# data[].attributes.headline
Using Positive Reinforcement in the Classroom Article

# data[].attributes.subject
Using Positive Reinforcement in the Classroom Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Positive Reinforcement Positively Helps Students in the Classroom

# data[].attributes.body
Life and theory of cognitive development. https://www.verywellmind.com/jean-piaget-biography-1896-1980-2795549

# data[].attributes.body
Operant Conditioning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Positive Reinforcement - The Big Bang Theory

# data[].attributes.headline
How to Use Operant Conditioning in the Classroom

# data[].attributes.subject
How to Use Operant Conditioning in the Classroom

# data[].attributes.headline
Erikson's Stages of Psychosocial Development

# data[].attributes.subject
Erikson's Stages of Psychosocial Development

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmZpabCYzhE

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.ldatschool.ca/working-memory-difficulties/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When I ask about the length of the human attention span, I receive answers that range from 8 seconds to 45 minutes, with some predictable stops along the way (30 seconds, or 7-10 minutes or 20 minutes are all popular choices). If these numbers are right, how does anybody make it through a feature-length movie, much less an extended director's cut? There's a movie theater near my house that shows an 11-hour Lord of the Rings marathon every holiday season. Knowing the length of your audience's attention span could really influence how you design learning experiences, but how do we reconcile the difference between 8 seconds and 11 hours?

So, what's the real capacity of our attention? As with most things, the answer is it depends. Attention is fundamentally a resource allocation problem; what and how much attention should we pay to the stimuli around us?

If you are building a learning environment and want to best leverage the attention of your audience, you should consider the following:

How do memory and attention act as a filter?

How do people manage attention as a finite resource?

How does willpower impact attention?

How is attention a social experience?

What are the implications of attention for learning design?

Memory and Attention as a Filter

At any given time we are flooded with sensory inputs. Right now as I'm writing this article, I'm perceiving the sound of the heating system, the feel of the couch I'm sitting on, the temperature, the fact that my feet are a bit cold, the buzz of an email on my phone, the books on the bookshelf, the papers on the table, and the thought that maybe I should have gotten coffee before I settled in to get some writing done. And that is just a sliver of what is going on in my relatively quiet space. In busier environments like work or public spaces or the Internet, how do we decide what to pay attention to?

First, it might be useful to look at how memory enables attention. The best model for this is the Information Processing Model (see Figure 1), one of the primary memory models and a classic from your introduction to psychology textbook.

All the sensory stimuli coming in (sights, sounds, scents) go into sensory memory, where they're held for a very brief time (at most a few seconds). There, sensory memory acts as a buffer that holds the information just long enough for you to decide whether or not it's important enough to shift your focus.

Imagine driving to work in a busy city. How many cars might you see on an average commute? Dozens? Hundreds? Most of the cars are immediately discarded from sensory memory as unimportant. You "see" them but only in the most cursory way.

Some of the cars will make it to working memory (also called short-term memory). This form of memory lasts considerably longer: 20 seconds or so. The cars immediately adjacent to your car, for example, might be tracked in working memory as you wonder: Am I leaving enough following distance? Is there someone in my blind spot?

There is debate about the capacity of working memory, although it is commonly accepted that it typically contains 3-4 items and almost never more than 7 discreet items. The timeframe for working memory can be extended through continued interaction or rehearsal. For example, if you see a sign that indicates you need to get off at exit 42A, you can repeat that to yourself to keep it in working memory until you actually need the information.

Now, we are starting to see implications for the design of learning environments. For example, too many discreet items in a learning environment at once are likely to overwhelm working memory. The really important question is: What makes it to long-term memory? This is the goal of much learning design-to help people retain key information in their long-term memory.

Which cars were memorable?

The Tesla with the funky racing stripes?

The big white SUV that kept tailgating you?

The silver Honda that was the same make and model as the car your ex-boyfriend/girlfriend drives?

The car your neighbor drives, which you see every day when you are leaving home?

What characteristics caused these cars to be memorable? In all likelihood, they were:

Unusual or surprising

Provoking an emotional reaction

Meaningful or relevant to you

Something you had previous experience with

Something you interacted with during the drive

Something you had repeated exposure to

If a car didn't meet any of these criteria, it's extremely unlikely that you would remember it for more than a few seconds. This isn't a brain dysfunction. Our brains are designed to forget things that don't matter. The list of characteristics or criteria that caused certain cars to be memorable can be used as a checklist for learning materials. If you don't have one or more of these bullet points in your learning design it is unlikely that people will retain the information you are presenting.

We've all seen this horrible slide design in some presentation or class (see Figure 2), right? A good speaker might be able to make the content relevant and interesting, but all too often this sort of material gets uploaded in online learning environments without any further context or explanation.

How does this slide compare against our list? Badly. The only way that someone will retain information from dense, context-less presentation slides like this is if the content is meaningful or relevant to them. This, however, is the one thing that the designer has the least control over.

Managing Attention: A Finite Resource

I sometimes describe instructional designers as the ruthless managers of cognitive load. It is their job to ensure that their learners' cognitive capacity is being allocated in the right place. John Sweller's cognitive load theory (see Figure 3) describes three main types of cognitive load: intrinsic, germane, and extraneous.

Intrinsic cognitive load represents inherent task complexity, germane cognitive load is the effort the user must exert to incorporate information, and extraneous cognitive load can be equated to noise in the system. The implications of this model on the design of learning environments are probably obvious: the more effort one must spend on extraneous load, the less capacity there will be for intrinsic and germane function. Additionally, the intrinsic cognitive load can't be too high or the learner will be unable to process the information.

Allocation of attention

Immediacy is another variable that impacts the amount of effort required from the learner. If I ask you "On a scale of 1- 5, how interested are you in watching a video on printer repair right now (see Figure 4)?" you'd probably tell me your interest level is close to zero. If I were to make you watch the video regardless, it would probably be extremely difficult for you to allocate your attention to the video.

