Education P572:
Theory and Method in the
Learning Sciences

Thu. 1-4, EIG 521   Instructor: Sasha Barab, Ph.D. sbarab@indiana.Edu (812) 856-8462 Room 4066, Education

Course Overview

Welcome to the course Education P572, Theory and Method in the Learning Sciences . Let me introduce myself. I am Dr. Sasha A. Barab (Ph.D., University of Connecticut), the Associate Director of the Center for Research on Learning and Technology and Associate Editor of the Journal of the Learning Sciences as well as Associate Professor of in Instructional System Technology and Cognitive Science (and most recently, Learning Sciences!) at Indiana University. I prefer to be called Sasha and try not to take professional titles and credentials too seriously—I believe that too many hierarchies can interfere with the collaborative learning context I hope to establish. My degree was in Educational Psychology and much of my work has been as a learning scientist.

The focus of this course is to help you develop a rich appreciation for the relationship between theoretical assumptions and practical convictions, especially as they relate to theories of learning and development. As an evolving discipline, there is no clear definition of what defines Learning Sciences. However, my current take is that Learning Sciences is an interdisciplinary field that draws on multiple theoretical perspectives and research paradigms from the human sciences so as to understand the nature and conditions of learning, cognition, development, and related areas of human performance. Learning scientists investigate cognition in its material, social, and cultural context but with the broad goal of conducting both laboratory-based and naturalistic investigations. The intent of this research is to develop evidence-based claims about how people learn that have practical, pedagogical, and theoretical implications. Further, from the perspective of the Learning Scientist, any investigation of teaching and learning must consider context, cognition, and architecture, which are treated as inextricably intertwined. As such, learning scientists need to have a strong grounding in theory development, an appreciation of mind, design training, and a rich methodological toolkit for evolving evidence-based claims.

This course will introduce and illustrate the proper use of these tools in providing insights into defining and solving problems. The emphasis will always be on the use of these theories to solve realistic and relevant problems drawn either from your own personal experience or from cases you will study. It is only when you have experienced applying these theories to actual problems that you can readily see their strengths and weaknesses. Additionally, given the applied nature of the field, we will pay special attention to the ways in which educators, trainers, counselors, parents, policy makers and many others can use these theories and methods to make their endeavors more productive and useful.

The word "tool" has been used several times already and it is an important one to understand in the context of this course. It is my belief that theories and methods are tools much like hammers and screwdrivers are tools. A hammer is a useful and effective tool if your task is to drive a nail into a board. You can try to use a screwdriver to drive a nail, but I suspect you will fail and wind up with cuts and bruises. Likewise, if you try to drive a screw with a hammer, the wood will split and the bond is unlikely to hold - but a screwdriver will accomplish the task very well. And despite the best efforts of our most clever tool makers, there is no such thing as a tool that meets all of our needs.

As you probably already know, there is no single theory of psychology, no dominant methodology. Theories and methods carry with them a world view, a conception of what it means to be human: what it means to learn something, to teach something, to know something, to be a person. It is important that we examine these world views so that we can better judge the appropriateness of using a particular theory and/or method. To extend the analogy, to a two year old child with a hammer in her hands, everything in the world needs a good pounding. If we limit ourselves to one or a few theories, or if we fail to see the kinds of assumptions that theory makes about the world, we will commit a similar error. If we limit ourselves to a behaviorist approach to learning, for example, we run the risk of regarding all of our behavior (from simple forms like disliking broccoli to complex forms like understanding quantum mechanics) as a function of reinforced practice. One of my major aims for the course is that you carry away with you an understanding of the variety of tools in your chosen field and a sense of when they are and are not best applied.

There are three major sections of the course. First, we will examine some of the core learning sciences articles, helping to connect you to the core ideas of the field. By the time we are done with these manuscripts you should have a strong familiarity with someof the core manuscripts in our field. Second, we will examine the history of cognitive science, including those fields that have given rise to its identity (the Gardner book). As part of this exploration, we will look at philosophical discussions as they relate to this history, helping you to establish a rich appreciation for the relations between theory development, practical implementation, and underlying philosophical assumptions. Third, will be your contributions to class discussions and your own professional development. It is your responsbility to inquire deeply into the different arguements, understanding their philosophical assumptions, their methodological and theoretical claims, relating these to pratical issues in the world and to your unique backgrounds.

I mentioned the diverse backgrounds and goals of the students in this class. This will present both opportunities and challenges. Some of you have an undergraduate major (or perhaps even a Master's degree) in psychology, philosophy, research or cognitive science while others may have very little background in these fields. I am going to assume that most of you do have a solid background in some of these disciplines and structure our activities based upon that assumption. But I will also provide suggestions for more introductory readings and tasks for those who need them. For example, those just beginning in psychology will find the Stanovich book useful. Those new to scientific argumentation might want to read the Shavelson and Towne book. Those wanting a more general sweep of eductational psychology and what are some of the lessons with respect to how people know and learn might want to read the Bransford, Brown, and Cocking book.

[Return to TOP]

Course Requirements :

Class sessions will consist mainly of class discussion of basic issues and distinctions necessary to understand the field of learning sciences and what it means to be a learning scientist. Class sessions and reading assignments are listed below. You are expected to attend class sessions and to contribute to the discussion of the issues raised in the readings and in class. If you have questions about the readings, please raise them in class.

