larkin et al. 1980, Dufresne et al. 1992).
These studies suggest that skill at solving new problems depends on organization of information

26
within mental structures that facilitate information recall and application. Thus, metacognition
may help students apply old knowledge in new situations because effective learners organize
knowledge into “chunks” of stored patterns that they can readily call on (Bartlett 1932, Eylon
and Linn 1988). These ideas offer new insight about what knowledge is and how effective
learners use knowledge.

Considering different points of view.

Another way that scientists stand back is by looking at questions from different points of view.
Because this way of thinking is second nature to them, faculty are often surprised to learn that
many undergraduates, and even beginning graduate students, do not realize that scientists reflect
on questions in this way. Students need models to help them develop the skill of comparative
reflection (Kurfiss 1988), and Valiela models such thinking: “There are two ways we could think
about comparing data from two such bays. First, we could think of coastal environments such as
Waquoit Bay as representative of the myriad of estuarie [I]n this case, we could multiply results
from Waquoit Bay…. Second, we may ask…can we simply apply results from one bay to
another? In this case, we need to find a way to make the comparisons in spite of the differences
in scale” (Valiela 1995, p. 351; emphasis added). In this example, residence time (turnover) can
be used as a scaling factor. Valiela illustrates how this is possible with a figure showing export of
nitrogen as a function of residence time in a variety of estuaries.

Like Valiela, Molles asks his readers to reflect on questions throughout his text. He models this
practice in the section titled “The Fractal Geometry of Landscapes” by posing a series of
questions about measuring the length of coastlines. He also counters the misconception that there
is only one answer to complex questions: “During the development of fractal geometry,
Mandelbrot asked a deceptively simple question: ‘How long is the coast of Great Britain? Think
about this question. At first you might expect there to be only one, exact answer. However, an
estimate of the perimeter of a complex shape often depends on the size of the ruler you use”
(Molles 1999)

Molles demonstrates this “different points of view” type of thinking, in regard to scaling, by
describing Bruce Milne's research on the ecological significance of ruler length (Molles 1999).
Milne argues that because eagles are big and barnacles are small, their ecological “rulers” are
different, and as a result, barnacles perceive the Alaskan coastline perimeter as nearly 20 times
longer than eagles do. This is an accessible example of a difficult concept; one can imagine
students visualizing the eagle–barnacle difference and saying, “Wow, I never thought of it that
way,” which is exactly what Molles is trying to get his readers to do.

The importance of modeling comparative, reflective thinking is supported by a large literature on

epistemology (the nature of knowledge). Introductory-level college students have predictable
beliefs about scientific knowledge that interfere with their ability to “think like a scientist” (Perry
1970, Wenk 2000). Such beliefs result from black–white and known-answer thinking (i.e., there
is one right answer that some expert knows; Kitchener and King 1981). As a result, these
students are not reflective and are often satisfied with limited analyses of viewpoints that fit their
existing convictions; this is called “make-sense epistemology” (Kurfiss 1988). These ideas,

27
based on theories about intellectual growth, help us understand why students need considerable
help developing a mature epistemology about science.

Metacognition and your teaching

Numerous commonly used student-active approaches are well supported by theory and research
on metacognition. For faculty interested in exploring one or two of these ideas for the first time,
and for those more experienced with these teaching tools, the cognitive-education theory
outlined below should clarify why, how, and when to use them.

Skill: Learning how to ask questions.

For each skill you might emphasize in a class session or a course, I give examples of several
approaches you could use and their bases in education theory.

Approach: Students ask their own questions.

Design your courses so that over the semester students often ask and answer their own questions.
There are many ways to do this—for example, the teacher can require students to come to class
with questions about a reading and can rely entirely on these questions during discussion or use
them in exams.

At the highest level of metacognition, students ask and answer their own questions to increase
comprehension. For this reason, transfer of control from the teacher to the learner is central to
metacognitive development (Kurfiss 1988). Tactics such as using student questions on exams are
powerful signals that students can take more control of their own learning.

There is some empirical evidence that teaching students how to question improves learning. For
example, King (1992) concluded that college students who were taught self-questioning
strategies had better long-term retention of information on exams compared with the control
group not trained in asking questions. Self-questioning skills can also be used to measure
students' intellectual development. By examining the quality of students' questions—their
relevance, depth, and creativity—faculty can assess the cognitive growth of students in a course.