Now imagine your printer is broken and you need to print handouts for a crucial meeting that starts in one hour. You would likely find that same video much easier to pay attention to because you now have an immediate need to consume the information so that you can fix your printer. Even if the material is not produced in a polished or entertaining format, it's not hard to allocate attention because it is urgent and relevant to you.

I often ask learning groups the following questions:

Would you rather have $10 today or $11 tomorrow?

Would you rather have $10 today or $11 in a year?

Would you rather have $10 today or $1000 in a year?

Typically, the response to the first question is evenly mixed. In the second question, everybody wants the money now. In the third question, people are generally willing to wait for the significantly larger reward. Behavioral economists refer to this phenomenon as hyperbolic discounting, which essentially means that we prefer to get the reward now. And if we must wait for the reward, we discount its value (the drop-off falls in a hyperbolic curve, hence the name).

Most behaviors that humans have trouble with have an element of hyperbolic discounting. For example, a potential consequence of smoking is premature death, but it's so far in the future that it's discounted, and often the behavior does not change. Along the same line of thinking, the rewards for exercise, which requires expending a good deal of effort, can take weeks or months to show up, making it difficult to sustain the behavior.

So, how does this relate to learning? The main reward for learning something is getting to use it. The currency we expend to achieve that reward is effort and attention. I don't think it's a coincidence that we talk about paying attention. If we think back to the printer example, attention was not difficult to allocate when the knowledge could be applied to an immediate need. In the absence of a reward (or need) though, attention allocation would have been extremely difficult.

There are two obvious strategies that can be employed to address this. First, when possible, move the point of learning close to the point of use. Short informational videos are staples of just-in-time software training. A short video on how to assign a hyperlink to a button in Axure doesn't need to be entertaining or engaging-it just needs to be clear and easy to find when a learner needs it.

Sometimes, however, it's not possible to delay the point of learning. If, for example, you need someone to learn to recognize the symptoms of money laundering in financial transactions or to know how to evacuate a building in case of an earthquake, a just-in-time approach probably isn't practical. In these cases, you can create the feeling of immediate need. For example, if you were in a class and somebody put a broken printer down on the desk in front of you and said, "Your task is to fix this printer and here's a repair video for you to use for reference," would that make it easier for you to pay attention to the video? For most people, it probably would.

Willpower and attention

In 1999, Professors Baba Shiv and Alexander Fedorikhin conducted an experiment. They divided participants into two groups and asked them to memorize sequences of numbers. The first group had to memorize two-digit numbers (a relatively simple cognitive task); the second group had to memorize seven-digit numbers (a significantly more difficult cognitive task).

Next, they offered participants a snack. Participants could have either a healthy fruit salad or an indulgent piece of chocolate cake (see Figure 5). Participants that were given the cognitively more challenging task took the chocolate cake almost twice as often as the participants in the easy condition.

This study, along with research by Roy Baumeister at Florida State University and Kathleen Vohs at the University of Minnesota, suggests that willpower is an exhaustible resource and that when it's depleted, people are less able to exert it until their batteries have recharged, so to speak. By exerting willpower to concentrate on the harder memorization task, participants had less willpower to make good nutritional choices.

A typical brain represents approximately 2-3 percent of a person's body weight, but uses close to 20 percent of blood glucose, our primary energy source.Concentrating uses a lot of resources. You can force yourself to pay attention to anything, but you pay a price for conscious focus of attention to material that you have no compelling interest in. It's probably easier for most people to watch the Hobbits' journey to Mordor than to do their taxes, but they can force themselves to focus on their 1040 forms if they have to. The question is, how long can they maintain that focus?

Attention is a Social Experience

The fact that people pay attention to other people's faces is well documented in research literature. There may even be a specific brain region dedicated to it. People pay more attention to faces in photographs than to other stimuli, and also tend to look where other people are looking, which helps determine where and how people allocate attention.

Research by Sandra Okita, Jeremy Bailenson, and Daniel Schwartz at MIT in 2008 found that the mere perception of social interaction impacts not only learners' attention, but also their memory and retention of the learning material.

Okita et al. had learners put on virtual reality goggles to interact with a virtual science tutor. Half the participants were deliberately misled to believe they were interacting with a real person, while the other half knew they were interacting with a computer. Both groups received identical information from the same virtual tutor. However, participants that believed they were interacting with a real person showed more arousal, focused more on the tutor, did better on the post test, and retained more information overall.

Implications of Attention for Learning Design

Given what we know about attention, I use and recommend the following strategies for the design of learning environments to attract and retain learners' attention:

Make it immediately useful

Reduce extraneous cognitive load

Use emotion and stories

Incorporate the cues that make material sticky

Make it immediately useful

If the learner has something specific that they want to use the learning material to do, your best option is to make the learning material easy to locate and get out of their way. But if the learner isn't bringing their own motivation to the table, you should structure the learning experiences around authentic, achievable goals.

For example, if they didn't already have a goal of their own, which of the following Photoshop classes would give beginners a concrete goal they can accomplish (see Figure 6)?

To create a sense of immediacy (where there is none), the problem needs to feel real. Take a look at the two screens below from a terrorism training course for California police officers (developed by Allen Interactions and used with their permission). (see Figure 7).

In the screen on the left, the user needs to click three different medallions to see three different legal definitions of terrorism. In the screen on the right, the user is looking at items on the inside of a car during a routine traffic stop. The objective is to identify items that seem significant and click to add them to the observation notebook. Both examples involve interactivity, and the gestures the user must perform are nearly identical (click an item to reveal relevant text). I've used a demo of this course with dozens of students in instructional design workshops, and they all report that it's much easier to pay attention to the module on the right, which is grounded in an authentic situation.

