Understand Learning - Teaching and Learning Languages A Guide

Understanding learning
kE DEAS
• There are changing views about learning in general and languages in particular
in contemporary education
• The learning theories that teachers hold implicitly or explicitly infuence their teaching,
learning and assessment practices
• Theories o learning have changed rom behaviourism to cognitive and sociocultural

theories. They have been described through acquisition and participation metaphors
and it is recognised that both are needed
• Language, culture and learning together orm the basis or the languages curriculum
Rationale for considering learning theories

In thinking about teaching, learning and assessing in languages education, it is essential for
us to consider the understandings that we hold and the assumptions that we make about learning.
This is because these understandings, be they implicit or explicit, infuence our proessional stance
as language educators and our teaching, learning and assessment practices. Our understandings
o learning are not simply acquired as knowledge that is put into practice; rather, they develop
over time and in diverse contexts working with diverse students, based on ongoing experience
and refection.
In such an ongoing process, often ‘dominant theories of the past continue to operate as
the default framework affecting and driving current practices and perspectives’ (Shepard,
2000:4). Thus, it is important to have a sense of past theories as well as more contemporary
conceptualisations of learning as a basis for examining understandings and assumptions about
how students learn. Teachers as social beings construct the world of teaching and learning
according to their values and dispositions. As such, their biographies are central to what they
see and how they interpret their world. As Shepard points out, changing conceptions of learning
24 Teaching and Learning Languages: A Guide

are closely entwined with changing conceptions of curriculum and assessment. She observes that,
at present, there is a mismatch between current views of learning on the one hand, and teaching
and assessment practices on the other. This mismatch warrants further consideration in each
particular context of teaching and learning.
Some teachers nd engaging with theory to be o limited direct value and preer to ocus on
practice. Theory versus practice dichotomies do not refect current understandings as theory and
practice are not seen as opposites. Contemporary understandings show that there is an important
relationship between the two: a good theory can be immensely practical, just as excellent practice
informs theory-making. It is learning theory that provides big picture understandings when teachers
wish to reconsider and potentially change their practices.
Theories of learning
Behaviourism
Behaviourism, one of the most pervasive theories of learning in the 1940s and 1950s was based
on stimulus-response associations. Its focus is on observable behaviour rather than thinking. Learning
within this theory entails the accumulation of atomised bits of knowledge that are sequenced and
ordered hierarchically. Each item of knowledge (called ‘objectives’ in curriculums and programs)
is to be learned independently on the assumption that this makes learning more manageable. All
the constituent parts of learning are to be mastered before proceeding to the next part (objective)
in the hierarchy, gradually leading to a complex whole. In this theory, learning is seen as developing
associations between stimuli and responses. Motivation involves positive reinforcement of the many
small steps in learning and forming good habits. Development is seen as occurring through a series
of required stages, in a step-by-step process.
The major concerns with this theory are that:
• learning is broken down into ever-smaller, analytic parts that are no longer
integrated to form a whole
• learning entails much more than a response to a stimulus
• learning is task and context dependent.
Language, Culture and Learning 25

Cognitive theories
The various cognitive theories, which challenged behaviourism, introduced the concept of
a thinking mind. Learning within these theories is understood as a process of active construction
whereby each individual makes sense of new information in his/her mind by mapping it onto
his/her existing framework of knowledge and understanding. The incorporation of new knowledge
leads to a restructuring of the individual’s conceptual map. These theories also highlight the fact
that learning is context-dependent – that is, ‘situated’ – and that new knowledge can only
be taken in when connected to existing knowledge structures. In this sense, learning involves
a process of making connections – reorganising unrelated bits of knowledge and experience into
new patterns, integrated wholes. Students learn by relating new experiences to what they already
know. Learning involves making new meanings which are generally expressed through language.
In this way learning, language, meaning and thinking are closely related. Within this perspective,
beyond the accumulation and restructuring of information, developing knowledge involves
developing processes of self-monitoring and awareness that we refer to as metacognition.
Sociocultural theories
Whereas cognitive theories highlight thinking as it occurs in the mind of the individual, sociocultural
theories consider the relationship between thinking and the social, cultural, historical and
institutional context in which it occurs. The rediscovery of the work of Vygotsky (1978) has led to
the understanding that learning and development are culturally embedded and socially supported or
mediated processes. As Lantolf, one of the major researchers who has developed sociocultural theory
in the eld o applied linguistics, explains:
Sociocultural theory holds that specically human orms

o mental activity arise in the interactions we enter into with
other members o our culture and with the specic experiences
we have with the arteacts produced by our ancestors and by our
contemporaries. Rather than dichotomising the mental and the
social, the theory insists on a seamless and dialectic relationship
between these two domains. In other words, not only does our
mental activity determine the nature o our social world, but this
world of human relationships and artefacts also determines to
a large extent how we regulate our mental processes.
(Lantol, 2000:79)