Approach: The teacher models the skill of asking questions.

Good question asking is a sophisticated skill that teachers can model in class. For instance, a
teacher might show students the types of questions to ask by reading several paragraphs aloud
from the introduction of an article, posing questions he or she considers interesting, and
explaining why. Students who depend on teacher-generated inquiry are using less advanced
metacognitive skills than those who generate questions themselves. However, during their
intellectual development, students need help shaping high-quality questions. When teachers
model good questioning skills, they act as surrogates for learners who are still practicing this
skill (Kurfiss 1988).

Skill: Learning from other students.

Approach: Students explain solution strategies.

Pose a question in class, and then ask a student with good study skills to verbally categorize the
type of question and the sources of information the student would use to address it.

28
When given a problem, novice learners often do not know how to begin working on it. In
contrast, more skilled learners are aware of the various sources of information available to them
and are practiced at assessing which sources are most useful and relevant. These more advanced
students can be very helpful to less-experienced students as they explain, in their own words,
how they find and evaluate relevant information.

Approach: Students describe how they study.

Ask students to describe to other students how they read a text and prepare for exams.
Less sophisticated learners know little about the variety of learning strategies they can use and
often do not realize how much time others devote to learning tasks. Categories of strategies that
aid in learning include rehearsal (e.g., highlighting text, using flash cards), elaboration (e.g.,
making connections by comparing two texts), organization (e.g., making diagrams of related
course concepts), comprehension monitoring (e.g., pausing to focus one's attention or checking
for comprehension), and resource management (e.g., scheduling homework time or working in a
quiet setting) (Cross and Steadman 1996). It is important to add that students need also to
understand the purpose of a particular strategy (e.g., underlining helps focus attention); several
studies show that simply being taught such techniques without an explanation of why they are
important does not necessarily aid learning (Segal et al. 1985).

Approach: Students use paired problem solving.

Teachers can ask students to work in pairs on a set of problems. For this technique, one partner
reads the problem and explains how he or she would work on it, while the other listens. The two
then switch roles on the next problem. The listener is expected to check for accuracy and
encourage thinking aloud. As with all group work approaches, faculty must help students
understand their roles as teachers and learners—what they should do and why.

As Whimbery and Lochhead (1980) point out, “In contrast to playing golf, analyzing complex
material is an activity which is generally done inside your head. This makes it somewhat difficult
for a teacher to teach and a learner to learn…. There is one way to reduce this difficulty—to have
people think aloud while they solve problems…. [In this way] the steps they take are open to
view and their activities can be observed and communicated” (p. 78). The objective of paired
problem solving is for students to learn to be both listeners and problem solvers, able to watch
their own line of reasoning and to catch errors when working a problem with another student.
Ultimately, students should be able to do the same while listening to a lecture.

Skill: Recognizing what is not known.

A circular problem for novice learners is that they don't know what they don't know. In contrast,
more experienced learners better appreciate what they already understand and what they don't yet
know. In Plato's Meno, Socrates explains the conundrum of knowing what is not known: “You
argue that man cannot inquire either about that which he knows, or about that which he does not
know; for if he knows, he has no need to inquire; and if not, he cannot; for he does not know the
very subject about which he is to inquire”.

Approach: Problem-based learning.

Problem-based learning (PBL) is a distinct approach to teaching that is characterized by the use
of “real-world” problems as a means for students to learn content and problem-solving skills

29
(McKeachie 2002). Students work cooperatively on problems that are “mysteries” designed to
capture the students' interest and motivate them (Allen 1997, D'Avanzo 2000). A PBL problem
can take weeks of course time or, in contrast, 20 minutes during a lecture. Although PBL has its
roots in medical school, it can be used in all settings—in small and large enrollment classes and
for K–12, undergraduate, graduate, and medical school students. It is especially designed to
strengthen students' ability to recognize the relevant information they already have, and will
need, to solve a problem.

As an example, Allen (1997) uses the “Geritol solution” problem in an introductory biology
course at the University of Delaware. For this problem, students are given a brief description of
John Martin's idea that seeding waters off Antarctica with iron might be one solution to global
warming (Martin 1994). The dilemma for students is to explain how and why this proposal might
work. Content goals for this problem are use of carbon dioxide in photosynthesis, the global
carbon cycle in relation to atmospheric carbon dioxide and photosynthesis, the greenhouse effect
and its causes, the role of pigments in photosynthesis, and marine food chains. In working
though the Geritol solution, students synthesize concepts usually presented in different parts of a
course, such as photosynthesis, marine food chains, and biogeochemistry.

