Is Learning Social? In which senses?

Table of Contents
Introduction
KeyPaper
Summary
SocialConstructivism
Evidenceinsupportoftheory
Criticismoftheory
Scaffolding
Computerbasedscaffolding
Peerinteraction
PeerInteractioninmodernanddiversesettings
PeerDiscussion
Feedback
Typesofeffectivefeedback
Electivefeedback
Reciprocalpeercritiquing
Principlesofgoodfeedback
Whenisfeedbackineffectiveforlearning?
Crosslinkswithothertheories
PerrysSchemeofCognitiveDevelopment
TheLaurillardModel
Moderntechnologyinlearning
AnnotatedReferenceList
References

Introduction

Thequestionastowhetherornotlearningissocialandinwhatsensescanbeanswered
throughinvestigationoftheliteratureinthearea.Theuseofvarioustechniquesinattempting
toincreasethesocialaspectsoflearning,suchasgroupdiscussion,canhelptostructure
learningandenhancelearnersabilitiestodevelopideasandgraspconcepts(Weimer,2011).
Byusingtechniquessuchastheseandemployingsocialconstructivistmethods,itseemsthat
learningcanbeconsideredsocialinseveralsenses,aswillbediscussedthroughthis
document.

"Whatthechildisabletodoincollaborationtodayhewillbeabletodo
independentlytomorrow" (Vygotsky,1987,p.211).
Key Paper

Thiskeypaperby
Chietal.(2008)
encompassesmanyofthethemesevokedbythe
question:
Islearningsocial?
Forexampletutoring,theroleandvalueofteachers,scaffolding
(contingenttutoring),feedback,constructivism,deeplearning(vsshallow),peerinteraction
andselfexplanation.

Aim:
Thepaperseekstounderstandwhyhumantutoringissoeffectivewithina
relativelynovellearningenvironment.
Methods
:Alternativelearningenvironmentswerecomparedoneononetutoring,
observingtutoringindividually,collaboratingwithoutobserving,studyingalone.
Results
:Learnerswhohadindividualtutoringwereabletosolvephysicsproblemsjust
aseffectivelyaslearnerswhoobservedcollaborativetutoring.
Conclusions:
Byobservingcollaborativelearning,studentsbenefitfromtutoringand
collaborating.Studentsareencouragedtobecomebothactiveandconstructive
observersthroughsocialinteractionswithpeers.

Summary
Inanswertothequestionislearningsocial?thecurrentdocumentwouldanswer
yes
,inthe
followingways:
Thetheoryofsocialconstructivismcanbeseentoencapsulatethenotionoflearningas
socialthroughtheemphasisitplacesoninteractionwithpeersinordertolearnandgain
knowledge.Peerdiscussionisinherentlysocialasstudentslearnthroughnegotiatingwith
peersandsynthesizingideas,whilstfeedbackisessentialtoeffectivelearning,andwhen
donewithpeers,benefitsboththeindividualgivingandreceivingfeedback.
TwoNeoVygotskiannotionswhichexemplifymaximisedlearningthroughsocialprocesses
arescaffoldingandpeerinteraction.Scaffoldingprovidesaframeworkfortheteacherto
interactivelysupportastudentbasedontheirindividualneeds.Equally,peerinteraction
denotesthatlearningismaximisedwhenalternateconceptionsofanideaareofferedwithina
groupsetting.Alongsidethis,thebeliefthatlearningissocialcanbeseentocrosslinkwith
variousotherlearningtheoriessuchasPerrysSchemeofCognitiveDevelopment,the
LaurillardModelandtheuseofmoderntechnologyinlearning.

Social Constructivism

ThebasisofsocialconstructivismliesinLevVygotskysconstructivisttheories.Twomajor
branchesofconstructivistviewpointexist,intheformofcognitiveconstructivismandsocial
constructivism.Jonassen(1994)providedanoverviewofthegeneralcharacteristicsof
constructivistlearning,andhowthecognitiveandsocialaspectsarebothsimilaranddifferent:

1.Constructivistlearningenvironmentsprovidemultiplerepresentationsofreality.

2.Multiplerepresentationsavoidoversimplificationandrepresentthecomplexityofthereal
world.

3.Constructivistlearningenvironmentsemphasizeknowledgeconstructioninsertedof
knowledgereproduction.

4.Constructivistlearningenvironmentsemphasizeauthentictasksinameaningfulcontext
ratherthanabstractinstructionoutofcontext.

5.Constructivistlearningenvironmentsprovidelearningenvironmentssuchasrealworld
settingsorcasebasedlearninginsteadofpredeterminedsequencesofinstruction.

6.Constructivistlearningenvironmentsencouragethoughtfulreflectiononexperience.

7.Constructivistlearningenvironments"enablecontextandcontentdependentknowledge
construction."

8.Constructivistlearningenvironmentssupport"collaborativeconstructionofknowledge
throughsocialnegotiation,notcompetitionamonglearnersforrecognition."

TheeightcharacteristicsaslaidoutbyJonassenincorporatebothsocialandcognitive
aspects,howeverthelevelofemphasisthateachbranchofthetheorywouldplaceoneach
characteristiccouldbeseentodiffer.Forexample,thefinalpoint,relatingtocollaborationand
socialinteractioncanbeseentobeofgreaterimportancetosocialconstructivismthan
cognitive.Inthissenseitissuggestedthatthesocialaspectsoflearningareofgreat
importance,inthatourabilitytogainnewknowledgeisaidedthroughasharingofinformation
andcollaborationwithothers.

