Classrooms and Cognative Learning Theory

          Cognitivists explain learning in terms of the thinking process (Lever-Duffy, & McDonald, 2008). Although this is not observable like behaviorist theories during the process of learning it can be displayed through the application of the newly acquired information (Laureate Education Inc., 2011).  Cognitive Learning Theories are strongly based upon connections within new content and making solid connections to prior student knowledge (Laureate Education Inc., 2011). Cognitivist believe the connections of information are the key to deep learning that allows for application and synthesis (Orey, 2001).  Can

            Cognitivism can be a difficult learning theory because it deals in the abstract, but it brings to light ways to move students beyond rote memorization for a test into a far more usable and complex understanding of knowledge. 

Cues, Questions, and Advanced Organizers

            Cues, Questioning and Advanced organizers are all excellent examples of the theories of Cognitivists.  Cues, are fun ways to make connections between prior knowledge and new information.  They can be (Pitler, Hubell, & Kuhn, 2012).  A fun way to use cues is through a riddle that leads students to new content.  Cues facilitate connections they can be graphical, auditory, or kinesthetic therefore helping teachers meet the needs of all learners. 

            Questions, are everywhere in a classroom.  There are many types of questions and questioning strategies that it seems silly to talk about it but the questions a teacher asks, when then are asked, and the level of complexity can make a huge difference in the depth of knowledge that is acquired by the learner (Pitler, et al., 2012).  Great example of this is essential questions or bid idea questions.  These questions attempt to create organization in information that is being learned by connecting them to an overall category that according to cognitive learning theories will help make lasting connections that facilitate the movement of learning from the sort term memory to the long term memory of the learner (Orey, 2001). 

            Advanced Organizers, are a great way to help a student organize and process new information.  There is a large variety of tools and methods in which a teacher can implement the use of organizers, but again the key is connections and organization (Pitler, et al., 2012).  It is the connections and organization of information through the use of organizers that makes them a great example of cognitive learning theory (Orey, 2001).  Our school district is big on the use of advanced organizers.  As a district we use Thinking Maps, a series of eight maps each of which is used for a different cognitive process to help solidify information during the learning process.  They are a fabulous tool and since we all use them students become familiar with them therefore the content becomes more important than the map.  For example we use a circle map for brainstorming, and if I tell my students we are going to brainstorm, they automatically draw a circle map. 

Concept Maps

            Concept Maps, are an explicit example of an advanced organizer.  Personally at first glance the maps in this week’s reading seems overwhelming and difficult to understand and follow.  However, after thinking of how I could use the tool in my classroom I became more comfortable with the use and ideas.  I do not feel that this tool can be used for everything but they defiantly have a place in some lessons especially science or social connections that have more complexity.  This complex map is about connections, and deep understanding which evolves through the “linking words” (Novak, & Cañas, 2008).  It is not just about connected words or phrases but how the words and phrases connect to each other.  This type of analysis brings an advanced organizer to the next level.  These maps make a visual representation of the cognitive process that occurs in the brain and are therefore in perfect alignment with Cognitivist Learning Theories (Novak, & Cañas, 2008).

Summarizing and Note Taking

            These are valuable classroom tools that help with synthesis and depth of knowledge (Pitler, et al., 2012).  I personal struggle with teaching these skills to my third grade students, due to their complexity.    It is the first year where they are really learning these skills and how to apply them more independently.  I acknowledge their value and I integrate and specifically teach these skills throughout the year. 

            Summarizing is a difficult skill for children to learn.  Deciphering what information is essential and what information can be excluded can be a complex process.  Using guided strategies and technology a student should be taught how to ask the right questions in order to summarize.  Pitler (2012) gives us the idea of placing rules on the summary to help students focus on the important aspect of the text.  I think that having a frame of reference to pull information can be helpful when students are learning this process.  Additionally, I plan to implement the idea of using tracking changes option in MSWord to help model and show my students how to summarize (Pitler, et al., 2012). 

            Note taking is a complex and personal task, and most students are not taught how to take good notes (Pitler, et al., 2012).  There are numerous ways to take notes and notes are essential for studying and helping to learn information that needs to be applied (Pitler, et al., 2012).  I personally begin teaching my students to take notes by providing them a copy of my notes with missing information.  This allows my students to not be overwhelmed with writing, but they need to remain engaged to complete the information.  I also use graphic organizers and T-charts to sort organize and categorize complex information.  As the year progresses I front load the notes less and less allowing the students to slowly take ownership and responsibility for this task and the knowledge associated with the process. 

            Cognitivism attempts to explain the processes of the mind and how a learner will process information from sensory input (Orey, 2001).  This theory has some good foundation and I think it heavily relies on other learning theories to make it complete especially Neuroscience and the theory of Multiple Intelligences.  Regardless Cognitive Processing and Learning helps educators with many resources that help secure meaningful learning and not just rote memorization of fact (Laureate Education Inc., 2011).

Resources

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2011). Program five: Cognitive learning theory [Video webcast]. Bridging learning theory, instruction and technology. Retrieved from http://laureate.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5700267&CPURL=laureate.ecollege.com&Survey=1&47=2594577&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=0&bhcp=1

Lever-Duffy, J., & McDonald, J. (2008). Theoretical foundations (Laureate Education, Inc., custom ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Novak, J. D., & Cañas, A. J. (2008). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them, Technical Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01 Rev 01-2008. Retrieved from the Institute for Human and Machine Cognition Web site: http://cmap.ihmc.us/Publications/ResearchPapers/
TheoryUnderlyingConceptMaps.pdf

Orey, M. (Ed.). (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved

from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Main_Page

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E. R., & Kuhn, M. (2012). Using technology with classroom instruction that

            works (2^nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.