Personal Theory of Learning

Learning is growth in some area of knowledge or skill. If a person knows something more than they knew before or if that person is able to do something more than they were able to do before, they have learned. The relevant question to consider then, especially for educators, is: How does this learning take place?

Learning as Pattern Recognition

From the research that I have done and my own personal analysis, in my opinion, all learning boils down to pattern recognition. From the earliest learnings to the most recent, humans observe something and then try to “connect the dots” to understand why it happened. 

At the simplest level of pattern recognition, a stimulus occurs, a response happens, and the search is on to discover the connection. The Russian physiologist, Ivan Pavlov, called this learning classical conditioning (McLeod, 2018). In classical conditioning, people learn to associate certain stimuli with certain positive or negative events through experiences. Even though we may not realize it, we are being classically conditioned all of the time. We experience this in advertisements where marketers try to get us to associate a pleasant unconditioned stimulus such as seeing a scantily clad woman with a neutral stimulus such as a beer or a hamburger (Nebel, 2017). This association causes positive emotions to be aroused whenever the stimuli are present (i.e. being hungry and seeing a hamburger). The potential shopper is conditioned to think that the product is something they likely want to buy. 

Although later theorists have since proven pure classical conditioning inadequate as an explanation for all learning, I find that classical conditioning still explains emotional associations. Consider a student who has had negative experiences in their past learning and how the student learned to associate school with fear. As a result, the student may develop a phobia of school because of the feelings that this association creates (McLeod, 2018).

While classical conditioning describes the acquisition of associations where a stimulus produces a certain behavior, a different set of pattern recognition learning takes place when the behavior is followed by a consequence, whether pleasant or unpleasant. This second type of learning, which Skinner would call operant conditioning, is the heart of how children learn what it means to behave. Classroom management systems in schools are built on this system of reinforcements and punishments (Nebel, 2017). Operant behaviors are those over which a person has some conscious control. The consequences of these behaviors are what shapes whether or not the behavior is more or less likely to repeat. If a behavior is followed by a pleasurable consequence, the person is more likely to repeat the behavior in order to receive the reinforcement. On the other hand, if a behavior is followed by an unpleasant consequence, the person is less likely to repeat the behavior in order to avoid the punishment (Cherry, 2020).

To illustrate how operant conditioning works, let us examine an example of learning early in a child’s development. A baby may learn that when a certain person which they will later associate as Mom picks them up, they have a positive emotional response because of the physical connection. After many iterations, the baby forms associations between stimuli. Similar to making a connection between hunger, food, and satisfaction, the baby learns to associate this person with positive emotions of being held so that when the baby sees their Mom, they reach out to be held.

In my experience, students in school learn to live up to the expectations that parents and teachers have for them. If the standards are high, the students learn to conform to those standards, if only to avoid punishment. However, if, through exposure and repetition, the student feels respected by the one in authority and if they perceive that the high standards are imposed by the parent or teacher out of concern for the student’s welfare, the student will often not only conform, but may exceed the expectations that are put upon them.

Making Connections Among Patterns

As pattern recognition becomes more complex, patterns grow into systems. Through observation and experience humans develop associations between sets of related stimuli so that they come to create a set of beliefs about how particular parts of their world works. For example, with multiple iterations, if the interactions are predictably positive, the baby learns that their mother is trustworthy and that they can feel safe in her care. The baby has developed the conditional set of beliefs that allow them to psychologically relax because they feel taken care of by their mother. The child may transfer that trust to other people and generally feel safe in the care of different people (Bransford et al., 2000). The child is developing their ideas about their world and how they think things work. 

The Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget conceived and popularized the term schema to refer to the way that observations become small patterns which are linked together to become larger patterns or complete systems. Schemas are a set of beliefs or a personal assessment of how things work or how things should be (Cherry, 2019b). Our schemas can be more or less accurate depending on our level of experience. Our schemas are refined through more observation and experience so that our knowledge becomes closer to complete understanding. 

For example, let us argue that up to this point, the child has had only positive experiences with being held and has developed the schema, or pattern of beliefs about the world and how it works, that all people are trustworthy. If the baby has a negative experience with someone while being held, they will have to fit this encounter into their existing schema. The child could assimilate this negative experience as something not too much to be concerned about, dismiss it as an exception, and leave their schema largely intact. On the other hand, the experience could really upset them and they could accommodate this encounter into their schema by revising their entire set of beliefs in this area and perhaps become fearful about trusting unknown people. It may take some new learning on the part of the infant to overcome this and learn to be more trusting again.

When it comes to our schema, completeness is an elusive target and we can ultimately only say that our understanding is the best that it can be with the available evidence at the time. Piaget would argue, and my personal experience seems to support it, that our schemas are always in a state of continual refinement and development (Cherry, 2019b).  To use an example from the technology world, what we know as a computer and what a computer can do is continually being refined with every new computer that is designed. In a similar fashion, since knowledge is context dependent, what one individual with limited exposure and experience conceives of as a computer may be entirely different from another person whose exposure and experience is more broad. This variation in experiences results in some people having a more complex schema than others.

All learning is built upon previous knowledge. In order for a student to advance in a particular skill or set of knowledge, the prerequisite skills and knowledge must be acquired. For example, if a student does not know how to form simple sentences, it would be incredibly challenging for them to learn about paragraphs. If a student has gaps in knowledge or in skills in a certain area, it will be difficult for them to build a complete understanding. At best, there will be some misconceptions.