SocialconstructivismcanbeseentohaveoriginatedthroughVygotskysincreasedemphasis
onthesocialaspectsoflearninginPiagetiantheory(Chen,n.d.).Socialconstructivismcanbe
seentorootinassumptions
regardinglearning,
knowledgeandreality(Kim,
2001),whereaspectsoflife
suchasknowledgeare
viewedasemanatingfrom
individualsthemselves,
havingbeencreated
throughsocialandcultural
interactionsandnorms
(Kim,2001Ernest,1999).
Itisclaimedthatinorderfor
learningtobemost
effective,educatorsmustbe
abletoincorporateboth
cognitiveandsocialconstructivisttechniqueswithintheclassroomenvironment(Powell&
Kalina,2009).

Socialconstructivismreferstotheconceptionofideasandthoughtsthroughinteractionwith
peersandtheteachertherebylearninginasocialsense(Powell&Kalina,2009).
Intermsoftheextenttowhichlearningcanbeseentobesocial,socialconstructivismwould
suggestthatitistoahighdegree.Iflearningviainteractionisaneffectivemeansof
transferringandimpartinginformationandknowledge,thenthesocialaspectsoflearning
cannotbeignored.
Teachersmayincorporatethisintoteachingthroughuseofgroupworkandpeercollaboration
inwhichitisimportantforthestudentstolearnfromotherspointsofviewanddifferent
culturalbackgrounds(UniversityCollegeDublin,n.d.).Vygotskyintroducedtheideaofsocial
constructivismasaresultoftheZoneofProximalDevelopment,whichdescribeswhata
learnercanachievebothwithandwithouthelp(Vygostky,1987),asherecognisedchildren
learnedbetterwhenworkingwithanadultormoreablepeer,eventhoughtheywerenot
necessarilybeinghelped.TheZoneofProximalDevelopmentcanbeelaboratedupon
throughthisshort
video
.
Inthissense,hedeterminedthatlearningwithothershadthepotentialtobesubstantially
moreeffectivethanlearningalone(Vygotsky,1987).

Evidence in support of theory

ThesocialconstructivistviewisechoedbyChi,etal(2008)intheirinvestigationintothe
impactofobservinganotherindividuallearning,findingthatwhenanindividualobserved
tutoringwithapeer,theylearnedmorethanfromwatchingalone.Watchingwithapeerthat
theyalsocollaboratedwithresultedinthegreatestleveloflearning,compoundingthenotion
thatlearningcanbeviewedasasocialactivity(Chi,Roy&Hausmann,2008).

AnotherstudywhichprovidesevidencefortheZPDistheDollsHouseStudybyFreund
(1990).Thestudywasinterestedinexploringwhetherchildrenlearnmoreeffectivelyby
themselvesinaccordancewithPiagetsconceptofdiscoverylearning,orwithguidanceor
scaffoldingfromtheirmothersinlinewithVygotskysZPD.Thetaskwasforchildren,
betweentheagesofthreeandfour,tohelpapuppetdecidewhichfurnitureshouldgoineach
roominadollshouse.Freundbeganbytakingabaselinemeasureofwhateachchildknew
alreadyaboutthelocationoffurniture.Thechildrenthenallworkedonasimilartask,either
alone(discoverylearning),orwiththeirmother(scaffolding/guidedlearning).Theresults
showedthatchildrenwhowereassistedbytheirmothersperformedbetterthanchildrenwho
workedalone.Theseresultssuggestthatlearningismosteffectivewhenitisdone
interpersonallyratherthanindependently.

Criticism of theory

AcriticismofVygotskysZPD,isthatalthoughhedoesmentionpeers,hereferstomoreable
peers,suggestingthatanasymmetricintelligencemustbeinplace(Fernandez,Wegerif,
Mercer,andRojasDrummond,2001).However,thisdoesnotalwaysneedtobethecase,for
example,researchershavefoundthatsuccessfullearningcanoccurincollaborative
situationsbetweenstudentsofasimilarlevelofability(LittletonandLight,1999Cowrieand
vanderAalsvort,2000).Thuslearningcanalsooccurasaresultofsymmetricalexchanges.
Scaffolding

OneNeoVygotskianview,whichexemplifieslearningasaninteractivesocialprocessis
contingenttutoringotherwiseknownasscaffolding.Brunerbasedtheconceptofscaffolding
uponVygotskys(1978)notionofthezoneofproximaldevelopment,whichdenotesthat
individualscansupportlearnerswithtaskstheycannotaccomplishontheirown.

Scaffoldinginvolves(Sawyer,2005):
1. Organisingparticipationinactivitiesthataddressbasichumanneedsforasenseof
safetyaswellasbelonging.
2. Makingthestructureofthedomainvisibleandsocialisingparticipantsfordispositions
andhabitsofmindnecessaryforexpertlikepractice.
3. Helpingnovicesunderstandpossibletrajectoriesforcompetenceaswellasthe
relevanceofthedomaintothelearners.
4. Providingtimelyandflexiblefeedback.

Scaffoldingisthetermusedtodescribethesupportthatpromotesdeeplearning.Itisthe
supportsystemthatenableslearnerstocarryoutdifferentactivities(Wood,Bruner,&Ross,
1976).Thesupportistailoredtoindividualabilityandperformance.Thebestformof
scaffoldingrequiresactiveparticipationfromthelearneritisthereforerootedinsocial
constructionisttheory.Scaffoldingcanbebuiltuporremovedaccordingtotheindividual
needsofthelearneritcanbebuiltupwhenalearnerisstrugglingandremovedwhenthey
haveachievedtheirgoal.