Reduce extraneous cognitive load

It's important for learners to be able to reserve as much cognitive capacity as possible for the actual learning content. Effort that is spent on extraneous tasks like logging in or navigation leaves less capacity for learning. Content can also impact cognitive capacity. Conversational content, for example, usually has a lower cognitive load than formal speech (see Figure 8).

Use emotion and stories

One of the cues that tell us something is important is our own emotional and physiological reaction. Insurance procedure information, often presented in a context-free and dispassionate format (see Figure 9 left), is likely to stream past like the dozens of cars we don't pay any attention to on our daily commute. But with the right learning design, even something as dry as insurance training can use stories and emotion to attract and retain attention (See Figure 9 right):

Incorporate the cues that make material sticky

Create learning experiences that use some or all of the following:

Make it unusual or surprising

Use appropriate repetition

Provoke an emotional reaction

Make it meaningful or relevant to the learner

Tie it to the learner's prior experience

Give them something to interact with

While involuntary attention can be grabbed by motion or a sudden flash, the kind of sustained voluntary attention that learning requires is supported by the nature of the learning materials and by the learner's past experience with, and current need for, the learning materials.

Learners will pay attention to even the most poorly designed materials if their need is pressing enough, or if they already have enough context and experience to draw meaning from them. The feeling of need can also be created by presenting learners with immediate real world problems to solve. In all cases, reducing the cognitive load of extraneous interface elements gives learners more cognitive capacity for learning.

Comments are closed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Memory and Attention: Building Effective and Engaging Learning Environments

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When I ask about the length of the human attention span, I receive answers that range from 8 seconds to 45 minutes, with some predictable stops along the way (30 seconds, or 7-10 minutes or 20 minutes are all popular choices).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How We Make Memories: Crash Course Psychology #13

# data[].attributes.body
Life and influence on psychology. https://www.verywellmind.com/lev-vygotsky-biography-2795533

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is Classical Conditioning? in 2 minutes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How drawing helps you think | Ralph Ammer | TEDxTUM

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Bobo Doll Experiment - Albert Bandura on Social Learning

# data[].attributes.headline
Vygotsky's Socialcultural theory of development

# data[].attributes.subject
Vygotsky's Socialcultural theory of development

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Kohlberg’s 6 Stages of Moral Development

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Print Version
Tips and Techniques

Communicate

Have students identify specific problems, difficulties, or confusions. Don't waste time working through problems that students already understand.

If students are unable to articulate their concerns, determine where they are having trouble by asking them to identify the specific concepts or principles associated with the problem.

Make students articulate their problem solving process.

In a one-on-one tutoring session, ask the student to work his/her problem out loud. This slows down the thinking process, making it more accurate and allowing you to access understanding.

When working with larger groups you can ask students to provide a written"two-column solution." Have students write up their solution to a problem by putting all their calculations in one column and all of their reasoning (in complete sentences) in the other column. This helps them to think critically about their own problem solving and helps you to more easily identify where they may be having problems.
Two-Column Solution (Math)
Two-Column Solution (Physics)

Encourage Independence

Model the problem solving process rather than just giving students the answer. As you work through the problem, consider how a novice might struggle with the concepts and make your thinking clear

Have students work through problems on their own. Ask directing questions or give helpful suggestions, but provide only minimal assistance and only when needed to overcome obstacles.

Don't fear group work! Students can frequently help each other, and talking about a problem helps them think more critically about the steps needed to solve the problem. Additionally, group work helps students realize that problems often have multiple solution strategies, some that might be more effective than others

Be sensitive

Frequently, when working problems, students are unsure of themselves. This lack of confidence may hamper their learning. It is important to recognize this when students come to us for help, and to give each student some feeling of mastery. Do this by providing positive reinforcement to let students know when they have mastered a new concept or skill.

Encourage Thoroughness and Patience

Try to communicate that the process is more important than the answer so that the student learns that it is OK to not have an instant solution. This is learned through your acceptance of his/her pace of doing things, through your refusal to let anxiety pressure you into giving the right answer, and through your example of problem solving through a step-by step process.

Expert vs. Novice Problem Solvers

Experts (teachers) in a particular field are often so fluent in solving problems from that field that they can find it difficult to articulate the problem solving principles and strategies they use to novices (students) in their field because these principles and strategies are second nature to the expert. To teach students problem solving skills, a teacher should be aware of principles and strategies of good problem solving in his or her discipline.

The mathematician George Polya captured the problem solving principles and strategies he used in his discipline in the book How to Solve It: A New Aspect of Mathematical Method(Princeton University Press, 1957). The book includes a summary of Polya's problem solving heuristic as well as advice on the teaching of problem solving.

Novices in a particular field typically have not yet developed effective problem solving principles and strategies. Helping students identify their own problem solving errors is part of helping them develop effective problem solving skills. Beverly Black and Elizabeth Axelson's list of common problem solving errors, adapted from Arthur Whimbey and Jack Lochhead's book Problem Solving and Comprehension (Lawrence Erlbaum, 1999), provides useful insight into the mindset of a novice problem solver.

This teaching guide is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Print Version Tips and Techniques Expert vs. Novice Problem Solvers Tips and Techniques Communicate Have students identify specific problems, difficulties, or confusions. Don't waste time working through problems that students already understand. If students are unable to articulate their concerns, determine where they are having trouble by asking them to identify the specific concepts or principles associated...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Classical Conditioning | Simply Psychology

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Classical conditioning is learning through association and was discovered by Pavlov, a Russian physiologist. In simple terms two stimuli are linked together to produce a new learned response in a person or animal.