Your grade in this course will be determined in the following ways:

•  Reading Presentation (30%) I will provide more details on this assignment in class. Basically, you will select a class reading, whether article or chapter and lead a discussion in class. The goal is to provide an overview of the core argument (5 mins.) and then facilitate a rich discussion among class members. You should also come prepared with some rich discussion points for your class mates. Each class member will likely facilitate two-three discussions over the semester.

•  Reflective Paper (10%) One short (1 page) reflective paper. I want you to take one of the manuscripts assigned in class and write a one page essay overviewing the core argument/message. In addition to overviewing the paper, I also want you to critically reflect on the argument. Here, you should provide one paragraph on what you see as valuable and one paragraph on the shortcomings of the article.

•  Integrative Essay (15%) One short (2-3 pages) application paper due Nov 15th - In this essay I want you to integrate two-three of the works used in class to build an argument about how people known and learn. The idea is not simply to summarize the manuscripts, but to integrate them to advance a fundamental argument that has your own voice at its core. However, while you must decide what argument to make, you should also build off of these works such that they are brought together to lend support for the argument you are making. In this way, the integrative essay is a balance of a reflective paper and a personal essay.

•  Socratic Hour (15%) This will be three one-hour events in which I come with a list of questions directly related to the readings and our class discussions and I go around the room asking different people questions. You will have time to think through your responses but will not be able to re-read the original works and will instead be required to respond in the moment to the best of your ability. These while being a little stressful, should be educational and somewhat enjoyable. I will work hard to mantain a professional air while also establishing a supportive context for learning.

•  Midterm Exam (20%) –For this, you will have an examination in which you can bring whatever resources you would like and you will type up your answers on the computer. The questions will all be based directly on the readings that we have completed up to the point and while you can write anything before, I would ask that all submitted text was typed during the examination allocated time period. The goals of this examinations are to provide you with a better understanding of you current beliefs, and to trace these beliefs in terms of their historical origin. We can collectively determine if this will be take home or in class, but my preference is in class so I really hear what you are believing and not what you elegantly compose.

•  Class Participation (10%)--My subjective estimate of your contribution to class discussions, attendance, etc. I will, from time to time, ask you to complete some tasks outside of class and bring the results back to share. I will not formally grade these tasks but will assess your work as we talk about the tasks in class. For example, I may ask you to complete “1 minute papers” after a particular presentation.

[Return to TOP]

Readings:

Books:

American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (5 th ed.). Washington , DC : American Psychological Association.

Bransford, J.D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R.R. (Eds). (2002). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington , D.C. : National Academy Press.

* Gardner, H. (1985). The Mind's New Science: A History of the Cognitive Revolution. Basic Books, New York .

Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society . Cambridge , MA : Harvard University Press.

Shavelson, R. & Towne, L. (2002). Scientific research in education . Washington , DC : National Academy Press. Available on-line at http://www.nap.edu/books/0309082919/html .

Stanovich, K. E. (2004). How to think straight about psychology (7 th ed.). Boston : Allyn and Bacon.

Manuscripts and Chapters:

* Barab, S. A., Cherkes-Julkowski, M., Swenson, R., Garrett. S., Shaw, R. E., & Young, M. (1999). Principles of self-organization: Ecologizing the learner-facilitator system. The Journal of The Learning Sciences, 8 (3&4), 349-390 .

* Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of The Learning Sciences, 2 (2), 141-178.

* Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32-42.

* Cobb, P., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32 (1), 9-13.

Cognitive Science (1993) 17 (1), Jan-March. Special Issue: Situated Action. Norwood , NJ : Ablex.

* Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1990). Anchored instruction and its relationship to situated cognition. Educational Researcher, 19 , 2-10.

Cole, M. & Engestrom, Y. (1993). A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions. Cambridge , UK : Cambridge University Press.

* Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453-494). Hillsdale , NJ : Erlbaum.

* Greeno, J. G. (1989). A perspective on thinking. American Psychologist, 44, 134-141.

* Goldstone, R. L., & Son, J. Y. (2005). The transfer of scientific principles using concrete and idealized simulations. The Journal of the Learning Sciences , 14 , 69-110.

* Hay, K. E., & Barab, S. A., (2001). Constructivism in practice: A comparison and contrast between apprenticeship and constructionist learning environments. The Journal of the Learning Sciences , 10 (3), 281-322.

* Lave, J. (1996). The practice of learning: The problem with "context." In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.) Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp.3-32). Boston , MA.: Cambridge University Press.

Whitehead, A.N. (1929). The aims of education and other essays . New York : MacMillan.

[Return to TOP]

Weekly Topic Outline

[Return to TOP]

Expectations

I am not so concerned with assigning grades but it is the Policy of the School of Education that every student be assigned a grade for the course. I will follow the grading policy adopted for graduate courses in the School of Education found on lucky page 13 of the Bulletin of the School of Education Graduate Program :

A = Outstanding achievement, exceptionally high level
A- = Excellent achievement, very high level
B+ = Very good achievement, thorough command
B = Good achievement, solid, acceptable performance
B- = Fair achievement, acceptable
etc.

These words are very subjective and grades will be determined based on my best judgment.

NOTE: I do not give incompletes except under extraordinary circumstances. Keep up with the reading and attend classes and you will have no trouble succeeding.

[Return to TOP]