To identify what is known and not known, after reading through the problem, students write
down “what we know” (e.g., Martin suggests adding iron to Antarctic waters) and “what we need
to know” (e.g., what are phytoplankton, and why would adding iron stimulate their growth?). In
the next step, students divide up the work and then report back what they found. Students often
work on PBL problems in class, with faculty providing reference texts with background
information.

There are empirical studies on particular aspects of PBL instruction. For example, group work
changes students' beliefs that good students solve problems in a few minutes and, therefore, their
beliefs about how experienced learners work on problems (Schoenfeld and Herrmann 1982).
Particularly relevant is Kramarski and colleagues' (2002) work on the interactive effects of
metacognitive instruction (e.g., discussing such questions as “What's the question?” or “Does
that make sense?”) and cooperative learning on students' ability to solve mathematics problems.
In this study, students were given either cooperative plus metacognitive instruction or only
cooperative instruction. The students who were taught both learning skills outperformed the
single-skill comparison group on both authentic (real-world) and traditional math tasks.
Therefore, intentionally verbalizing specific metacognitive questions worked better than simply
talking about the math problems.

Students' misconceptions are notoriously difficult to change, and numerous studies show that
students come to class—and leave—with the same content misinformation even when the
content is directly dealt with in class (Nazario et al. 2002). Clement (1982) found that even after
a year of college physics, many students believe that a ball thrown into the air is affected by
gravity on the way down but not on the way up. Anderson and colleagues (1990) found similar
results in a study of college students' understanding of photosynthesis and respiration. Therefore,
what students know (or think they know) is arguably the most important thing a teacher needs to
be aware of when designing a course.

30
The special importance of metacognitive theory in university biology instruction
Today, perhaps more than ever before, colleges and universities are challenged to help students
become critical, independent thinkers. For instance, the technical revolution is forcing graduate
programs to reexamine the ever-narrowing training of their students, as industry demands
researchers who can solve new problems and quickly realize the practical implications of their
work (Smith and Tsang 1995). At the same time, even the best undergraduate programs are
claiming that students are deficient in their ability to reason, use information, and distinguish
between evidence and opinion (Moffat 1994).

Although no teaching philosophy or method is a panacea for educators, metacognitive

approaches are especially useful now, because they cut to the heart of helping students think
critically and flexibly. A particular goal of metacognitive teaching is for students to be aware of,
active in, and in control of their own learning. In my own courses, knowledge about
metacognition as applied to teaching has helped me understand how to put students in charge of
their learning and why various approaches accomplish this goal.

One difficulty in informing college science faculty about teaching and learning lies in exposing
them to pedagogical literature; this is especially true for articles and books on cognition and
learning. From my experience giving workshops across the United States, I have found that
science faculty know surprisingly little about pedagogy and especially about its theoretical
underpinnings. In my judgment, this ignorance will limit the extensive science education reform
efforts now under way in the United States. Therefore, I urge science professors to become
familiar with modern ideas about teaching and learning.

For faculty looking for a simple way to start reading about research on learning, I suggest using
the Internet. For instance, to learn more about metacognition and teaching, the search term
“metacognition” can be used to find many useful sites. As I have shown with the metacognitive
examples in this article, classroom research shows the effectiveness of teaching approaches that
are based on learning theories. This research should help faculty to better understand the
theoretical bases for methods that they are already using and to think about teaching in new and
creative ways.

1.8 SUMMARY

As the academic technology profession has matured over the past decade, expectations have
risen for accountability, effectiveness, facilitation, and implementation. Collaboration,
stewardship, ethics, and change are becoming part of everyday life for academic technologists.
Today's top-ten issues facing academic technologists provide a unique opportunity for the
profession to shape and contribute to campus priorities and solutions. ACTL hopes the critical
issues in teaching and learning identified here will help our community create professional
development opportunities and programs that effectively address the needs of the "Instruction
2.0" world.

1.9 QUESTIONS

1. What is Need Theory?

31
2. What is the Variables?
3. What is the Laws of Learning?
4. What are the Problems and Issues?
5. What is the Determinants of Learning?
6. What is the Applications of Learning Research?

32