# data[].attributes.body
The 6 Stages described

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Lawrence Kohlberg expanded on the earlier work of cognitive theorist Jean Piaget to explain the moral development of children. Kohlberg believed that moral development, like cognitive development, follows a series of stages. He used the idea of moral dilemmas-stories that present conflicting ideas about two moral values-to teach 10 to 16 year-old boys about morality and values. The best known moral dilemma created by Kohlberg is the "Heinz" dilemma, which discusses the idea of obeying the law versus saving a life. Kohlberg emphasized that it is the way an individual about a dilemma that determines positive moral development.

After presenting people with various moral dilemmas, Kohlberg reviewed people's responses and placed them in different stages of moral reasoning. According to Kohlberg, an individual progresses from the capacity for pre-conventional morality (before age 9) to the capacity for conventional morality (early adolescence), and toward attaining post-conventional morality (once Piaget's idea of formal operational thought is attained), which only a few fully achieve. Each level of morality contains two stages, which provide the basis for moral development in various contexts.

Throughout the preconventional level, a child's sense of morality is externally controlled. Children accept and believe the rules of authority figures, such as parents and teachers. A child with pre-conventional morality has not yet adopted or internalized society's conventions regarding what is right or wrong, but instead focuses largely on external consequences that certain actions may bring.

Stage 1 focuses on the child's desire to obey rules and avoid being punished. For example, an action is perceived as morally wrong because the perpetrator is punished; the worse the punishment for the act is, the more "bad" the act is perceived to be.

Stage 2: Instrumental Orientation

Stage 2 expresses the "what's in it for me?" position, in which right behavior is defined by whatever the individual believes to be in their best interest. Stage two reasoning shows a limited interest in the needs of others, only to the point where it might further the individual's own interests. As a result, concern for others is not based on loyalty or intrinsic respect, but rather a "you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours" mentality. An example would be when a child is asked by his parents to do a chore. The child asks "what's in it for me?" and the parents offer the child an incentive by giving him an allowance.

Throughout the conventional level, a child's sense of morality is tied to personal and societal relationships. Children continue to accept the rules of authority figures, but this is now due to their belief that this is necessary to ensure positive relationships and societal order. Adherence to rules and conventions is somewhat rigid during these stages, and a rule's appropriateness or fairness is seldom questioned.

Stage 3: Good Boy, Nice Girl Orientation

In stage 3, children want the approval of others and act in ways to avoid disapproval. Emphasis is placed on good behavior and people being "nice" to others.

Stage 4: Law-and-Order Orientation

In stage 4, the child blindly accepts rules and convention because of their importance in maintaining a functioning society. Rules are seen as being the same for everyone, and obeying rules by doing what one is "supposed" to do is seen as valuable and important. Moral reasoning in stage four is beyond the need for individual approval exhibited in stage three. If one person violates a law, perhaps everyone would-thus there is an obligation and a duty to uphold laws and rules. Most active members of society remain at stage four, where morality is still predominantly dictated by an outside force.

Throughout the postconventional level, a person's sense of morality is defined in terms of more abstract principles and values. People now believe that some laws are unjust and should be changed or eliminated. This level is marked by a growing realization that individuals are separate entities from society and that individuals may disobey rules inconsistent with their own principles. Post-conventional moralists live by their own ethical principles-principles that typically include such basic human rights as life, liberty, and justice-and view rules as useful but changeable mechanisms, rather than absolute dictates that must be obeyed without question. Because post-conventional individuals elevate their own moral evaluation of a situation over social conventions, their behavior, especially at stage six, can sometimes be confused with that of those at the pre-conventional level. Some theorists have speculated that many people may never reach this level of abstract moral reasoning.

Stage 5: Social-Contract Orientation

In stage 5, the world is viewed as holding different opinions, rights, and values. Such perspectives should be mutually respected as unique to each person or community. Laws are regarded as social contracts rather than rigid edicts. Those that do not promote the general welfare should be changed when necessary to meet the greatest good for the greatest number of people. This is achieved through majority decision and inevitable compromise. Democratic government is theoretically based on stage five reasoning.

Stage 6: Universal-Ethical-Principal Orientation

In stage 6, moral reasoning is based on abstract reasoning using universal ethical principles. Generally, the chosen principles are abstract rather than concrete and focus on ideas such as equality, dignity, or respect. Laws are valid only insofar as they are grounded in justice, and a commitment to justice carries with it an obligation to disobey unjust laws. People choose the ethical principles they want to follow, and if they violate those principles, they feel guilty. In this way, the individual acts because it is morally right to do so (and not because he or she wants to avoid punishment), it is in their best interest, it is expected, it is legal, or it is previously agreed upon. Although Kohlberg insisted that stage six exists, he found it difficult to identify individuals who consistently operated at that level.

Kohlberg has been criticized for his assertion that women seem to be deficient in their moral reasoning abilities when compared to men. Carol Gilligan (1982), a research assistant of Kohlberg, criticized her former mentor's theory because it was based so narrowly on research using white, upper-class men and boys. She argued that women are not deficient in their moral reasoning and instead proposed that males and females reason differently: girls and women focus more on staying connected and maintaining interpersonal relationships.

Kohlberg's theory has been criticized for emphasizing justice to the exclusion of other values, with the result that it may not adequately address the arguments of those who value other moral aspects of actions. Similarly, critics argue that Kohlberg's stages are culturally biased-that the highest stages in particular reflect a westernized ideal of justice based on individualistic thought. This is biased against those that live in non-Western societies that place less emphasis on individualism.

Another criticism of Kohlberg's theory is that people frequently demonstrate significant inconsistency in their moral judgements. This often occurs in moral dilemmas involving drinking and driving or business situations where participants have been shown to reason at a lower developmental stage, typically using more self-interest driven reasoning (i.e., stage two) than authority and social order obedience driven reasoning (i.e., stage four). Critics argue that Kohlberg's theory cannot account for such inconsistencies.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Lawrence Kohlberg expanded on the earlier work of cognitive theorist Jean Piaget to explain the moral development of children. Kohlberg believed that moral development, like cognitive development, follows a series of stages. He used the idea of moral dilemmas-stories that present conflicting ideas about two moral values-to teach 10 to 16 year-old boys about morality and values.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Donald J. Treffinger

Teachers can help students become 21st-century problem solvers by introducing them to a broad range of thinking tools.