Whereascoachingencompassesallthemanywaysinwhichateachercanpromotelearning
scaffoldingrefersto,morenarrowly,thedirectsocialrelationshipbetweentheteacherandthe
learnertofosterspecificlearnersuccess.Scaffoldingenableslearnerstocarryouttasks
beyondtheircapabilities.

Forexample,scaffoldingcantakethefollowingforms:
Suggestionsorhelp
seePalinscar&Browns(1984)reciprocalteaching.
 Physicalsupport
seeScardamalia&Bereiters(1994)useofflashcardstofacilitate
writingortheuseofshortskistoteachdownhillskiing(Burton,Brown,&Fischer,
1984).

Computer-based scaffolding

Morerecently,thenotionofscaffoldinghasbeenextendedfromteacherstudentinteractionto
computerstudentinteraction.Forexample,computerbasedscaffoldingcould:

Domanylowlevelchoressuchasarithmeticcalculationswhilethelearner
concentratesonhigherleveltasksanddecidingwhattodo.
Provideofaframeworkviawhichthelearnercanreceiveguidanceonwhichtaskto
completenextandtheorderoftaskcompletion.

Oneconcernregardingtheemergenceofcomputerbasedscaffoldingisthatitcanbeapplied
inafarbroadersettingthanthenarrowtraditionstudentteacherdynamicandthereforerisks
becomingwatereddown(Sawyer,2005).Moreover,thereisconcernthatthesoftware
employedincomputerbasedscaffolding,incomparisontoateacher,lackstheappropriate
mechanismstoidentifywhenfadingisappropriateandnecessary.

Peer interaction

AfurtherneoVygotskiannotion,whichexemplifieslearningasasocialprocess,ispeer
interaction.Withinthecontextofgrouplearning,peerinteractiondenotesthatlearningis
maximisedwhenalternationconceptionsofanideaareoffered(Howeetal.1992).Research
concerningthebenefitsofpeerinteractiondrawinspirationfromthenotionthatchildrendo
notcometoprimaryschoolasablankslate.Moreover,giventhatinschoolcontexts,
informationispresentedingroupformat,thecompositionandinteractionofthegroupcannot
beignoredaspartofthesociallearningprocess.

ThedynamicsofpeerinteractionforlearningcanbedrawnbacktoPiagetiantheory.
AccordingtoPiaget(Forman&Kraker,1985)developmentisdrivenbyequilibrationastable
thoughtpatternconcerningthewayoftheworld.Whenthisequilibrationischallenged(for
examplebycompetingviewsofdifferentpeerswithinaninteractivesetting)astateof
disequilibrationoccurs.Theensuedstateofdissatisfactioncauseslearnerstochangeand
adapt.AccordingtotheremitofPiagetiantheorytherefore,thepresenceofacompetingview
canenhancelearning.Demonstrating,therefore,thatlearningisinextricablysocial.

InastudybyHoweetal.(1992)itwasestablishedthattheprocessofprivateconflict
resolution,promptedbypeerinteraction,maximisedlearninginlongterm.Howeetal.(1992)
comparedtheabilityoftwogroupsofchildrenaged8to12intheirabilitytounderstand
motiondownanincline,theyfoundlearningwasmaximisedinthegroupthatcontained
alternativeconceptionsincomparisontosimilarconceptions.Notably,maximisedlearning
wasonlyevidentfourweeksafterdiscussion,notimmediatelyafter,whichwasaresultof
independentthoughtandstudyprecedingtheinitialconfusioncausedbypeerinteraction.

Mazurspeerinstruction(PI)

isoneformofpeerinteraction,whichexemplifieslearningas
social.MazurdevisedthenotionofPItocombatthe
arguablystaticnatureoftraditionallecturestyle
classroomlearning.PIisastudentcentredapproachthat
activelyengagesstudentsintheirownlearning.

Thiskeypaper
byMazurandCrouch(2001)summarises
peerinstruction.Essentially,thepaperdemonstratesthat
learningimproveswithpeerinstruction.PImodifiesthe
traditionallectureformattoincludequestionsdesignedtoengagestudentsanduncover
difficultieswithmaterials.

PIaims,unliketraditionallearning,toengage
every
studentratherthanaselecthighly
motivatedfew.

PeerInstructionunfoldsinthefollowingway:

1. Instructorbrieflypresentsasetofideas.
2. UnderstandingistestedusingaConepTest,forexampletheimagebelow.
3. Studentsaregivenoneortwominutestoformulateideasindividuallyandreporttothe
teacher.
 4. Studentsdiscusstheirideaswiththeirpeers,persuasivediscussioninfavouroftheir
ideaisencouraged.
5. Apollisthentakenforthesecondtime,afterdiscussion.

Pleasewatch
thisshortvideoclip
foranexampleofPeerInstructionatAvantislearning
centreinKanpur,India.

PleasealsoseethediagrambelowfordiagrammaticrepresentationofPI:


Thismethodofinstruction,exemplifieshowlearningcannotonlybeclassifiedas
social
but
thatstudentscanflourishwhenlearningistreatedasasocialprocessincomparisontothe
oftenstatictraditionalteachingmethods.

Peer Interaction in modern and diverse settings

Peerinteractioncantakeplaceinbothformalandinformalsettings
thisvideo
providesan
exampleofpeerinteractionwithinadiversehiphopprogramforyoungpeoplefromChicago.