Learning according to this theory is developed through social interaction with more knowledgeable
or more procient others. This social process o interaction (through language, as well as other
systems and tools such as gestures, narratives, technologies) mediates the construction of knowledge
and leads to the individual’s development of a framework for making sense of experience that is
congruent with the cultural system in which the learner and learning are located. It is through this
social and cultural process that students are socialised to act, communicate and ‘be’ in ways that
are culturally appropriate to the groups in which they participate as members, and through which
identities are formed.
Within sociocultural theories, development occurs twice: rstly in the process o social interaction
(that is, on an interpersonal plane) and then within the mind of the individual (that is, on an
intrapersonal plane). Language is integral to learning in that it is the major means by which we make
and share meanings with ourselves and with others, and by which we negotiate social relationships
and social values. It is language that makes it possible for people to objectify and conceptualise
themselves in the world – to give names to experiences, and make sense of the environment,
objects, experiences, events and interactions. In short, language is central to the process of
conceiving meaning, which is integral to learning.
Sociocultural theory is concerned with the development of individuals over time. According
to Vygotsky (1978), learning is not xed but dynamic and developmental. In this sense, the
developmental focus is on an individual’s potential abilities. An individual’s learning potential
depends fundamentally on mediation – that is, learning support or scaffolds that are made available.
These scaffolds might include reminders, examples, models, graphics, illustrations, explanations,
further questions and elaborations, as well as encouragement. They are designed to move the
learning forward in the zone of proximal development. An individual’s learning and achievement
are mediated by supportive interactions with others. This interaction is fundamental to learning.
To understand learners’ learning and potential development, it’s important to take into account
both what they are able to do independently and what they can do, with others, in and through
social interaction – what they are able to do at any particular time and what they continue to learn
to do over time.

The cultural dimension of sociocultural theories of learning is highlighted by Gee.
A sociocultural approach places a premium on learners’

experiences, social participation, use o mediating devices
(tools and technologies), and position within various activity systems
and communities o practice. The word ‘culture’ has taken on a wide
variety o dierent meanings in dierent disciplines. Nonetheless, it is
clear that as part and parcel of our early socialisation in life, we each
learn ways of being in the world, of acting, and interacting, thinking
and valuing and using language, objects and tools that critically
shape our early sense o sel. A situated/sociocultural perspective
amounts to an argument that students learn new academic ‘cultures’
at school (new ways o acting, interacting, valuing and using
language, objects and tools) and, as in the case o acquiring any
new culture, the acquisition of these new cultures interacts
ormidably with learners’ initial cultures.
(Gee, 2008:100)
Thus the diverse cultural understanding and experiences that students bring are highly infuential
and need to be taken into account. The implication of this for us as a profession is that we need
to enlarge our understanding of learners, recognise the extraordinary differences in their social and
cultural life-worlds, experiences, motivations, aspirations, and incorporate this diversity into our
teaching and learning.
Merged theories
While there is much debate within and among cognitive, constructivist and sociocultural theories,
Shepard (2000:6), among others, maintains that it is some kind of combined or ‘merged’ theory that
will end up being ‘accepted as common wisdom and carried into practice’. Learning, then, is socially
constructed, mediated through language and other tools that are congruent with the culture in
which the learner and learning are situated, and develops over time. As Broadfoot says:

What we can and should do is … recognise that learners are
rst and oremost sentient beings and, hence, that the quality
and scope of their learning is likely to be at least as closely
related to their feelings and beliefs about it as it is to their
intellectual capacity.
(Broadoot, 2005:138–139)
Students bring with them their own conceptions, misconceptions, understandings, experiences
and feelings that shape their learning.
Acquisition and participation

Anna Sfard (1998) discusses learning theory through two metaphors: an acquisition metaphor
and a participation metaphor. Learning within the acquisition metaphor involves the accumulation
of a body of facts or items of knowledge that are abstracted and generalised. The process may
involve either reception or development by construction, but the focus is on ‘gaining ownership’
(Sfard, 1998:5) or possession of something. Within the participation metaphor, learning involves
participating within a community of more knowledgeable others to construct understanding.
Participation takes place in the context of culture through social mediation. The focus within this
metaphor is not on possession but on participation in various kinds of activities characteristic of a
learning area as the learner gradually becomes a member of the subject community. Sfard highlights
that ‘each (metaphor) has something to offer that the other cannot provide’ (Sfard, 1998:10).
Questions for reection

1 How does your stance to language learning refect your views on learning?
2 Where do your views on learning come from?
3 How are your views of learning evident in your teaching and assessment practice?
4 What are some implications of these learning theories for your own teaching?
5 Why do you think Sfard emphasises the merging of the two metaphors?
6 Are there dimensions of learning that are not captured by the acquisition
and participation metaphors?

Understand Learning - Teaching and Learning Languages A Guide

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Understand Learning - Teaching and Learning Languages A Guide

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Understand Learning - Teaching and Learning Languages A Guide

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Understanding learning

• Theories o learning have changed rom behaviourism to cognitive and sociocultural

Rationale for considering learning theories

24 Teaching and Learning Languages: A Guide

The major concerns with this theory are that:

Language, Culture and Learning 25

Sociocultural theory holds that specically human orms

26 Teaching and Learning Languages: A Guide

Language, Culture and Learning 27

A sociocultural approach places a premium on learners’

28 Teaching and Learning Languages: A Guide

Acquisition and participation

Questions for reection

Language, Culture and Learning 29

You might also like