The Learner-Centered Psychological Principles

Excerpt from Assessing the Role of Educational Technology in the Teaching and Learning Process: A Learner-Centered Perspective by Barbara L. McCombs, University of Denver Research Institute, in Secretary's Conference on Educational Technology 2000 [http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/techconf00/mccombs_paper.html]

Beginning in 1990, the American Psychological Association (APA) appointed a special Task Force on Psychology in Education, one of whose purposes was to integrate research and theory from psychology and education in order to surface general principles that have stood the test of time and can provide a framework for school redesign and reform. The result was a document that originally specified twelve fundamental principles about learners and learning that, taken together, provide an integrated perspective on factors influencing learning for all learners (APA, 1993). This document was revised in 1997 (APA, 1997) and now includes 14 principles that are essentially the same as the original 12 principles with the exception that attention is now given to principles dealing with diversity and standards. [Note to readers: For those interested in research support for the Principles, several sources are relevant. The specific research and theory that was reviewed in developing the Principles is described in McCombs and Whisler (1997). Further research support is also provided in Alexander and Murphy (1998) and Lambert and McCombs (1998)].

The 14 learner-centered principles are categorized into four domains as shown in Table 1. These categories group the principles into research-validated domains important to learning: metacognitive and cognitive factors, affective and motivational factors, developmental and social factors, and individual difference factors. An understanding of these domains and the principles within them establishes a framework for designing learner-centered practices at all levels of schooling. It also helps define what "learner-centered" means from a research-validated perspective.

Defining "Learner-Centered"

From an integrated and holistic look at the Principles, the following definition emerges:

"Learner centered" is the perspective that couples a focus on individual learners - their heredity, experiences, perspectives, backgrounds, talents, interests, capacities, and needs - with a focus on leaning - the best available knowledge about learning and how it occurs and about teaching practices that are most effective in promoting the highest levels of motivation, learning, and achievement for all learners. This dual focus then informs and drives educational decision making. Learner-centered is a reflection in practice of the Learner-Centered Psychological Principles - in the programs, practices, policies, and people that support learning for all.

This definition of learner-centered is thus based on an understanding of the Learner-Centered Psychological Principles as a representation of the current knowledge base on learners and learning. The Principles apply to all learners, in and outside of school, young and old. Learner-centered is also related to the beliefs, characteristics, dispositions, and practices of teachers - practices primarily created by the teacher. When teachers and their practices function from an understanding of the knowledge base delineated in the Principles, they (a) include learners in decisions about how and what they learn and how that learning is assessed; (b) value each learner's unique perspectives; (c) respect and accommodate individual differences in learners' backgrounds, interests, abilities, and experiences; and (d) treat learners as co-creators and partners in the teaching and learning process.

Table 1: The Learner-Centered Psychological Principles

COGNITIVE AND METACOGNITIVE FACTORS Principle 1: Nature of the learning process. The learning of complex subject matter is most effective when it is an intentional process of constructing meaning from information and experience. Principle 2: Goals of the learning process. The successful learner, over time and with support and instructional guidance, can create meaningful, coherent representations of knowledge. Principle 3: Construction of knowledge. The successful learner can link new information with existing knowledge in meaningful ways. Principle 4: Strategic thinking The successful learner can create and use a repertoire of thinking and reasoning strategies to achieve complex learning goals. Principle 5: Thinking about thinking Higher order strategies for selecting and monitoring mental operations facilitate creative and critical thinking. Principle 6: Context of learning Learning is influenced by environmental factors, including culture, technology, and instructional practices. MOTIVATIONAL AND AFFECTIVE FACTORS Principle 7: Motivational and emotional influences on learning What and how much is learned is influenced by the learner's motivation. Motivation to learn, in turn, is influenced by the individual's emotional states, beliefs, interests and goals, and habits of thinking. Principle 8: Intrinsic motivation to learn The learner's creativity, higher order thinking, and natural curiosity all contribute to motivation to learn.

