Learning theories are conceptual frameworks that indicate how information is received, processed and retained during learning (Wells, 2007). Learning incorporates cognitive, environmental and emotional aspects for receiving, improving or developing a person’s knowledge, values, skills and beliefs. The physical changes children have to undergo during their development as teenagers is reflective of the progression of their cognitive abilities’. Controversy over the birth of learning amongst people began as early as the existence of Greek philosophers Socrates (469-399 B.C), Plato (427-347 B.C) and Aristotle (384-322 B.C) (Darling-Hammond, Rosso, Austin, Orcutt & Martin, 2001). Aristotle believed that people used senses to search for truth and knowledge beyond ourselves that inspired a scientific route for achieving information.
Conversely, Plato held the view that knowledge and truth can be discovered by self reflection.
Socrates affirmed that specific knowledge could only be gained through reason, and believed that research is relative to a dialectic mode of discovering truth through conversations with people (Darling-Hammond et al, 2001).
Another portal for transferring knowledge to citizens was the powerful influence of the Roman Catholic Church. Parallel to Greek methodology, the Romans perceived education as vocational training rather than discovery of truth (Darling-Hammond et al, 2001). The Renaissance led to the development of individual inquiry and discovery. Pioneers of this era, Descartes (1596-1650), Locke (1632-1704), Rousseau (1712-1778) and Kant (1724-1804) celebrated the conceptual outlook of a child’s development dependent on experience. At this period in time learning history reached one of its most crucial discoveries, recognition of the cognitive processes of the mind
(Darling-Hammond et al, 2001). Since then many of today’s theoretical base for learning makes some reference to cognitive truths that have been established during the early 1600s and 1800s.
The dawn of the 1900s propelled the theory of behaviourism as a predominant paradigm for examining learning. The theory of behaviourism concentrates on the study of overt behaviours that can be measured and observed (Good & Brophy, 1990). The behavioural approach encompasses the learning approach as a change in behaviour in which instructors cordon the environment to produce the desired responses through behavioural objectives (Wikipedia, 2013).
This analysis of learning was primarily developed by Skinner and included the work of people like Thorndike, Pavlov, Hull and Watson (Wikipedia, 2013). Behaviourism aligns within a post- positivist or positivist paradigm because of the intent to describe, control and predict how learning takes place (Christiansen et al, 2010). Research in this field believes there are patterns and a sense of order that one can discover; inconsistent with the values of modern learning strategies that rely on the experiences of students own learning process.
Three basic tenets surround the ideology behind behaviourism. Firstly, learning is reflective of change in behaviour. Secondly, the environment moulds and shapes behaviour. And thirdly, the principles of contiguity and reinforcement are pivotal to the learning process (Illeris, 2004). The learning platform is dominated by the competencies, knowledge and skills of the teacher, thus a teacher-centred pedagogy is envisaged. This support the epitome of behaviourism, i.e. learning is the acquisition of new behaviour through conditioning. Although modern learning theories are repulsive of the very nature of conditioning, the behaviourist learning theory has been relevant in guiding the development of sequenced and structured curricula (Mergel, 1998).
One of the pitfalls of the behaviourist theory was the inability to explain certain social behaviours.
Hence the rise of cognitivism in the 1900s incorporated two key approaches; that the memory system is an active organised processor of information, and that previous knowledge holds an integral component on learning (Wikipedia, 2013). Cognitivists’ prioritise brain-based learning as well as articulate on how the human memory works to simulate learning. In a cognitivist environment the educator structures the content of learning activities to build on intelligence and cognitive development. Hence, learning is captured in the image of a content-centred approach.
This theory falls within the post positivist
Another view of learning that has made a mark in educational psychology is the theory of constructivism. Constructivists assert that students construct their own reality based upon ideas or concepts from past and present knowledge (Wells, 2007). As a result, the constructivist approach is significantly learner-centred because of the freedom and opportunity students have
in developing their own learning. Threads of constructivism may also be attributed to the work of Ulrick, Neiser, Goodman, Kant, Kuhn, Dewey and Harbemas, who concur that reality is a sequence of a process of social negotiation, whereby students construct mental structures that are congruent to external ones that exist on the environment (Mergel, 1998). The paradigm associated with constructivism is the interpretive, because researchers in this realm assert that people’s actions cannot be predicted, but rather are influenced by how people make sense of their worlds in their own stride (Christiansen et al, 2010).
It is relevant to address theories of learning derived from previous generations to demonstrate how learning has evolved and progressed, and to appreciate the one identified in this study. The learning patterns and methodologies during that time were conducive to the environment inhabited. However it is more than sufficient to mention that during that era learning had not been influenced by technology to the extent at which it has been today. However, this does not to denounce or claim that earlier theories are unsupportive of technological advancements in education. In fact, present day researchers commend the role of reinforcement in the development of skills, and the influence of cognitive learning in driving forth intent, effort and reason (Darling-Hammond et al, 2001). They acknowledge the need for developmental stages that can be stimulated through social interaction and the structuring of experiences within the learner’s ability of readiness. This suggests support towards former theories of learning, but the extent to which it can be successfully acclimated to technology is somewhat unclear (Siemens, 2004). Unwin (2007) cautions that technology used in the absence of a sound theoretical framework or pedagogy may not be very effective in reaching programme goals.
The current plethora of learning envisages a student-centred approach to education (Liu, 2010), contrary to traditional methods. There is an ever-pressing need for collaboration, interactivity and authenticity across a wide spectrum of student activities vocalised by educational institutions (Liu, 2010). The introduction of ICT in education encapsulated a theme of independent learning, in which students take charge of their own learning almost anywhere at any time through internet connectivity (Kirkup & Kirkwood, 2005). Just as theories of behaviourism, cognitivism and constructivism were created to theoretically describe learning activities at the time, so too have modern theories been developed to support the tech-stewards of the 21st century. Consequently the researcher has selected Activity Theory (AT) and Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) to guide this study. CHAT has been developed as a spin-off to AT, hence both will be used interchangeably during this study. Amory (2006) conveys that CHAT has been instrumental as a theoretical framework in the design of technology enhanced courses. AT signifies the ideas of collaboration, development, intentionality and mediation (Nardi, 1996). A fundamental aspect of AT is the principle of tool mediation that describes human activity driven towards an overall goal,
oriented by the use of tools (e.g. instruments and devices) (Wang, 2008). Such an environment creates space for tapping into relevant resources/tools that are beneficial to facilitators and students. Therefore AT has been chosen to underpin the theoretical framework for this study, in providing a deeper analysis.
3.4 ACTIVITY THEORY / CULTURAL HISTORICAL ACTIVITY THEORY