If you doubt that we live in a world of accelerating change, just consider the everyday life experiences of millions of children and teenagers today:

They can view live images from every corner of the world and talk with or exchange video images with other young people who live many time zones away.

They have more technology in their classrooms (and in many cases, in their backpacks) than existed in the workplaces of their parents 20 years ago.

They will study subjects that were unknown when their teachers and parents were students, and they may well enter careers that do not exist today.

In contrast with most of their parents, more of today's young people will routinely come into contact with other people of diverse backgrounds and experiences. They will grow up to interact, collaborate, and compete with others around the globe.

Once upon a time, educators might have said to their students, "If you'll pay close attention to what I'm going to teach you, you'll learn everything you need to know for a successful life." It's doubtful that this message was ever entirely true, but it's certainly not true today. We don't know all the information that today's students will need or all the answers to the questions they will face. Indeed, increasingly, we don't even know the questions.

These realities mean that we must empower students to become creative thinkers, critical thinkers, and problem solvers-people who are continually learning and who can apply their new knowledge to complex, novel, open-ended challenges; people who will proceed confidently and competently into the new horizons of life and work.

In education, we routinely teach students how to use various sets of cognitive tools to make academic work easier, more efficient, or more productive: for example, research methods, note-taking strategies, or ways to remember and organize information. In teaching thinking, we need to give students cognitive tools and teach them to use these tools systematically to solve real-life problems and to manage change. These tools apply to two essential categories: creative thinking and critical thinking.

Creative Thinking, Critical Thinking

What is creative thinking? What is critical thinking? We often view these terms as opposites that are poles apart and incompatible. We stereotype the creative thinker as wild and zany, thriving on off-the-wall, impractical ideas; in contrast, we envision the critical thinker as serious, deep, analytical, and impersonal. Consider instead a different view-that these two ways of thinking are complementary and equally important. They need to work together in harmony to address perceived dilemmas, paradoxes, opportunities, challenges, or concerns (Treffinger, Isaksen, & Stead-Dorval, 2006).

Creative thinking involves searching for meaningful new connections by generating many unusual, original, and varied possibilities, as well as details that expand or enrich possibilities. Critical thinking, on the other hand, involves examining possibilities carefully, fairly, and constructively-focusing your thoughts and actions by organizing and analyzing possibilities, refining and developing the most promising possibilities, ranking or prioritizing options, and choosing certain options.

Generating many possibilities is not enough by itself to help you solve a problem. Similarly, if you rely on focusing alone, you may have too few possibilities from which to choose. Effective problem solvers must think both creatively and critically, generating options and focusing their thinking.

Both generating and focusing involve learning and applying certain guidelines (attitudes and habits of mind that support effective thinking) and tools. Let's first look at the guidelines for generating and focusing, and then consider a number of specific tools.

Habits of the Mind for Generating Ideas

Individuals or groups use generating tools to produce many, varied, or unusual possibilities; to develop new and interesting combinations of possibilities; or to add detail to new possibilities. When using these tools, it is important to follow four broad guidelines, or ground rules (Treffinger, Isaksen, & Stead-Dorval, 2006):

Defer judgment. When generating options, productive thinkers separate generating from judging. They direct their effort and energy to producing possibilities that can be judged later.

Seek quantity. The more options a person or group generates, the greater the likelihood that at least some of those possibilities will be intriguing and potentially useful.

Encourage all possibilities. Even possibilities that seem wild or silly might serve as a springboard for someone to make an original and powerful new connection.

Look for combinations. It is often possible to increase the quantity and quality of options by building on the thinking of others or by seeing new combinations that may be stronger than any of their parts.

Brainstorming is probably the most widely known generating tool (but often the most misunderstood and misused tool, too). Many people use the term brainstorming as a synonym for a general conversation, discussion, or exchange of views. It is more accurate, however, to view brainstorming as a specific tool in which a person or a group follows the four guidelines described above to search for many possible responses to an open-ended task or question. As illustrated in Figure 1, there are also several other tools for generating options (Treffinger, Nassab, et al., 2006).

Habits of the Mind for Focusing Ideas

Focusing tools help individuals or groups analyze, organize, refine, develop, prioritize, evaluate, or select options from the set of possibilities they have at hand. When using these tools, problem solvers should again follow four broad guidelines or ground rules (Treffinger, Isaksen, & Stead-Dorval, 2006):

Use affirmative judgment. When focusing their thinking, productive thinkers examine options carefully but constructively, placing more emphasis on screening, supporting, or selecting options than on criticizing them.

Be deliberate. Effective focusing takes into consideration the purpose of focusing. Is it to select a single solution, to rank order or prioritize several options, to examine ideas carefully with very detailed criteria, to refine or strengthen options, or to create a sequence of steps or actions? Each of these purposes might be best served by a specific focusing tool.

Consider novelty. If the stated goal is to find a novel or original solution or response, then it is important to focus deliberately on that dimension when evaluating possible solutions, and not simply to fall back on the easiest or most familiar options within a list.

Stay on course. When focusing, it is important to keep the goals and purposes of the task clearly in sight and to ensure that you evaluate the options in relation to their relevance and importance for the goal.

The Problem Solver's Basic Toolbox

At the Center for Creative Learning, we have developed a Creative Problem Solver's Basic Toolbox of generating and focusing tools (see fig. 1 for the toolbox and links to examples of each tool).

Tools for Generating Possibilities (Creative Thinking)

Tools for Focusing Possibilities (Critical Thinking)

Teachers can incorporate instruction in creative and critical thinking into the curriculum in a number of ways, either singly or in combination. I recommend that teachers follow several guidelines.

