Theory And Principles Of Education J.c. Aggarwal Pdf Free Download [TOP]

Theory and Principles of Education discusses the latest trends and current educational thoughts. This thoroughly revised edition covers a wide range of issues and themes related to the philosophical and sociological basis of education. All possible efforts have been made to include the latest trends on the theory and principles of education.

This book, Theory and Principles of Education, provides an exhaustive treatment of the subject in a very lucid and cogent manner, so that even an average student can grasp the subject matter easily. The book is essentially student-centred and examination-oriented. It is primarily written for the students of B.Ed., M.Ed., M.Phil. and MA (Education). It will be equally useful in the Middle East and South-East Asian countries by virtue of its authoritative coverage of the subject. The extensive coverage and detailed explanations will also make it very useful for students preparing for teacher training courses. It will also serve as a reliable hand book for in-service teachers.

The only book of its kind on the subject that discusses the latest educational trends and covers a wide range of issues and themes related to philosophical and sociological basis of education.

Aggarwal, J.C. (1998). Theory and principles of education: Philosophical & sociological bases of education. New Delhi: Kanishka Publishers. Bigge, M.L. and Hunt, M.P. (1962). Psychological foundations of education. NY: Harper and Row Publishers. Chandra, S.S. (2002). Philosophy of education. New Delhi: ATLANTIC. Kneller, G.F. (1971). Introduction to the philosophy of education. London: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. McNergney, R. Space F., and Herbert, I. M. (1998). Foundation of education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Semel,S.F.(2010) Foundations of Education: the Essentials text.USA:Routledge Shami,P.A.(2011).Introduction to education.Urdu Print

Theory And Principles Of Education J.c. Aggarwal Pdf Free Download

Download File 🔥 https://tinurll.com/2y2EKV 🔥

Theory & Principles Of Education by J. C. Aggarwal Book Summary:Theory and Principles of Education discusses the latest trends and current educational thoughts. This thoroughly revised edition covers a wide range of issues and themes related to the philosophical and sociological basis of education. All possible efforts have been made to include the latest trends on the theory and principles of education.

If we dissect these videos further, the variation in learning outcomes might be due to differences in design.29 Few curriculum developers subscribed to guidelines guided by pedagogical principles.29, 30 As there is diverse configuration, methods, and presentation,31, 32 Mayer's multimedia design principles based on cognitive load theory have been espoused to guide future designs.33, 34, 35 In Mayer's approach, multimedia instruction has the potential for cognitive overload, as the learner's cognitive processing exceeds the available capacity.34, 36 His principles reduce cognitive load to maximize learning.22, 36, 37, 38 However, with few exceptions, most studies did not explicitly reference any design.36, 39, 40 Scant description of video production was typically limited to the software programs and hardware equipment used. Format, if mentioned, varied.27 Examples included interactive games,31 animations,33 or videotaped lectures.22, 37 Given the lack of detail in these preclass materials, study replication is difficult.

In this commentary, we would like to put forward the cognitive principles of learning that may underlie the 5E Model and that could theoretically explain its effectiveness as a learning sequence, according to basic research in cognitive science of learning and memory. By 'cognitive principles of learning', we mean theories and models of how learning works that have been developed by research mainly in cognitive psychology and cognitive neuroscience, although we also draw on research from developmental psychology and other behavioral disciplines that assume the cognitivist paradigm. Thus, our dissertation includes references to socio-cognitive theories of motivation and the conceptual change theory, for example.

