In EDLD 5317 ADL students Pedro Beltran, Colby Clifford, Allison Palmer, and Brianna Rodriguez created a 3 Part Podcast series called Thoughts on Learning where they discuss the following key topics with Dwayne Harapnuik:
Part 1 – ePortfolios as Assessment as Learning EP 36
Explores how educators can move beyond using ePortfolios for assessments for learning to assessments as learning.
Part 2 – Blended Learning and COVA EP 37
Explores how giving learners choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning can have a positive impact on the blended learning environment.
Part 3 – Opportunities with ePortfolios Blended Learning and COVA EP 38
Summarizes the opportunities that learning environments that utilize ePortfolios, blended learning, and COVA can offer learners.
If you run a quick google search on the phrase “main learning theories” the results will reveal that there is inconsistency in what people agree are the main learning theories. You will also find that many sources will shift their perspectives on learning theories. For example back in 2016 when I first wrote this post, United Nations, Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) which should be considered an authority listed the following 7 learning theories:
While the changes are small, combining Social Learning Theory and Socio-Constructivism into what is now called Social Constructivism, lifting Situated learning to the level of a theory, removing 21st Century Learning or Skills and, moving Community of Practice into a separate category these changes reflect a shift from a contemporary or postmodern epistemological interpretation to a critical theory narrative.
Wikipedia points to Behaviourism, Cognitivism, and Constructivism as the main theories but also points to a wide assortment of related links. Learning-theories.com which was once a scholarly project but has now turned into an add riddled site suggests that there are the following 5 major paradigms which the different learning theories fall under:
Behaviorism
Cognitivism
Constructivism
Design-based
Humanism
21st Century skills
Depending on the theoretical preference of the author(s) and when the site you land on was originally written or last updated you will find many of the theories from the lists above.
Back in the late 90’s when I was researching learning theories for my doctoral thesis and in 2003 when I taught my first graduate course on learning theories most texts and literature pointed to the following as the main theories:
Behaviorism
Cognitivism
Humanism
Today the term Humanism is seldom used in the learning theory context and Constructivism has been pulled out of the Cognitive camp to stand on its own. Design is involved (or at least it should be) in most theories so I fail to see how this is a learning theory itself. Similarly, 21st Century learning is much more of a popular phrase of the day and since one could argue that all learning happening today is in the 21st Century, this really isn’t a learning theory.
Therefore, I suggest that the primary learning theories today are:
Behaviorism
Cognitivism
Constructivism
But which list is accurate? Perhaps a more important question is why is an understanding of learning theories important? The following four key points should serve as a good start for why understanding learning theories is so important:
1. Knowing what you really believe about learning is important because this foundational belief should drive the way you create significant learning environments and the way you engage learners.
2. Knowing that your beliefs about learning are supported by evidence and are shared with others should give you the confidence to move away from the role of sage on the stage to guide on the side as you give your learners more choice, ownership, voice, and authenticity (COVA) in their learning experiences.
3. Knowing the full breadth of the learning theory or theories where your beliefs about learning fall will help you to analyze, assess, and choose the appropriate technologies that can not only fit the needs of your learners but enhance the learning environment.
If we don’t choose to take a proactive approach to understand what we fully believe about learning and purposefully design the learning environment, we choose to follow tradition. As Christopher Knapper warns there are consequences to blindly doing what has always been done:
…there is an impressive body of evidence on how teaching methods and curriculum design affect deep, autonomous, and reflective learning. Yet most faculty are largely ignorant of this scholarship, and instructional practices and curriculum planning are dominated by tradition rather than research evidence. As a result, teaching remains largely didactic, assessment of student work is often trivial, and curricula are more likely to emphasize content coverage than acquisition of lifelong and life-wide learning skills. (2010, p. 229)
Understanding what we believe about learning has never been more important. We are living in the age where we no longer are asking if we should use technology to enhance learning but are asking how well are we using technology to enhance learning. Tony Bates has spent decades researching how to use technology to enhance learning and in his post Learning theories and online learning he points to the fundamental role the understanding of theories of behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism play in online learning and more importantly reminds us that our thinking must continually evolve as these theories evolve. Bates also reminds us that we need to be open to new theories as these new and old learning theories evolve we must move from theory to practice. We need to be flexible enough to adapt and grow in our thinking about learning to develop effective learning environments that meet our learner’s needs.