Patterns as Habits

Perhaps it is the computer scientist in me, but I have noticed that I try to automate as many of my daily tasks as possible. I have pretty much the same routine every morning so I do not have to think about what to do or when to do it. In a habit experiment for a graduate course, I set myself a daily reminder and tried to complete a chosen activity at the same time each day. This freed me up from trying to remember to perform my new ritual.  It became virtually automatic when the stimuli occurred that were associated with that particular time of day (5th hour in the library). Many of our human daily activities are ingrained habits - patterns - that we use to manage the complexities of our life. As Duhigg (2012) asserted, “Without habit loops, our brains would shut down, overwhelmed by the minutiae of daily life. People whose basal ganglia [the part of the brain thought to be responsible for habit formation] are damaged by injury or disease often become mentally paralyzed (Section II, para. 26).

The study of habit formation has revealed some startling insights into how people interact with their world. Larry Squire, a professor who specialized in how the brain stores events, discovered that many of the actions that seem to an outsider as the result of deliberate and conscious thought were actually conditioned responses (Duhigg, 2012). Our habits contribute greatly to make us who we are.  For example, on most days, except when there are detours, we do not have to consciously plan out our daily commute to work. It is something we just know and do without much thinking. Habits of nearly automatic processes allow us to devote the greater part of our mental energies toward analysis and insights. 

Related to habits is the organization and automatization of knowledge. Miller (1956) argued that people can typically remember five to nine independent things, or chunks, of knowledge. Miller proposed that in order to increase the amount of information remembered, people need to increase the amount of information contained in each chunk of information. This is precisely why telephone numbers are seven digits long and also why these and our Social Security numbers are grouped into sections. This grouping aids in recall. Thus, one thing that separates a novice learner from the expert is the size of the chunks of information and how they are organized. As Bransford et al. (2000) attested, the knowledge of experts is not a haphazard arrangement, but rather it is “organized around core concepts or ‘big ideas’ that guide their thinking about their domains” (p. 36). 

Patterns Become Social Learning

Imagine that you are a child and are watching your sister screaming in pain and holding her hand after touching the hot stove. In order to learn, do you really need to investigate it first-hand to see if touching the stove is really painful? Most people have observed cause and effect patterns in the lives of others that have caused them to change their own behaviors or beliefs. Observational learning is the way we learn many things that we did not learn by direct experience. If direct experience was necessary for every lesson learned, our growth would be quite limited and our knowledge would be much more hard earned and probably much more painful. We see this often in the early development of children. Cherry (2021a) gave the example of a child learning to wave hello or goodbye. No one explicitly taught the child how to do this, but by observing the adults in their life doing so, learning has taken place. “Children learn how to behave and respond to others by observing how their parent(s) and/or caregivers interact with other people” (Cherry, 2021a, para. 4).

Another way I conceptualize social impacts on patterns is through Vygotsky’s theory that for every learner, different zones exist that explain how learning happens. There are three levels within this theory. First, skills outside the zone of proximal development are those which, even with expert guidance, the learner will not be able to master. Second, there are skills which the learner can accomplish without any assistance. Finally, skills inside the Zone of Proximal Development can be mastered with assistance and guidance from a more knowledgeable and experienced other person who is able to point out the pertinent patterns to the learner (Cherry, 2021b). Further, if the mentor-mentee relationship is positive, the student will seek to emulate the habits of their mentor.

Summary

Learning starts with pattern recognition and as experience increases, patterns become larger and more complex and develop into systems. Such systems are then built into schemas which, in turn, become increasingly complex. Learning is aided by the organization of knowledge and making connections. Not all learning is done first hand and much can be gained by the assistance of others in a positive social setting as it often takes supportive, social systems to enable learning to stick and to flourish. Learning is a lifelong process of seeing patterns, whether those be as simple as knowing not to touch a hot stove or as complex as understanding how the human heart works in order to perform an emergency experimental surgery.

References

Berkeley Graduate Division. (n.d.). Behaviorism. Graduate Student Instructor Teaching Resource Center. https://gsi.berkeley.edu/gsi-guide-contents/learning-theory-research/behaviorism/

Bransford, J. L., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (Expanded Edition). National Academy Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/9853

Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), p. 32-42. https://doi-org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.2307/1176008

Cherry, K. (2019a, September 5). What is classical conditioning?. Verywell Mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/classical-conditioning-2794859

Cherry, K. (2019b, September 23). The role of a schema in psychology. Verywell Mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-a-schema-2795873

Cherry, K. (2020, May 15). The importance of assimilation in adaptation. Verywell Mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-assimilation-2794821

Cherry, K. (2021, April 28). How observational learning affects behavior. Verywell Mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-observational-learning-2795402

Cherry, K. (2021, September 11). What is the zone of proximal development? Verywell Mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-the-zone-of-proximal-development-2796034

Duhigg, C. (2012). The power of habit: Why we do what we do in life and business. Random House.

Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 101(2), 343-352. doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.1037/0033-295X.101.2.343

Moore, J. (2011). Behaviorism. The Psychological Record, 61(3), 449-463. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1007/BF03395771

Nebel, C. (2017, August 10). Behaviorism in the classroom. The Learning Scientists. https://www.learningscientists.org/blog/2017/8/10-1