Furthermore,ProfessorSugataMitrafromtheInstituteofEducationalTechnologyatthe
UniversityofNewcastlewascommissioned$1millionbyTEDin2013inrecognitionofhis
researchwhichdemonstratedthatchildreninsmallgroupscanlearntousecomputersand
theinternetontheirowninapublicspace.

SeehisTEDtalk
whichoutlineshisratheruniqueideas,whichundeniablydemonstrate
learningasasocialprocess.AccordingtoMitra,childrencanachievephenomenal
educationalfeatsingroupswhichtheycannotachievealone.
ThemajorityofMitrasworkbuildsuponthe1999HoleintheWallexperiment(seeimage
below).

Inthisexperiment,acomputerwasembeddedinthewallofanIndiansluminKalkaji,Delhi,
whichenabledchildrentoaccessitforfreewithoutinstruction.Hereareacoupleofquotes
thatdemonstratetheeffectoftheHoleintheWallcomputerexperiment:

childrenwilllearntodowhattheywanttolearntodo

groupsofchildrencanlearntousecomputersandtheinternetontheirownirrespectiveof
whoorwheretheyare

Notably,Mitrafoundthatafterjustfourhoursofseeingacomputerforthefirsttime,groupsof
childrenwereabletoregardtheirownvoiceandplayitback.Mitrabelieveshisexperiments
demonstrateaselforganisingsystemwherethesystemstructureappearswithoutexplicit
interventionfromtheoutsidesystem.Accordingly,eachselforganisingsystemdisplays
emergence
theappearanceofapropertynotpreviouslyobservedasafunctional
characteristicofthesystem.Mitrasworkexemplifieslearningassocialinauniqueand
technologicallyinfluencedsetting.
Peer Discussion

DiscussionisoneofthethreefundamentallearningactivitiesidentifiedbyFrancisBacon
(1625)andelaboratedonbySamuelJohnson(1753).Theuseofpeerdiscussioninan
educationalsettingisrootedintheoriesofsocialconstructivism.Thatis,discussionpromotes
learningbecauseitencouragesstudentstomakesenseofinformationthroughnegotiating
ideaswiththeirpeers.Considerableresearchshowsthatdiscussionplaysacrucialrolein
studentslearningbytestingtheirviewpoints,synthesizingtheideasofothers,andgenerating
adeeperunderstandingofthematerial(
Reznitskaya,Anderson,andKuo

Weber,Maher,
Powell,andLee,2008Corden,2001Nystrand,1996).

Discussionisacrucialcomponentinpeerinstruction(PI)whichinvolvesstudentsconversing
withtheirpeersaboutconcepts.CrouchandMazur(2001)foundthatafterdiscussion,
significantlymorestudentsansweredaconceptualquestioncorrectlycomparedtopriorto
discussion.Similarly,Smithetal(2009)foundthatwhenstudentsansweredaconceptual
questionindependently,discusseditwiththeirpeers,andthenreanswered,thenumberof
correctanswersincreasedsignificantlyandsodidstudentsconfidenceintheirresponses.
Therefore,theseresultssuggestlearningismosteffectiveafterdiscussionwithpeers.

However,itcouldbethecasethatstudentsarenotnecessarilylearningfromdiscussion,but
aresimplychoosingtheanswergivenbymoreknowledgeablepeers(Smithetal.,2009).
Therefore,Smithetal(2009)investigatedwhichoftheseexplanationsaccountedforthe
increaseincorrectanswersfollowingdiscussionbyusinganadditionalquestionforstudents
toanswerindividuallytotesttheirunderstanding.Theydiscoveredthatpeerdiscussion
enhancedlearning,evenifnobodyinthegrouporiginallyknewtheanswer.Thisfinding
supportsasocialconstructionistviewoflearningasopposedtoatransmissionistview,as
ratherthanitbeingthecasethatmoreknowledgeablestudentsaregivingtheirpeersthe
answer,thestudentsarereachinganunderstandingthemselvesthroughthesocialprocesses
ofdiscussionanddebate.

Therearevariouswayseducatorscanincorporatediscussionintotheirlessons.Oneway,
whichhasalreadybeenmentioned,isthroughPI.Anotherapproachisthroughclasswide
discussion(CWD).WhilstPIbeginswithindependentthinkingandisfollowedbypeer
discussion,CWDbeginswithpeerdiscussionandendswithCWD(NicolandBoyle,2003).
NicolandBoyle(2003)wereinterestedinwhichtypeofdiscussionwasbestforlearningand
underwhatcircumstances.Ingeneral,studentspreferredtostartwithindependentthinking
andcontinuewithpeerdiscussionbecauseitforcedthemtothinkabouttheproblemandform
theirownreasoningmeaning.Thismeanttheywerelesslikelytobepassive,swayedby
dominantpeersorabsentmindedlyaccepttheiranswer.Studentsexpressedthattheywere
morelikelytoengageindiscourseinordertojustifyanddefendtheirideas,andfinallythey
feltitwasmoreusefulinidentifyinggapsintheirunderstanding.However,itwasnotalways
thecasethatstudentsfeltitwasbeneficialtostartwithindividualresponse.Whenthe
questionsareverydifficult,beginningwithpeerdiscussionallowsapoolingofideaswhich
mayhelpstudentstoembarkontheproblem.

AsummaryoftheprosandconsofpeerdiscussionforlearningasidentifiedbyNicoland
Boyle(2003).