This flexible and eclectic approach to understanding and adopting learning theories have driven my thinking about learning since the late 90’s when I developed Inquisitivism which is an approach for designing and delivering web-based instruction that shares many of the same principles of minimalism and other constructivist approaches. Being eclectic in my thinking about learning theories has enabled me to not limit my understanding of learning to one system but I have continually considered and selected the best elements from all systems.
Putting this in the 21st Century vernacular one could argue that I prefer the mashup theory of learning because creatively combining and mixing the best elements of learning theories is the best way to address the needs of 21st Century learners. Don’t assume that my mashup theory of learning is just a willy-nilly approach to being pragmatic. On the contrary, the quality of a mashup is totally dependent upon the quality of its components—remember I am continually selecting and mixing the best elements.
This finally takes me to my fourth key point why understanding learning theories is so important.
4. The better you know and understand specific learning theories the better able you will be to select the best elements from all the theories which will help you to mashup the most effective learning environment.
Regardless of where you land in your thinking about learning the fact that you are thinking about learning and how learning works means that your learners will benefit. When we strive to create significant learning environments we can all agree that it’s about the learning.
References
Knapper, C. (2010) ‘Changing Teaching Practice: Barriers and Strategies’ in Christensen Hughes, J. and Mighty, J. eds. Taking Stock: Research on Teaching and Learning in Higher Education Toronto ON: McGill-Queen’s University Press
Originally posted on March 11 and revised on November 10, 2021
If Genius Hour and 20% Time, Passion projects, and other similar project-based engagement activities are so helpful in promoting learning why don’t we spend more time on these activities and not limit them to an hour a week or 20% of our learner’s precious time? Why don’t we flip Genius hour and 20% time with the time we spend on test preparation. Perhaps if we move our learners away from the time-wasters of rereading and highlighting and get them engaged in the effective study skills of self-testing, distributed practice, elaborate interrogation, self-explanation, and interleaved practice we could flip the time we spend on test prep to 20% and spend 80 of our learner’s time engaged in Genius Hour type activities. The research is clear and the Scientific America article on study skills What Works, What Doesn’t – https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273626957_What_Works_What_Doesn’t confirms what study skill yields the best results and also points to a large body of research on this topic.
While flipping Genius Hour and improving our learner’s study skills may be a great first step it isn’t enough. Trying to apply a simple solution like flipping Genius Hour to the more complex problem of deeper learning within our current educational system will not work unless we address all the other key factors of this complex problem. We need to help change our educator’s and learner’s thinking about learning, their approach to learning, and we need to change the learning environment. I am not alone in calling into question the use of Genius Hour and 20% Time as a treatment without addressing all the other factors.
In a recent post The Research Behind PBL, Genius Hour, and Choice In The Classroom – https://www.ajjuliani.com/blog/research/ A.J. Juliani argues for the benefits of project-based activities that promote choice and give learner’s the opportunity to engage in learning activities that are important to them. Juliani is an advocate of these useful learning activities and in his post, he points to some research and larger body anecdotal or experiential support for these types of activities. He also deals with some of the objections to challenges to these activities and points to Ewan McIntosh’s 2013 post 20% Time and Schools: not the best of bedfellows – https://edu.blogs.com/edublogs/2013/08/20-time-and-schools-not-the-best-of-bedfellows.html where McIntosh points to the problem with our system of education that limits the effectiveness of these types activities in this statement:
The problem is, that students given this open stretch of time often don’t know what to do, or beyond their initial couple of passions they run out of steam. Their end-products are largely under par of their capacity. Sure, there are moments of genius, just as in Google, 3M or any other corporation that introduces 20% time. But, just like them, they are by a small proportion of students, with the vast majority of ideas failing to hit the mark.
McIntosh is pointing out that many, perhaps even most, of our learners are not prepared for this type of deeper learning. He suggests that that experimenting with these individual activities is a start it would be better to include more student autonomy in everything one does. This is not the first time we have heard an educator point to the sobering reality that too many of our students are not prepared to learn. In his book Failure to Disrupt: Why Technology Alone Can’t Transform Education Justin Reich points out that pandemic inspired move to online learning hasn’t worked well because most students are not able to learn online because they are not self-directed and are not able to learn independently. Reich does a good job pointing out the complex problem but doesn’t offer a solution. Fortunately, in the post We Need More Autodidacts we offer a solution to this complex problem.