Introduce the tools directly, using engaging, open-ended questions from everyday life. Be clear that the purpose of such out-of-context work is to gain confidence and skill in using the tool, so everyone will be successful when using it in context.

Next, provide opportunities to apply the tools in lessons or activities related to specific content areas. Any of the generating and focusing tools can be used to help students master a variety of specific content standards in many areas (see Treffinger, 2007; Treffinger et al., 2004a, 2004b, 2004c).

Kopcak (2007), for example, describes using the Brainstorming, Hits and Hot Spots, and Paired Comparison Analysis tools with high school seniors as they worked on the Virginia learning standard "The student will write documented research papers." The students began with a stack of blank sticky notes on which they wrote possible topics (one per sticky note). After covering a chalkboard with sticky notes, the class paused to discuss the characteristics of a good research topic. The students used the Hits and Hot Spots focusing tool to select promising topics and organize them into categories based on theme or overarching topic; they used the Paired Comparison Analysis focusing tool to narrow down the most appealing options.

Other examples of applications of the tools in content areas include

Attribute Listing. Understanding the important elements or parts of a topic being studied (for example, the major attributes of a country or civilization in social studies, the major elements of a story, or the characteristics of the main characters in a novel).

Brainstorming. Identifying varied or unusual ways to make people aware of the importance of voting. Generating many possible math problems that could be constructed from a given set of data, events, or circumstances. Listing many ways to promote recycling or conservation.

Evaluation Matrix. Evaluating choices or possible courses of action faced by people or groups in literature or social studies units (for example, in a film the students have viewed or a story they have read). Judging and choosing one of several possible themes, plots, or endings for a story or dramatic scene.

Sequencing: SML. Investigating career preparation (for instance, "If you want to become a ____, the steps or stages in your preparation should include ..."). Understanding and ordering the stages or chronology in an event or process (for example, the steps in an experiment or the sequence of certain measurements to be taken on a set of data).

Be deliberate about applying the basic tools in several different content areas, to help students learn how to transfer their learning about the tools across contexts. As you work with the tools, be explicit about metacognitive skills. Ask, "What is the tool? How did you use it? When and why would you use it in other situations?"

Beware of presenting too much newness at once. When you are working with new content, start with familiar tools. When you are introducing new tools, start with familiar content. Don't try to teach all the tools at once.

When students are comfortable with the basic generating and focusing tools, teachers may guide them in applying these tools through the Creative Problem Solving framework, a model for attaining clarity about tasks, defining problems in a constructive way, generating possible solutions, preparing for action and successful implementation of solutions, and dealing with change. For more information about the Creative Problem Solving framework, see the resources at the Center for Creative Learning.

It is also important to engage students in finding and solving real-life problems or challenges within the classroom, the school, or the community. Two widely known enrichment programs can provide engaging opportunities for students to apply creative problem solving.

Preparing Students for a Changing World

By helping students learn and apply the attitudes and practical tools of effective problem solvers, teachers can enhance student learning in powerful ways that extend beyond memorization and recall. Even when teachers are compelled to place great emphasis on basic learning and doing well on standardized tests-indeed, particularly at such times-it remains important to balance the emphasis between process and content in teaching and learning. Students who are competent in not only the basics of content areas but also the basics of productive and creative thinking will be lifelong learners, knowledge creators, and problem solvers who can live and work effectively in a world of constant change.

References

Kopcak, T. (2007). Applying thinking tools to high school seniors' research papers. Creative Learning Today, 15(3), 3.

Treffinger, D. J. (2007). Applying CPS tools in school: Thinking in action. Creative Learning Today, 15(3), 2.

Treffinger, D. J., Isaksen, S. G., & Stead-Dorval, K. B. (2006). Creative problem solving: An introduction (4th ed.). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

Treffinger, D. J., & Nassab, C. A. (2005). Thinking tool guides (Rev. ed.). Sarasota, FL: Center for Creative Learning.

Treffinger, D. J., Nassab, C. A., Schoonover, P. F., Selby, E. C., Shepardson, C. A., Wittig, C. V., & Young, G. C. (2004a). Thinking with standards: Preparing for the future (Elementary ed.). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

Treffinger, D. J., Nassab, C. A., Schoonover, P. F., Selby, E. C., Shepardson, C. A., Wittig, C. V., & Young, G. C. (2004b). Thinking with standards: Preparing for the future (Middle ed.). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

Treffinger, D. J., Nassab, C. A., Schoonover, P. F., Selby, E. C., Shepardson, C. A., Wittig, C. V., & Young, G. C. (2004c). Thinking with standards: Preparing for the future (Secondary ed.). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

Treffinger, D. J., Nassab, C. A., Schoonover, P. F., Selby, E. C., Shepardson, C. A., Wittig, C. V., & Young, G. C. (2006). The CPS Kit. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

Brainstorming Return to Figure 1 Force-Fitting Return to Figure 1 Attribute Listing

Visual Display. Make larger, use a trifold out of cardboard, use bright colors, use computer to make written parts and drawings, add some charts and graphs, use some pictures or cartoons to get attention, include something that moves, use an overhead projector, add lights, add something people can touch or use.

Oral Presentation. Use music in background, use sound effects, use Power Point, dress up in a lab coat, wear a necktie, use props.

Written Report. Put in notebook, make colorful cover, do it on the computer, add some more graphs and charts, include some photographs, use color and highlight parts, use more labels, use more variety in the words, add a glossary of terms.

Return to Figure 1 SCAMPER

S - Substitute

C - Combine

A - Adapt

M - Magnify or Minify

P - Put to other uses

E - Eliminate

R - Reverse or Rearrange

Return to Figure 1 Morphological Matrix
Most college students are preparing to enter business fields and want to find peace within their lives.