Positives Negatives

DetailedReflectiononProblem DominatingStudent

ExploreDifferentPerspectives CanLeadtoConfusion

AlternativeProblemSolvingMethods AnxietyProvoking

AFormofScaffolding TimeConsuming

PeersLanguagemoreAccessible

Feedback

Tobeginwith,itmaybehelpfultowatchthis
briefvideo
byDylanWiliamwhoistheDeputy
DirectorandProfessorofEducationalAssessmentattheInstituteofEducationatUniversity
ofLondon.Hesummarisestheimportanceoffeedbackforlearningandreflectsonsome
importantaspectsoffeedbackincluding
taskversusegocentredfeedback
andDwecksidea
thatabilityis
'incremental'ratherthanfixed
andtheimplicationthishasonstudentslearning.
Types of effective feedback

Elective feedback

Electivefeedbackreferstofeedbackwherestudentsaskthemarkerforcommentson
particularaspectsoftheirwork.Thereareseveralreasonswhyitisbeneficialforlearning:
itencouragesstudentstobeproactiveintheirlearning,andislikelytodevelopthe
importantlearningskillofselfregulation
urgingthestudentstothinkaboutwhattheywantfeedbackon,meansthelearneris

morelikelytoattendtoandusethefeedback
receivingpositivefeedbackonaparticularaspectinstandardmarkingstudents
wouldnotgetpositivefeedback
itreducestheamountoftimestaffspentgivingfeedbackandtargetsthepointswhere
studentswantfeedback

SeeBloxhamandCampbells(2010)articleaboutcreatingdialoguebetweentutorand
studentbyusinginteractioncoversheetsandtheeffectthishadonstudentslearning.

Seealso,theUniversityofEdinburghsenhancingfeedbackwebsiteon
electivefeedback
andcasestudyexamples
.

Reciprocal peer critiquing

Foraquicksummaryoftheimportanceofpeerassessment/feedbackforlearning,youmight
finditusefultowatchthis
shortvideo
byDylanWiliam.

Thegeneralprinciplebehindreciprocalpeercritiqueisthatinorderforstudentstoperform
wellonatask,theymustunderstandtheassessmentcriteriaandaneffectivewaytodothisis
tohavestudentsexercisethecriteriainadifferentwaybygettingthemtoapplythecriteriato
theirpeerswork(Sadler,1989).Seethis
webpage
forasummaryofthepotentialbenefitsfor
receivingandprovidingpeerfeedback.

Potentialdrawbacks:
largeclasses

Canbedoneinalecturegroupof90studentsforshortpassagesbyswapping
themwiththeirneighbour
softwaretomanageit,forexamplesee
AropaPeer

Morrow(2006)foundstrongsupportfortheusefulnessofRPCaccordingtostudentopinion.
However,whilstthestudentsvaluedanumberofaspectsaboutgivingandreceiving
feedback,whattheyfoundmostusefulwassimplytheopportunitytoreadanotherstudents
workasitallowedthemtoconsideralternativewaysofapproachingtheirwork.

Principles of good feedback

Goodfeedbackpracticeisarguablyanythingwhichencouragesstudentstoselfregulatetheir
ownworkperformance.NicolandMacfarlaneDick(2006)havesynthesisedtheresearchof
feedbacktoidentifythefollowingsevenprinciplestomakeforeffectivefeedbackandlearning:

1. makesclearwhatgoodperformanceis(learningobjectives,goals,criteria)
2. encouragesthedevelopmentofselfassessmentorreflectioninlearning
3. providesstudentswithahighqualityofinformationabouttheirlearning
4. encouragesdialoguebetweenteachersandpeersaboutlearning
5. promotesselfesteemandmotivationalbeliefs
6. enablesstudentstobridgethegapbetweencurrentandoptimalperformance
7. providesteacherswithnecessaryinformationtoshapeteaching

See
thisarticle
toreadaboutthereasoningbehindeachprincipleintermsofselfassessment
andtechniqueseducatorscanusetofosterselfassessment.

When is feedback ineffective for learning?

Regardlessoftheseprinciplesofgoodqualityfeedbackpractice,feedbackwillhavenouse
whatsoeverunlessitisactuallyusedbystudents.Forfeedbacktobeeffectiveanduseful,
studentshavetoproperlyprocessitandthisdoesnotappeartobesomethingdonenaturally.
Inordertoensurelearnersprocessthefeedback
promptquestions
and
feedbackvisas
are
effectivemethodsdesignedtopromptthelearnerstoengagewiththefeedback.Alsosee
here
forapresentationonthis,and
here
forarelevantblog.

Furthermore,effectivenessdependsontheformoffeedback.Forexample,Chietal.,(2008)
foundthatwheneverthetutorgavefeedbackintheformofgivingstudentsthecorrectanswer
learningactuallydecreased,butwhenhegotstudentstoproduceexplanationsfor
themselves,learningincreased.

Cross links with other theories

Theideaoflearninginasocialsensehasmultiplecrosslinkswithothertheoriesthroughout
educationalliterature.Aslearningcaninsomesensesbeseentobeinherentlysocial,for
examplethroughtheimportanceoflearningfromothersaswellaswiththem,itispossibleto
identifyseveralareasinwhichthesocialityoflearningcanalsobeseentoapply.