As you should have heard in the Learner’s Mindset Discussion video above we agree with McIntosh about student autonomy, but once again we go a fair bit further and address all the aspects of this complex problem. Incorporating more student autonomy is a good start and so is Genius Hour. But if these activities are used as treatments or stand-alone activities we argue that they won’t work because the problem that we need to address is much more complex and requires a much broader focus. Unless we adopt a Learners Mindset where you change your thinking and your learner’s thinking about learning, change the approach to learning, and create a significant learning environment in which you give your learner’s choice ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities you run the risk of running an interesting learning activity that will have minimal long term impact.
Even though constructivist learning theorists for many decades promoted the benefits of self-directed learning or autodidactism it wasn’t until the COVID crisis of 2020 and the mass forced remote learning that most educators had realized that too many students were not suited or prepared to learn online. Why? Justin Reich (2020) points to research in his book, A Failure to Disrupt: Why Technology Alone Can’t Transform Education, which shows that the learners who are most successful in an online or blended environment that requires self-pacing and personal motivation are those who are already successful in school. These self-directed, self-motivated, and academically prepared learners will succeed in any learning environment because they know how to learn and assess the quality of their own work. The problem that we face is that the vast majority of students are dependent on their teachers to direct their learning and to administer standardized testing. If autodidactic learners are able to learn in any type of environment then we should be asking how do we help our learners become autodidacts and adopt a learner’s mindset. I have explored this notion further in the post, We Need More Autodidacts and the related Learner’s Mindset Discussion.
Our research in the Digital Learning and Leading (DLL) program at Lamar University, our experience in the School of Instructor Education at Vancouver Community college over the past several years, and several decades of related research and experience in a wide variety of learning environments have confirmed that if you create a significant learning environment where you give your learners choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities (CSLE+COVA) you can incorporate assessment FOR/AS learning which can help shift a learner toward a learner’s mindset. We have also learned through our experience and research that incorporating feedforward or educative formative assessment will also help to continue that shift toward the learner’s mindset. By giving learners choice over most aspects of their learning experience and through the use of authentic learning opportunities and ePortfolios, our students over the past several years have incorporated many aspects of the assessment as learning perspective which are essential to the learner’s mindset.
Unfortunately, all too often there is a very different learning environment that our students experience in the courses and programs I have developed and instructed than the type of the learning environment that my students are able to create for their learners in their organizations. Finding the right balance between assessment of learning, assessment for learning, and assessment as learning is one more factor that plays a significant role in the learning environment. In much the same way that we have explored and differentiated the role of choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities we have to do the same for assessment OF/FOR/AS learning.
Rather than add to the decades of literature on assessment OF/FOR/AS learning I will draw upon the key ideas and summarize the salient points that are most important to contributing to a significant learning environment.
For those who prefer a more typical written definition the New South Wales (Australia) Education Standards Authority (2017) provide a good summary of “assessment for, as, and of learning”
Assessment of learning assists teachers in using evidence of student learning to assess achievement against outcomes and standards. Sometimes referred to as ‘summative assessment’, it usually occurs at defined key points during a teaching work or at the end of a unit, term or semester, and may be used to rank or grade students. The effectiveness of assessment of learning for grading or ranking purposes depends on the validity, reliability, and weighting placed on any one task. Its effectiveness as an opportunity for learning depends on the nature and quality of the feedback.
Assessment for learning involves teachers using evidence about students’ knowledge, understanding, and skills to inform their teaching. Sometimes referred to as ‘formative assessment’, it usually occurs throughout the teaching and learning process to clarify student learning and understanding.
Assessment as learning occurs when students are their own assessors. Students monitor their own learning, ask questions and use a range of strategies to decide what they know and can do, and how to use assessment for new learning.
The following assessment OF/FOR/AS learning table is a compilation of from a wide variety of resources that goes a bit further than simple definitions (Chappuis et al., 2012; Fenwick & Parsons, 2009; McNamee & Chen, 2005; Rowe, 2012; Schraw, 2001; Sparks, 1999):
Assessment
Of Learning
For Learning
As Learning
Type
Summative
Formative
Formative
What
Teachers determine the progress or application of knowledge or skills against a standard.
Teachers and peers check progress and learning to help learners to determine how to improve.
Learner takes responsibility for their own learning and asks questions about their learning and the learning process and explores how to improve.
Who
Teacher
Teacher & Peers
Learner & Peers
How
Formal assessments used to collect evidence of student progress and may be used for achievement grading on grades.
Involves formal and informal assessment activities as part of learning and to inform the planning of future learning.
Learners use formal and informal feedback and self-assessment to help understand the next steps in learning.