Intrinsic motivation is stimulated by tasks of optimal novelty and difficulty, relevant to personal interests, and providing for personal choice and control. Principle 9: Effects of motivation on effort Acquisition of complex knowledge and skills requires extended learner effort and guided practice. Without learners' motivation to learn, the willingness to exert this effort is unlikely without coercion. DEVELOPMENTAL AND SOCIAL FACTORS Principle 10: Developmental influence on learning As individuals develop, they encounter different opportunities and experience different constraints for learning. Learning is most effective when differential development within and across physical, intellectual, emotional, and social domains is taken into account. Principle 11: Social influences on learning Learning is influenced by social interactions, interpersonal relations, and communication with others. INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES FACTORS Principle 12: Individual differences in learning Learners have different strategies, approaches, and capabilities for learning that are a function of prior experience and heredity. Principle 13: Learning and diversity Learning is most effective when differences in learners' linguistic, cultural, and social backgrounds are taken into account. Principle 14: Standards and assessment Setting appropriately high and challenging standards and assessing the learner and learning progress-including diagnostic, process, and outcome assessment-are integral parts of the learning process.

Summarized from the APA Work Group of the Board of Educational Affairs (1997, November). Learner-centered psychological principles: Guidelines for school reform and redesign. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

References

Alexander, P.A., & Murphy, P. K. (1998). The research base for APA's Learner-Centered Psychological Principles. In N. Lambert & B.L. McCombs (Eds.), How students learn: Reforming schools through learner-centered education. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

APA Work Group of the Board of Educational Affairs (1997, November). Learner-centered psychological principles: A framework for school reform and redesign. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

APA Task Force on Psychology in Education (1993, January). Learner-centered psychological principles: Guidelines for school redesign and reform. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association and Mid-Continent Regional Educational Laboratory.

Bartolome, L. I. (1994). Beyond the methods fetish: Toward a humanizing pedagogy. Harvard Educational Review, 64(2), 173-194.

Bennett, D., McMillan-Culp, K., Honey, M., Tally, B., & Spielvogel, B. (March, 2000). It all depends: Strategies for designing technologies for education change. Paper presented at the International Conference on Learning with Technology, "Does Technology Make a Difference?," Philadelphia, Temple University.

Boyle, A., & Rigg, P. (March, 2000). Technology and problem-based learning: The virtual benefits of the processes of critical thinking and collaborative writing. Paper presented at the International Conference on Learning with Technology, "Does Technology Make a Difference?," Philadelphia, Temple University.

Bransford, John D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.) (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Brown, D. B. (2000). Convention highlights: Third general session on successful reform and change strategies that work (Michael Fullan). Tech Trends, 44(3), 14-15.

Burnham, L., Miller, A., & Ray. L. (March, 2000). Putting the pieces together. Paper presented at the International Conference on Learning with Technology, "Does Technology Make a Difference?," Philadelphia, Temple University.

Caine, R. N., & Caine, G. (1997). Education on the edge of possibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Carroll, T. (2000, July). Preparing tomorrow's teachers to use technology. Keynote presentation at the U.S. Department of Education's Regional Conferences on "Evaluating Technology in Education," Atlanta.

Combs, A. W. (1962). A perceptual view of the adequate personality. 1962 ASCD Yearbook: Perceiving, behaving, becoming: A new focus for education. Washington, DC: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Pp. 50-64.

Combs, A. W. (1986). What makes a good helper? A person-centered approach. Person-Centered Review, l(l), 51-61.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1996). The quiet revolution: Rethinking teacher development. Educational Leadership, 53(6), 4-10.

Diamond, M., & Hopson, J. (1998). Magic trees of the mind. New York: Dutton.

Ellsworth, J. B. (2000). An in-depth look at the 2000 CHANGE council keynote address. Tech Trends, 44(3), 28-30.

Fullan, M. (2000, February). Change forces: The sequel. 2000 CHANGE Council Keynote Address presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Long Beach, CA.

Fullan, M. (1997). Emotion and hope: Constructive concepts for complex times (pp. 216-233). In A. Hargreaves (Ed.), Rethinking educational change with heart and mind: 1997 ASCD Yearbook. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Fullan, M. G. (1995). The limits and the potential of professional development. In T. R. Guskey & M. Huberman (Eds.), Professional development in education: New paradigms and practices. New York: Teachers College Press. Pp. 253-267.

Fullan, M. (1992-93). Managing change. Toronto, Ontario: University of Toronto.

Fulton, K., & Torney-Purta, J. (March, 2000). How teachers beliefs about teaching and learning are reflected in their use of technology: Case studies from urban middle schools. Paper presented at the International Conference on Learning with Technology, "Does Technology Make a Difference?," Philadelphia, Temple University.