Perrys Scheme of Cognitive Development

Perrysschemeofcognitivedevelopment
focusesonthedifferencesbetweenlearning
unquestionabletruthsvs.debatablebutevidencedideas,throughjourneyingthrough9
differentstagesofintellectualcognitivedevelopmentinhighereducationstudents(Rapaport,
2013).ThemodelisbasedonastudyofHarvardstudents,claimingthatuniversitieshavean
obligationtostudentstosupportthemintheirdevelopmentthroughtheircognitiveviewof
knowledge.WhilethePerrymodelmayfocuspredominantlyonthedevelopmentofthe
individual,itcaninsomesensebeseentolinktotheideaoflearningasbeingsocial.Despite
thefactthatthecruxofthemodelmaybeseentobeaprogressionfromrelianceonan
authoritativefigureasaguideinlearning,togreaterautonomyandabilitytothinkcritically
aroundtopics,thereisnomentionthatthisprocessshouldbesolitary.Infact,linkscanbe
madebetweenthePerryschemeanddeepvs.shallowlearning,wheredeeplearningcanbe
thoughttobeenhancedthroughdiscussionandinteractionwithpeersinalearning
community(Akyol&Garrison,2011).Inthissense,itcanbesaidthatPerrysmodelmayin
factcrosslinkwithsociallearningtheory,giventhataspectsofwhattheschemeproposes
maybeenhancedthroughlearninginasocialsense.Forexample,wherestudentsmay
progressfromregurgitatingfactstoexpressingtheirownopinionsandideas,discussionand
interactionwithothersmayservetoenhanceanddevelopthiswayofthinkingandworking.

The Laurillard Model

TheLaurillardmodelcanbesaidtodiscussactivelearning,focussingontheinteraction
betweenteachers,learners,peers,theselfandtheoutsideworld(Laurillard,Charlton,Craft,
Dimakopoulos,Ljubojevic,Magoulas&Whittlestone,2013).Inthissense,themodelcanbe
seentorelatetothenotionoflearningassocial,asalargeamountofemphasisisplacedon
theroleofindividualsoutwiththelearnerthemselves.However,themodelcomprisesseveral
elements,andsoisnotnecessarilyfundamentallysocialinnature.Itcanbearguedthatit
mayfailtofullygrasptheimportanceofpeerinteraction,withagreateremphasisplacedon
thestudentteacherinteraction,ascanbeseenthroughLaurillardsdiagramofactivitiesfor
teachingandlearning(Laurillard,1993):

Source:adaptedfrom ,p.103,FigureII.1.(Ping,2003)
Laurillard(1993)

Inthissense,themodelmayseemtoregardlearningaslesssocial,asthelearning
communitythatitcreatescontainsonlythelearnerandtheteacher,whileothermodelsof
sociallearningmaybeseentoincorporatepeerandcollaborativelearningtoahigher
degree.
Modern technology in learning

Theincreasingprevalenceofmoderntechnologyandsocialnetworkinghasbecomean
integralaspectofHigherEducationcommunities(Yu,Tian,Vogel&Kwok,2010),creatinga
newonlineaspectofsociallearningwithinsuchcommunities(Hwang,Kessler&Francesco,
2004).Arguably,theuseofonlinesocialnetworkingplatformshasallowedforanewsenseof
sociallearning,inwhichlearningislargelyselfinitiatedandselfgovernedbytheindividual
themselves,yetalsodependsoninputfromothersinordertoadvanceknowledgeand
understanding(Yu,etal.,2010).Thishighlightsanaspectofcrosslinking,asthenotionof
learningassocialcanbeseentolinkwiththeideaoflearningthroughtechnologyusage.The
useoftechnologyineducationisbecomingmoreimportant,withitbeingclaimedthat
teachersandstudentsalikerequireeffectivecomputerbasedmeansbywhichtomanageand
assesscollaborativelearning(Strijbos,2010).Whileitmaynotseemhugelyimportant,ithas
beenclaimedthattodaysgeneration,accustomedtoonlinemeansoflearningand
interaction,throughuseofWikis,FacebookandYouTube,forexample,findtraditional
learningmethodslesseffective(Bosch,2009).Inadditiontothis,useofFacebookinassisting
learninghasbeenfoundtohavepositiveeffectsonlearningaswellasthebuildingofsocial
groups,allowingindividualstofeelpartofalargerlearningcommunity(Bosch,2009Yu,et
al.,2010).Inthissense,itcanbearguedthatsociallearninglinksstronglytouseof
technologyinlearningandteaching.

Annotated Reference List

Au,K.H.(1998).
Socialconstructivismandtheschoolliteracylearningofstudentsof
diversebackgrounds
.
JournalofLiteracyResearch
,
30
(2),297319.
doi:10.1080/10862969809548000
paperdiscussesthemeansbywhichsocial
constructivisttechniquesmaybeofuseinhelpingtoimprovetheliteracyabilitiesin
learningenvironmentswherechildrenareofabroadrangeofculturalbackgroundsand
abilitylevels.
Coll,C.,Rochera,M.J.,&deGispert,I.(2014).
Supportingonlinecollaborativelearning
insmallgroups:Teacherfeedbackonlearningcontent,academictaskandsocial
 participation.Computers&Education,75,5364.