When
Periodic report
Ongoing feedback
Continual reflection
Why
Ranking and reporting
Improve learning
Deeper learning and learning how to learn
Emphasis
Scoring, grades, and competition
Feedback, support, and collaboration
Collaboration, reflection, and self-evaluation
If we want to encourage our learners to become more autodidactic it would then seem reasonable to shift from assessment of learning to assessment for learning and ultimately get to assessment as learning. We see this perspective from Lorna Earl (2012) in her highly cited text Assessment as Learning: Using Classroom Assessment to Maximise Student Learning.
Earl’s assessment pyramids are featured in many different sources and her argument that the traditional assessment of learning is the dominant form of assessment is widely accepted. Even though she calls for a balance in the use of assessment of/for/as learning her revised assessment pyramid that replaces assessment of learning with assessment as learning as the base of the pyramid still doesn’t represent a realistic balance nor an effective way to incorporate assessment into the learning environment.
Rather than view assessment of/for/as learning as hierarchical it may be more effective to view assessment of/for/as learning more holistically as more of an interplay of assessment within the learning environment. The National Forum for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education in Ireland (2017) offers a wonderful perspective on assessment of/for/as learning that emphasizes the interplay of the different types of assessment and the key roles that the assessment and the people involved play.
While some learning theorists may desire to craft a potential learning environment that uses assessment as learning, the reality we face, and that our learners face is not theoretical. We live in a world where we use credentialing exams and other forms of standardized testing and while we have seen a recent move toward implementing formative feedback most educators’ reality reveals that assessment of learning dominates. Moving toward assessment for learning and assessment as learning will only be possible if we look at the bigger picture. We need to help educators to recognize that we are not asking for a full pendulum swing away from assessment of learning to assessment as learning with assessment for learning somewhere in the middle. We are acknowledging that an interplay of all three is not only realistic it will be the most productive approach to improving the learning environment.
We must also acknowledge that our teaching and learning environment are dramatically influenced by the assessments we use. If we consider assessment of/for/as learning as an integral part of the learning environment and we look to fully integrate assessment as part of the learning process then we do our learners justice by helping them to experience a balance in the assessment of/for/as learning. If we model an integrated approach to assessment of/for/as learning then we will be equipping our learners so that they too can integrate assessment of/for/as learning into their own learning environments that they create for their learners.
While this more focused examination of assessment of/for/as learning may provide a novel perspective for some, we have been incorporating the assessment of/for/as learning inter-relationship in the creation of our significant learning environments and when we give learners choice, ownership and voice through authentic learning. This assessment as learning perspective is a practical way to move into what the researcher Mizerow would argue is transformational learning. Mizerow (2000 & 2010) argues that you do not learn things until you tell someone about what you have learned. The transformation to deeper learning happens in the reflective process and the sharing of your learning process with others.
The entire shift toward the learner’s mindset includes the shift toward assessment as learning and you and the following posts and video are a few examples of how we have been supporting and exploring how to help learners become self-directed or autodidactic.
Contribution to Your Learning and the Learning Community
The assessment as learning model is realized in the ADL program and courses through the Contribution to Your Learning and the Learning Community collaboration and reflection component of each course.
In addition to viewing the Assessment As Learning Video posted at the top of the page, ADL students are required to also view the following video and then consider their contribution to their learning and their learning community.
Contribution to Your Learning and the Learning Community
“At some point, to be powerful performers in life as well as self-directed learners, students must learn how to assess the quality of their own work” Creating Significant Learning Experiences by Fink, L. D. (2013, p. 103).
This critical reflection allows you to evaluate your ability to be a self-directed learner by getting you to self-assess your contributions to your own learning and to the learning of your classmates. Learning to self-assess is an important part of your being a self-directed and lifelong learner.
You will be self-assessing your contributions to your learning and to the learning community at the end of each course.
Directions: (Expectations)
For each course, you are to select a numerical score from the self-assessment marking guide and then write a rationale (min 500-800** words) that supports and justifies the numerical score you have selected. This rationale will address what is working, what you can do better, and will highlight your contributions to your learning and to the learning of the community. Please provide specific details in your rationale. The rationale must also list the 3-5 members of your base group community with whom you consistently collaborate. The rationale must list a numerical score, include links to your work, and be submitted as a link to a post on your ePortfolio.