Green, D. A., & Staley, A. (March, 2000). Using information technology in traditionally "soft" subjects. Paper presented at the International Conference on Learning with Technology, "Does Technology Make a Difference?," Philadelphia, Temple University.

Hannafin, M. (1999). Learning in open-ended environments: Tools and technologies for the next millennium. (ITFORUM Paper 34) http://itech1.coe.uga.edu/itforum/paper34/paper34.html

Jensen, E. (1998). Teaching with the brain in mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Joyce, B., & Calhoun, E. (1995). School renewal: An inquiry, not a formula. Educational Leadership, 52(&), 51-55.

Kanfer, R., & McCombs, B. L. (in press). Motivation: Applying current theory to critical issues in training. In S. Tobias & D. T. Fletcher (Eds.), Handbook of Training. New York: Macmillan.

Lambert, N. & McCombs, B. L. (Eds.) (1998). How students learn: Reforming schools through learner-centered education. Washington, DC: APA Books.

McCombs, B. L. (in press). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: A phenomenological view. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-Regulated learning and academic achievement: Theory, Research, and Practice (2nd. Ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

McCombs, B. L. (2000, July). Learner-centered psychological principles: A framework for technology evaluation. Invited paper presented at the U.S. Department of Education's Regional Conferences on "Evaluating Technology in Education," Atlanta.

McCombs, B. L., & Lauer, P. A. (1997). Development and validation of the Learner-Centered Battery: Self-Assessment tools for teacher reflection and professional development. The Professional Educator, 20(1), 1-21.

McCombs, B. L., & Whisler, J. S. (1997). The learner-centered classroom and school: Strategies for increasing student motivation and achievement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

McKeachie, W. J. (1995, August). What makes a good teacher great! Invited address at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, New York.

McMillan-Culp, K., Hawkins, J., & Honey, M. (1999, January). Review paper on educational technology research and development. New York: Center for Children and Technology.

McNabb, M., Hawkes, M., & Rouk, U. (1999, July). Critical issues in evaluating the effectiveness of technology. Paper presented at the National Conference on Educational Technology, Washington, DC.

McWhorter, P., Jarrard, B., Rhoades, B., Wiltcher. B. (1996, Summer). Student-generated curriculum: Lessons from our students. (Instructional Resource No. 30). University of Georgia and University of Maryland: National Reading Research Center.

Noddings, N. (1995). Teaching themes of care. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(9), 675-679.

Nolen, S. B. (1994, April). Learning from students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.

Rein, D. (March, 2000). What is effective integration of technology, and does it make a difference? Paper presented at the International Conference on Learning with Technology, "Does Technology Make a Difference?," Philadelphia, Temple University.

Rudduck, J., Day, J., & Wallace, C. (1997). Student perspectives on school improvement (pp. 73-91). In A. Hargreaves (Ed.), Rethinking educational change with heart and mind: 1997 ASCD Yearbook. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Schank, R. C., & Jona, K. (1999, December). Extracurriculars as the curriculum: A vision of education for the 21st century. White paper commissioned for the Forum on Technology in Education: Envisioning the Future, Washington, DC.

Schaps, E., & Lewis, C. (1999). Perils on an essential journey: Building school community. Phi Delta Kappan, 81(3), 215-218.

Sparks, D., & Hirsh, S. (1997). A new vision for staff development. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Sylwester, R. (1995). A celebration of neurons: An educator's guide to the brain. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Thornburg, D. D. (1999, December). Technology in K-12 education: Envisioning a new future. White paper commissioned for the Forum on Technology in Education: Envisioning the Future, Washington, DC.

Weinstein, R. S. (1998). Promoting positive expectations in schooling. In N. Lambert & B. L. McCombs (Eds.), How students learn: Reforming schools through learner-centered education. New York: APA Books.

Wheatley, M. J. (1999). Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a chaotic world (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Wolfe, P., & Sorgen, M. (1990). Mind, memory, and learning. Napa, CA: Author.
Yakel, E., & Lamberski, R. J. (March, 2000). Searching for the differences technology makes. Paper presented at the International Conference on Learning with Technology, "Does Technology Make a Difference?," Philadelphia, Temple University.

Zimmerman, B.J. (1994). Dimensions of academic self-regulation: A conceptual framework for education (pp. 3-21). In D. H. Schunk & B.J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Zimmerman, B.J., & Schunk, D. H. (Eds.) (in press). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theory, research, and practice (2nd Ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.