Thispaperinvestigatesfeedbackin
smallonlinegroupsandshowsthattimingiscriticaltotheimpactoffeedbackandthat
boththefocusandtypeoffeedbackmustaccommodatetheneedsofthegroup.
Dolan,P.,Leat,D.,MazzoliSmith,L.,Mitra,S.,Todd,L.,&Wall,K.(2013).
Selforganisedlearningenvironments(SOLEs)inanEnglishschool:anexampleof
transformativepedagogy?
.
OnlineEducationResearchJournal
,
3
(11).
Thispaperby
MitreoffersaninnovativeapproachtosociallearningviaSelfOrganisedLearning
Environments(SOLEs)whichallowgroupsofstudentsacrosstheworldtolearntousea
computer.ItdrawsupontheaforementionedHoleintheWallstudybutwithina
classroomsettingratherthanaslum.
Haney,J.J.,&McArthur,J.(2002).
Fourcasestudiesofprospectivescienceteachers'
beliefsconcerningconstructivistteachingpractices
.
ScienceEducation
,
86
(6),
783802.doi:10.1002/sce.10038
paperincludes4casestudiesofprospective
teachers,investigatingtheirviewstowardsconstructivistteachingmethods.Concludes
thatatleast2varietiesofbeliefsexistinrelationtoconstructivism,thesebeingcentral
beliefsandperipheralbeliefs.Providesaninterestingviewpointoftowhatextent
personalfeelingsimpactuponteachingstyles.
Smith,M.K.,Wood,W.B.,Krauter,K.,&Knight,J.K.(2011).
Combiningpeer
discussionwithinstructorexplanationincreasesstudentlearningfrominclass
conceptquestions
.
CBELifeSciencesEducation
,
10
(1),5563.Thispapercompared
theeffectivenessofpeerdiscussion,instructorexplanation,oracombinationofthem
both,andshowedthatacombinationofpeerdiscussionfollowedbyinstructor
explanationimprovedstudentperformancesignificantlycomparedtoeitherapproach
alone.
Wood,D.,Wood,H.,&Middleton,D.(1978).
Anexperimentalevaluationoffour
facetofaceteachingstrategies
.
Internationaljournalofbehavioraldevelopment
,
1
(2),131147.
ThispaperisoneofthreeseminalpapersproducedbyWoodwhichform
thegroundworkforcontingenttutoringorscaffolding.Thepapertestsfourdifferent
strategiesforhowtomasteradifficultconstructiontask.Thetypeoftutoringenlistedwas
abletopredicthowwellchildrenperformedonataskafterinstruction.