When high school students exhibit good citizenship they will not encounter conflict in the mall.
Return to Figure 1 Hits and Hot Spots Return to Figure 1 ALoU: Refining and Developing Advantages

Easy to manage and do within our time limits

Fun for everyone

People would actually be learning sign language a little at a time

Seeing and using sign language would become more accepted in school

No cost involved

Very visible

How to ensure that it would get used?

1. Let teachers know the words ahead of time so they can include ways to use them in daily/weekly plans.

2. Make it a contest, like a spelling bee each month.

How to get participants to take it seriously?

1. Do a "hush day" to help people get a firsthand understanding of the need for all to communicate.

2. Bring in or create a school presentation using words and sign language to demonstrate the importance of diversity.

Unique Features

Our deaf population might be able to communicate with all others in the school without the need for an interpreter.

Sign language might be seen as a language just like other foreign languages and be taught as a subject.

Return to Figure 1 PCA: Paired Comparison Analysis Return to Figure 1 Sequencing: SML

In the short term (and before they contacted any other agencies or the student body), the students needed to understand community service better themselves. They listed questions to ask representatives from one or more community agencies.
Next, they researched agencies in their community that needed volunteers and would be receptive to middle school students as well as interesting to the students.

As a medium-range step, the group prepared and rehearsed the kind of interview they would do with representatives from the agencies, contacted one agency, conducted their interviews, and began doing some volunteer work themselves.

The students' long-term steps involved creating an appealing presentation that incorporated information from their interviews and personal experiences to inform other students and to stimulate their involvement.

Return to Figure 1 Evaluation Matrix

Which dog can Grandma best afford?

Which dog will be the most quiet?

Which dog will be the easiest for Grandma to care for by herself (walk, bathe, groom, and so on)?

Which dog will be protective when needed?

Which dog will be the friendliest companion to grandma?

Options for Breeds

Fits Gram's budget

Most quiet

Ease of care

Protectiveness

Friendliness

Total

Return to Figure 1

Future Problem Solving Program Destination ImagiNation Return to Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Preparing Creative and Critical Thinkers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Donald J. Treffinger Teachers can help students become 21st-century problem solvers by introducing them to a broad range of thinking tools. If you doubt that we live in a world of accelerating change, just consider the everyday life experiences of millions of children and teenagers today: They can view live images from every corner of the world and talk with or exchange video images with other young people who live many time zones away.

# data[].attributes.body
In 1980, Blasi used them to study the relationship between moral development and classroom conduct. His research revealed that 4th, 7th, and 10th grade boys who rated their teacher high in fairness and uprightness also rated their peers high for moral character and had an established moral character themselves (Sorrell, 2016). This demonstrates how a teacher can be a role model for moral behavior and the way they run the classroom can help foster moral behavior in students.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Journal Information

The Pluralist is dedicated to advancing the ends of philosophical thought and dialogue in all widely used philosophical methodologies, including non-Western methods and those of traditional cultures. The Pluralist upholds the Socratic dictum of self-knowledge and the love of wisdom as the purpose of philosophy. It seeks to express philosophical insights and concerns humanely and with an eye to literary as well as philosophical excellence, but technical papers are welcome. The Pluralist is a forum for discussion of diverse philosophical standpoints and pluralism's merits.

Publisher Information

Founded in 1918, the University of Illinois Press (www.press.uillinois.edu) ranks as one of the country's larger and most distinguished university presses. The Press publishes more than 120 new books and 30 scholarly journals each year in an array of subjects including American history, labor history, sports history, folklore, food, film, American music, American religion, African American studies, women's studies, and Abraham Lincoln. The Press is a founding member of the Association of American University Presses as well as the History Cooperative, an online collection of more than 20 history journals.

Rights & Usage

This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions
Copyright 2016 by the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois
Request Permissions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sentimental Education: Critical Common Sense and the Social Intuitionist Model in Psychology on JSTOR

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Journal Information The Pluralist is dedicated to advancing the ends of philosophical thought and dialogue in all widely used philosophical methodologies, including non-Western methods and those of traditional cultures. The Pluralist upholds the Socratic dictum of self-knowledge and the love of wisdom as the purpose of philosophy.

# data[].attributes.headline
Understanding Brain-Based Approach to Learning and Teaching

# data[].attributes.subject
Understanding Brain-Based Approach to Learning and Teaching

# data[].attributes.body
Implications for Teachers and Parents

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Psychosocial Development of Children: Implications for Education and Society - Erik Erikson in Context

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If you have access to a journal via a society or association membership, please browse to your society journal, select an article to view, and follow the instructions in this box.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Brain-Based Learning: Learning, Leadership, and Laughing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dr. Peter Jonas talks about the connection between laughing, learning, and leadership.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Erikson's 8 Stages of Development Theory

# data[].attributes.headline
Difference between Social Cognitive Theory & Socail Learning Theory

# data[].attributes.subject
Difference between Social Cognitive Theory & Socail Learning Theory

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Social cognitive theory and social learning theory are theories that try to explain learning in the social context, with the main position being that people acquire new behaviors by observation. The two theories focus solely on behavior, in terms of what can be learned, setting aside other things such as knowledge or cognitive skills. The word 'social' refers to the influence of social interactions on how we acquire new behaviors which may not necessarily be social in nature, and how we perpetuate them. Both of these theories are rooted in behaviorist traditions in that focus on learned behavior and excluding thought and emotion. Still, both theories do acknowledge the cognitive processes that play a role in learning and behavior. The two are very similar in content, so similar that both are sometimes attributed to just one man, Albert Bandura.