**Accelerated ADL option: For those who are currently taking two ADL courses at the same time, you can combine the two separate course Contributions to Your Learning Community reflections into one unified reflection on the condition that you reflect on and articulate how your collaborations impact the connecting of ideas from the two courses. This is much more than just stating that you did combine the two reflections; you need to explain how you combined your collaborations and what was the impact of doing so.
Note: If your rationale lacks specific details and does not support your score (too high or too low) you may be asked to redo the rationale before the score is adjusted and is recorded.
Self-Assessment Marking Guide
Score 90-100
Key Contributions
Contributed to and helped build your core collaboration group.
Provided peer feedback to your core group members.
Revised all assignments and reflected on revisions in this contribution to learning activity.
Completed ALL of the course readings, videos and supporting resources.
Met the various course activity deadlines indicated in the calendar.
Supporting Contributions
Took leadership responsibility in your base group and the course.
Contributed to your learning and the learning of your colleagues by participating in ALL activities.
Active contributions in the various course forums.
You posted in a timely fashion so others can respond to your posting.
Your postings reflect breadth and depth of thinking with research to support your thinking and is cited using APA.
Additional postings were made that did not require research but were rather to contribute to the learning.
Score 80 – 89.5
All of the key contributions were met.
One of the supporting contributions was not met.
Score 70-79.5
One of the key contributions was not met or and one or more of the supporting contributions was not met.
Score 0 – 69.5
More than one of the key contributions were not met and more than one of the supporting contributions was not met.
This guide is provided in each of the ADL courses.
Alberta Education. (2003). Types of classroom Assessment http://www.learnalberta.ca/content/mewa/html/assessment/types.html
Assessment OF/FOR/AS Learning. (2017, March). [National Forum]. The National Forum for the enhancement of teaching and learning in higher education. https://www.teachingandlearning.ie/our-priorities/student-success/assessment-of-for-as-learning/
Chappuis, J., Stiggins, R. J., Chappuis, S., & Arter, J. (2012). Classroom assessment for student learning: Doing it right-using it well. Pearson Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Earl, L. M. (2012). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning. Corwin Press.
Earl, L. M., & Manitoba School Programs Division. (2006). Rethinking classroom assessment with purpose in mind: Assessment for learning, assessment as learning, assessment of learning. Manitoba
Education, Citizenship and Youth. https://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/assess/wncp/index.html
Fenwick, T. J., & Parsons, J. (2009). The art of evaluation: A resource for educators and trainers. Thompson Educational Publishing.
McNamee, G. D., & Chen, J.-Q. (2005). Dissolving the Line between assessment and teaching. Educational Leadership, 63(3), 72–76.
Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress. Jossey-Bass Publishers. San Francisco, CA.
National Forum for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. (2017, March 30). Expanding our Understanding of Assessment and Feedback in Irish Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.teachingandlearning.ie/publication/expanding-our-understanding-of-assessment-and-feedback-in-irish-higher-education/.
NSW Education Standards Authority. (n.d.). Assessment For, As and of Learning. Retrieved December 7, 2020, from https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/k-10/understanding-the-curriculum/assessment/approaches
Rowe, J. (2012). Assessment as learning—ETEC 510. http://etec.ctlt.ubc.ca/510wiki/Assessment_as_Learning
Schraw, G. (2001). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. In Metacognition in learning and instruction (pp. 3–16). Springer.
Sparks, D. (1999). Assessment without victims: An interview with Rick Stiggins. Journal of Staff Development, 20, 54–56.
If there is one significant lesson that educators can learn from the COVID pandemic it is that shifting to virtual teaching or remote teaching without a plan or preparation was hard at best and more chaotic for students, teachers, and families than anyone could have predicted.
With the dispersion of vaccines, we are now hearing about a potential resumption of school this coming fall of 2021. But, once schools return to traditional face-to-face attendance, will they revert to pre-COVID norms? Perhaps this past year of reactive remote learning will help school leaders to recognize that we need to be proactive and leverage technology to reshape their schools and transform student learning outcomes in the process.
The question we need to address is how do we go from hard pivot to seamless integration? The following are links to articles, blog posts, YouTube videos, TED Talks, and books that were used or referenced in my session for the School Leadership Progress & Innovation Series at Governors State University.
Links to Authentic Learning & CSLE+COVA posts:
I have been advocating authentic learning or project-based learning and creating significant learning environments for decades both professionally and personally. Talking the talk as an academic takes on a much more significant perspective when you walk the walk in your personal life.
The CLSE+COVA section of this site is also a great starting place to see how to create a significant learning environment by giving your learners choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities.