References

Akyol,Z.,&Garrison,D.R.(2010).Understandingcognitivepresenceinanonlineand
blendedcommunityofinquiry:Assessingoutcomesandprocessesfordeepapproaches
tolearning.BritishJournalofEducationalTechnology ,
42
(2),233250.
doi:10.1111/j.14678535.2009.01029.x
Bacon,F.(1625).OfStudies.RetrievedMarch20,2015,from
http://www.westegg.com/bacon/studies.html
Bloxham,S.,&Campbell,L.(2010).Generatingdialogueinassessmentfeedback:exploring
theuseofinteractivecoversheets. Assessment&EvaluationinHigherEducation ,
35
(3),
291300.
Bosch,T.E.(2009).Usingonlinesocialnetworkingforteachingandlearning:Facebookuse
attheUniversityofCapeTown. Communication,35 (2),185200.
doi:10.1080/02500160903250648
Burton,R.,Brown,J.S.,&Fischer,G.(1984).Skiingasamodelofinstruction.InB.Rogoff,&
J.Lave,EverydayCognition:It'sdevelopmentandsocialcontext (pp.139150).
Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress.
Chen,I.(n.d.).Technologyandlearningenvironment:Anelectronictextbook.Retrievedfrom
http://viking.coe.uh.edu/~ichen/ebook/etit/cover.htm
Chi,M.T.,Roy,M.,&Hausmann,R.G.(2008).Observingtutorialdialoguescollaboratively:
Insightsabouthumantutoringeffectivenessfromvicariouslearning.CognitiveScience,
32(2),301341.doi:10.1080/03640210701863396
Corden,R.(2001).Groupdiscussionandtheimportanceofasharedperspective:Learning
fromcollaborativeresearch. QualitativeResearch ,
1
(3),347367.
Cowie,H.,&vanderAalsvort,G.(Eds.).(2000). SocialInteractioninLearningandInstruction.
Oxford:Pergamon.
Crouch,C.H.,&Mazur,E.(2001).Peerinstruction:Tenyearsofexperienceandresults.
AmericanJournalofPhysics ,
69
(9),970977.
Cuppacocoa.(2014,November13). Zoneofproximaldevelopment [Imagedetailingthezone
ofproximaldevelopmentinVygotsky'stheory].Retrievedfrom
http://www.cuppacocoa.com/thezoneofproximaldevelopment
Ernest,P.(March23,1999).SocialConstructivismasaPhilosophyofMathematics:Radical
Constructivism
Fernndez,M.,Wegerif,R.,Mercer,N.,&RojasDrummond,S.(2001).Reconceptualizing"
scaffolding"andthezoneofproximaldevelopmentinthecontextofsymmetrical
collaborativelearning.TheJournalofClassroom Interaction,36(2),4054.
Forman,E.A.,&Kraker,M.J.(1985).TheSocialoriginoflogic:ThecontributionofPiagetand
Vygotsky.InM.W.Berkowitz, PeerConflictandPsychologicalGrowth. SanFrancisco:
JosseyBass.
Freund,L.S.(1990).MaternalRegulationofChildren'sProblemsolvingBehaviorandIts
ImpactonChildren'sPerformance. Childdevelopment ,
61
(1),113126.
 Howe,C.,Tolmie,A.,&Rodgers,C.(1992).Theacquisitionofconceptualknowledgein
sciencebyprimaryschoolchildren:Groupinteractionandtheunderstandingofthemotion
downanincline. BritishJournalofDevelopmentalPsychology
,10
(2),113130.
Hwang,A.,Kessler,E.H.,&Francesco,A.M.(2004).Studentnetworkingbehavior,culture,
andgradeperformance:Anempiricalstudyandpedagogicalrecommendations. Academy
ofManagementLearning&Education,3 (2),139150.doi:10.5465/AMLE.2004.13500532
Jonassen,D.(1994,April).Thinkingtechnology.EducationalTechnology,34(4),3437
Johnson,S.(1753)Onstudies. RetrievedMarch20,2015,from
http://grammar.about.com/od/classicessays/a/JohnsonStudies.htm
Kim,B.(2001).SocialConstructivism..InM.Orey(Ed.),Emergingperspectivesonlearning,
teaching,andtechnology.Retrieved16/03/15from
http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/
Laurillard,D.(1993). Rethinkinguniversityteaching:Aframeworkfortheeffectiveuseof
educationaltechnology .London:Routledge.
Laurillard,D.,Charlton,P.,Dimakopoulos,D.,Ljubojevic,D.,Magoulas,G.,Masterman,E.,..
.Whittlestone,K.(2013).Aconstructionistlearningenvironmentforteacherstomodel
learningdesigns. JournalofComputerAssistedLearning ,
29
(1),1530.
doi:10.1111/j.13652729.2011.00458.x
Littleton,K.,&Light,P.(1999). LearningwithComputers:AnalysingProductiveInteraction.
London:Routledge.
Mitra,S.,Rana,V.,&Mitra,S.(2001).ChildrenandtheInternet:experimentswithminimally
invasiveeducationinIndia. TheBritishJournalofEducational
Morrow,M.I.(2006)AnApplicationofPeerFeedbacktoUndergraduate'sWritingofCritical
LiteratureReviews. PracticeandEvidenceoftheScholarshipofTeachingandLearningin
HigherEducation ,
1
(2),6172.
Nicol,D.J.,&Boyle,J.T.(2003).Peerinstructionversusclasswidediscussioninlarge
classes:Acomparisonoftwointeractionmethodsinthewiredclassroom. Studiesin
HigherEducation ,
28
(4),457473.
Nicol,D.J.,&MacfarlaneDick,D.(2006).Formativeassessmentandselfregulated
learning:Amodelandsevenprinciplesofgoodfeedbackpractice. Studiesinhigher
education ,
31
(2),199218.
Nystrand,M.(1996).Openingdialogue:Understandingthedynamicsoflanguageand
learningintheEnglishclassroom.NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.
Palinscar,A.S.,&Brown,A.L.(1984).Reciprocalteachingofcomprehensionfosteringand
monitoringactivities.CognitionandInstruction,1 (2),337386.
Powell,K.C.,&Kalina,C.J.(2009).Cognitiveandsocialconstructivism:Developingtools
foraneffectiveclassroom. Education ,
130(2),241.Retrievedfrom
https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G1216181184/cognitiveandsocialconstructivis
mdevelopingtools
Ping,L.C.(2003).Informationandcommunicationtechnologies(ICT)addressingthe
challengesofeconomicseducation:Tobeornottobe? InternationalReviewof
EconomicsEducation ,
2(1),25.
 Rappaport,W.J.(2013,September26). WilliamPerry'sschemeofintellectualandethical
development .RetrievedMarch20,2015,from
http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~rapaport/perry.positions.html
Reznitskaya,A.,Anderson,R.C.,&Kuo,L.J.(2007).Teachingandlearningargumentation.
TheElementarySchoolJournal ,107(5),449472.
Sadler,D.R.(1989).Formativeassessmentandthedesignofinstructionalsystems.
Instructionalscience ,
18
(2),119144.
Sawyer,R.K.(2005). TheCambridgehandbookofthelearningsciences. Cambridge:
CambridgeUniversityPress.
Scardamalia,M.,&Bereiter,C.(1994).ComputerSupportforknowledgebuilding
communities. 3
(3),265283.
Smith,M.K.,Wood,W.B.,Adams,W.K.,Wieman,C.,Knight,J.K.,Guild,N.,&Su,T.T.
(2009).Whypeerdiscussionimprovesstudentperformanceoninclassconcept
questions.Science ,
323(5910),122124.
Strijbos,J.W.(2010).Assessmentof(computersupported)collaborativelearning. Learning
Technologies,IEEETransactionson,4 (1),5973.doi:10.1109/TLT.2010.37
UniversityCollegeDublin.(n.d.).Educationtheory/constructivismandsocialconstructivismin
theclassroomUCDCTAG.Retrievedfrom
http://www.ucdoer.ie/index.php/Education_Theory/Constructivism_and_Social_Constructi
vism_in_the_Classroom
Vygotsky,L.(1987).Zoneofproximaldevelopment. Mindinsociety:Thedevelopmentof
higherpsychologicalprocesses ,
5291 .
Weber,K.,Maher,C.,Powell,A.,&Lee,H.S.(2008).Learningopportunitiesfromgroup
discussions:Warrantsbecometheobjectsofdebate. EducationalStudiesin
Mathematics ,
68
(3),247261.
Weimer,M.(2011,January20).WhatDoStudentsLearnThroughDiscussion?Faculty
Focus.Retrievedfrom
http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teachingprofessorblog/whatdostudentslearnthro
ughdiscussion/
Wood,D.,Bruner,J.S.,&Ross,G.(1976).Theroleoftutoringinproblemsolving. Journalof
childpsychologyandpsychiatry
,17
(2),89100.
Yu,A.Y.,Tian,S.W.,Vogel,D.R.,&Kwok,R.C.(2010).Canlearningbevirtuallyboosted?
Aninvestigationofonlinesocialnetworkingimpacts. Computers&Education,55 (4),
14941503.doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.015