Largely due to Bandura's great contribution to social learning theory, it is difficult to differentiate it from social cognitive theory. As such, this article sets Bandura's 1986 book entitled Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory as the delineation between the two. Although not by much, social learning theory is a fairly older body of knowledge while social cognitive theory has a broader scope. And while social cognitive theory can be attributed solely to Bandura, social learning theory is a collection of ideas from various thinkers. These two theories are discussed further in the following sections, along with a summary of how they differ.

What is Social Cognitive Theory?

The social cognitive theory is a learning theory which states that people acquire new behaviors by observing a model, and that personal (or cognitive) factors, the behavior itselfand the environment (in the form of reinforcements) are engaged in a triadic feedback relationship, called reciprocal determinism, which influences the reproduction of the learned behavior. This theory was proposed by Albert Bandura officially in his 1986 book, Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory, and is an expansion of his take on social learning theory. He called it social cognitive theory to emphasize the role of cognitive factors (encapsulated under the personal factors) in the process of learning as well as to differentiate it from other social learning theories.

With social cognitive theory, Bandura broadens his social learning theory by starting with a conceptualization of humanity as having agency and capability, that is, humans are not just shaped by their environments and inner forces but also shape their environment and can regulate those inner forces. He maintains his major contributions to social learning theory, such as modeling, identification, and direct and vicarious reinforcement. He expands observational learning by adding onto it four cognitive processes that mediate learning, namely attention, retention, production and motivation. Finally, he adds the concept of self-efficacy, the personal belief in one's own capability to plan and act accordingly in response to foreseeable situations.

What is Social Learning Theory?

Social learning theory is a cognitive-behavioral theory of learning which proposes that we acquire new behaviors simply by observing it along with its consequences. Although Bandura is credited with most of this body of knowledge, the entirety of social learning theory is a collective work from different people. The theory traces its roots to a combination of psychoanalytic and behaviorist concepts. In 1941, Neil Miller and John Dollard published a book called Social Learning Theory. In it they proposed that biological drives acts as stimulus for behavior which is in turn reinforced by social interaction. In 1954, Julian B. Rotter also published his book Social Learning and Clinical Psychology. Rotter theorizes that the emergence of novel behavior is a function of expectancy of a positive outcome and the behavior is reinforced by positive outcomes. Sociology also has its take on social learning theory. Edwin Sutherland's Differential Association Theory was integrated into operant conditioning and social learning by criminologists Robert Burgess and Ronald Akers and they developed a comprehensive theory on how criminal behavior is learned. Throughout all this, cognitive perspectives maintain that a lot of novel behavior is acquired and reproduced even without repetition and reinforcement.

It was in this state of the social learning theory that Bandura conducted research on how novel behavior is acquired in the social context. Through his famous Bobo Doll Experiments Bandura came to the conclusions that are now basically the core concepts of modern social learning theory. First, learning occurs by observing the behavior of a model, which includes extracting information about the observation and deciding on performing the behavior ( modeling or observational learning). Second, behavior can be reinforced by observing the consequences that happen to the model after the behavior was performed ( vicarious reinforcement). Third, observation is a cognitive skill hence learning is a cognitive-behavioral process. Lastly, a learner observes and copies the model that he or she sees the most similarity with or has the most emotional attachment with (identification).

Difference between Social Cognitive Theory and Social Learning Theory

Definition

Social cognitive theory is the expanded form of Albert Bandura's social learning theory which states that learning can occur by observing a behavior and that the manifestation of that behavior in the learner is regulated by the triadic reciprocal determinism between personal (cognitive) factors, the behavior itself, and by the environment (reinforcement). Meanwhile, social learning theory is a learning theory that proposes that learning occurs in a social context by means of observation of the behavior and the consequences that follow it.

Proponent/s

Social cognitive theory was proposed by Albert Bandura alone. Social learning theory is a collective work, with the most contribution coming from Bandura but with earlier contributions from Neil Miller and John Dollard, Julian Rotter, and Robert Burgess and Ronald Akers, as well as an influence from cognitive perspectives on learning.

Core concepts

Core concepts in the social cognitive theory are human agency, observational learning and its four meditational processes (attention, retention, production, motivation), triadic reciprocal determinism between cognitive, behavioral and environment factors, and self-efficacy. In social learning theory, the core concepts are observational learning, reinforcement (direct or vicarious), learning as a cognitive-behavioral process, and identification with a model.

Role of cognitive factors

In the social cognitive theory, cognitive factors play an important and equal role with environmental factors in the acquisition of new behavior and in its production. In social learning theory, the cognitive factors are only acknowledged to play a role in the acquisition of new behavior but not much or none at all in its production.

Role of reinforcement

In the social cognitive theory, reinforcement or environmental factors has an equal role with cognitive factors in the learning and production of behavior. In social learning theory, consequences and reinforcement play a major role in the acquisition and production of behavior.

Social cognitive theory has a broader theoretical scope as it includes a conceptualization of humans as agents capable of shaping their environment and of self-regulation. Social learning theory on the other hand is limited to tackling the learning process in the social context.

Social Cognitive Theory vs Social Learning Theory

Social cognitive theory and social learning theory are very similar as learning theories. Their similarity is due in large part to the great contribution of Albert Bandura to these theories.

Social cognitive theory is the expanded form of Albert Bandura's social learning theory where he emphasized the role of cognitive factors in the process of social learning. He also added self-efficacy and conceptualized humans as active agents, capable of shaping their environment and of self-regulation.

Social learning theory is a collection of works that explains the learning process in the social context. Much of social learning theory comes from the work of Albert Bandura that the current iteration of the theory is sometimes credited entirely to him.

Email This Post : If you like this article or our site. Please spread the word. Share it with your friends/family.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Difference Between Social Cognitive Theory and Social Learning Theory

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Social cognitive theory and social learning theory are theories that try to explain learning in the social context, with the main position being that people acquire new behaviors by observation. The two theories focus solely on behavior, in terms of what can be learned, setting aside other things such as knowledge or cognitive skills.