Some psychologists study motivation or the subject of why people or lower animals initiate a behavior at a particular time. It also involves the study of why humans and lower animals continue or terminate a behavior. Psychologists such as William James initially used the term motivation to refer to intention, in a sense similar to the concept of will in European philosophy. With the steady rise of Darwinian and Freudian thinking, instinct also came to be seen as a primary source of motivation.[140] According to drive theory, the forces of instinct combine into a single source of energy which exerts a constant influence. Psychoanalysis, like biology, regarded these forces as demands originating in the nervous system. Psychoanalysts believed that these forces, especially the sexual instincts, could become entangled and transmuted within the psyche. Classical psychoanalysis conceives of a struggle between the pleasure principle and the reality principle, roughly corresponding to id and ego. Later, in Beyond the Pleasure Principle, Freud introduced the concept of the death drive, a compulsion towards aggression, destruction, and psychic repetition of traumatic events.[141] Meanwhile, behaviorist researchers used simple dichotomous models (pleasure/pain, reward/punishment) and well-established principles such as the idea that a thirsty creature will take pleasure in drinking.[140][142] Clark Hull formalized the latter idea with his drive reduction model.[143]

School psychology combines principles from educational psychology and clinical psychology to understand and treat students with learning disabilities; to foster the intellectual growth of gifted students; to facilitate prosocial behaviors in adolescents; and otherwise to promote safe, supportive, and effective learning environments. School psychologists are trained in educational and behavioral assessment, intervention, prevention, and consultation, and many have extensive training in research.[185]

In 2008, Arnett pointed out that most articles in American Psychological Association journals were about U.S. populations when U.S. citizens are only 5% of the world's population. He complained that psychologists had no basis for assuming psychological processes to be universal and generalizing research findings to the rest of the global population.[281] In 2010, Henrich, Heine, and Norenzayan reported a bias in conducting psychology studies with participants from "WEIRD" ("Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic") societies.[282][283] Henrich et al. found that "96% of psychological samples come from countries with only 12% of the world's population" (p. 63). The article gave examples of results that differ significantly between people from WEIRD and tribal cultures, including the Mller-Lyer illusion. Arnett (2008), Altmaier and Hall (2008) and Morgan-Consoli et al. (2018) view the Western bias in research and theory as a serious problem considering psychologists are increasingly applying psychological principles developed in WEIRD regions in their research, clinical work, and consultation with populations around the world.[281][284][285] In 2018, Rad, Martingano, and Ginges showed that nearly a decade after Henrich et al.'s paper, over 80% of the samples used in studies published in the journal Psychological Science employed WEIRD samples. Moreover, their analysis showed that several studies did not fully disclose the origin of their samples; the authors offered a set of recommendations to editors and reviewers to reduce WEIRD bias.[286]

The roots of cognitive load theory can be traced back to 1982 (Sweller and Levine 1982), but a first full description of the theory was given in the 1988 article Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning (Sweller 1988). In the next decade, many cognitive load effects and associated instructional methods were investigated by a small group of researchers located at the University of New South Wales, Australia, and the University of Twente, the Netherlands. This close collaboration led to an updated description of cognitive load theory that was published in the 1998 article Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design (Sweller et al. 1998). After 1998, cognitive load theory quickly became one of the most popular theories in the field of educational psychology and instructional design, with researchers from across the globe contributing to its further development. The 1998 article became one of the most cited articles in the educational field with currently over 5000 citations in Google Scholar. The main aim of this follow-up article is to reflect on the evolution of cognitive load theory over the past 20 years, taking the 1998 article as a starting point and a description of future directions as the end point.

While working and long-term memory were well-known, the important relations between them were much less emphasised. Working memory was limited in capacity and duration when dealing with novel information but these limitations effectively disappeared when working memory dealt with information transferred from long-term memory. A ready availability of large amounts of organised information from long-term memory results in working memory effectively having no known limits when dealing with such information. Ericsson and Kintsch (1995) in their theory of long-term working memory, reflected this point. Expertise, reliant on information held in long-term memory, transforms our ability to process information in working memory and transforms us, reflecting the transformational consequences of education on individuals and societies. It follows that the major function of instruction is to allow learners to accumulate critical information in long-term memory. Because it is novel, that information must be presented in a manner that takes into account the limitations of working memory when dealing with novel information. These processes provided the cognitive architecture that led to the instructional implications of cognitive load theory in 1998. ff782bc1db