Technology That Supports Cognitive Learning Theory

Last week we looked at Behaviorism as a learning theory and established that much of its ideas are still very alive in everyday classrooms, and life.  However, by the latter half of the twentieth century, scholars like Gagne, Bloom, and Anderson began looking beyond what was simply observable in a lab.  As opposed to Behaviorism, Cognitivists believed that: “Changes in behavior are observed, but only as an indication of what is occurring in the learner’s head” (Learning Theories Knowledgebase, 2012).  In other words, we are not just programmed to spit out a specific response to every stimulus.  Rather, there are cognitive processes that actively occur.  According to Orey (Laureate Education, Inc., 2011) cognitive learning theory is really a collective of theories describing how the brain processes and stores information.  This week we looked into two instructional strategies based around cognitive learning theory.  I would like to take a moment to review these strategies as to their relation to the learning theory and application into my own classroom.

The first broad instructional strategy we will look at is called Cues, Questions, and Advanced Organizers by Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, and Malenoski (2007).  By their own definition this strategy: “Focuses on enhancing students’ ability to retrieve, use, and organize information about a topic” (p. 73).  This definition lends itself directly toward the cognitive learning theory as it focuses on information processing and storing.  Though the name of the strategy may seem daunting, it really comes down to different ways of organizing information so that students may access it more efficiently and make important links. The “cues” and “questions” are really built in to various forms of “advanced organizers.”  Though Pitler et al. discuss many technologies we can use to do this, they can essentially be summed into three larger categories.  

The first of these is Word Processors.  As an educator this is what most of us use to create the charts and tables we may call advanced organizers.  One idea I have not thought of is the use of a brochure for a field trip or other learning experience.  According to Pitler et al. (2007), a teacher could have students add all sorts of information from maps to agendas to interesting facts.

A second technology they discussed was the use of spreadsheets as advanced organizers.  Pitler et al. (2007) recommend this mostly in conjunction with a rubric.  Easy to set up formulas would allow students and teachers to plug in scores for categories established in a rubric.  This format is now easily calculated, saved, and duplicated for further use.

  Finally Pitler et al. (2007) discuss technologies that organize information for us.  At one end of this spectrum, we have programs like Inspiration that allow students and teachers to create all types of graphic organizers.  This is where the use of explicit cues and proper questioning techniques is essential.  From these, students are able to expand and analyze information while seeing the connections between it all.  They all discuss the use of other media that allows student to make visual-mental links to information, whether they are video sites, interactive tutorials, or maps of the stars.  This works well with Orey’s (2011) explanation the dual coding hypothesis, as students are able to link visual images with the linguistic data they are processing.  This visual image does not only have to be a picture (ex: of a cat), but could also be an image of a graphic organizer which allows them so see connections).

The second strategy we will look at is titled by Pitler et al. (2007) as Summarizing and Note Taking.  As the name says, this technique focuses: “On helping students separate important information from extraneous information and state the information in their own words” (Pitler et al., 2007, p. 119).  Again, we find this strategy to be in line with cognitive learning theory as it focuses on students’ processing and storing information.  As I am focusing primarily on the technologies that assist in this, I will again break this learning strategy into three broad categories.

Yet again, the first deals with an educator’s weapon of choice, a Word Processor.  They encourage the use of multiple note taking formats for maximum retention.  For example, students may write down notes supported by pictures.  In addition, they have to summarize the information, which helps improve comprehension.  This technique is called using “combination notes.”  Similar note taking techniques are described using other mediums, such as PowerPoint, but the main idea is the same.  One feature I was unaware of in Word is the AutoSummarize tool.  Though I have not tried it yet, it supposedly does exactly what the name explains.  I am a little weary of this, but am excited to try it out, especially on the newer versions Word. 

The second general category, and the one I am most excited about is the use of organizing and brainstorm software.  Pitler et al. (2007) describe several specifics ways to use concept maps to improve student understanding.  All of them start out with key questions or topics that branch into smaller sections.  I am not going to go into each type, but rather discuss them all as great ways to: “Help learners visualize ideas and connections between ideas” (Laureate Education, Inc., 2011).  The best techniques appear to involve the teacher setting up the main nodes of the graphic organizer.  From here, they leave holes for students to either fill in, create, or expand on.  In any case, it moves notes from a linear, often hard to follow, format to one that more closely resembles the connections our minds make when accessing and storing information.

Finally, Pitler et al. (2007) describe the use of communication software to help students organize and summarize learning, namely: wikis and blogs.  As I have discussed these at length in this blog already, I will not go into a ton of detail other than saying that these are great mediums for requiring students to take a chunk of knowledge, analyze what is important, and summarize what they have learned.  The advantage of these programs is that they are interactive, allowing for input from people anywhere in the world to help continue the conversation and advance learning.

In the end, I feel we have seen many great examples of learning strategies that closely align with cognitive learning theory.  We have also seen that technology appears to be paramount in maximizing these strategies effects.  Even though many examples were covered, I believe we are only scratching the surface in terms of both software and applications.  I encourage you to continue exploring what is out there and ask that if you find any golden nuggets you return to share with us here.

Resources:

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2011). Cognitive Learning Theories [DVD]. Bridging Learning Theory Instruction and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Learning Theories Knowledgebase (2012). Cognitivism at Learning-Theories.com. Retrieved March 14th, 2012 from http://www.learning-theories.com/cognitivism.html

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.