Learning Theory Summary


Published on

Published in: Design, Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Learning Theory Summary

  1. 1. Learning: A Summary of Research and Insights ICP LXD July 2012 Jen Briselli Learning Experience Design Intern © 2011 Autodesk Image courtesy of Christian Kasper
  2. 2. Learning Experience © 2011 Autodesk 2
  3. 3. Learning Experience   What does this mean for software learning?  What is Autodesk working on?  © 2011 Autodesk How do people learn? What does this mean for LXD? 3
  4. 4. How do people learn? © 2011 Autodesk 4
  5. 5. There are a lot of ideas about learning that include:  Learning Domains  Learning Theories  Learning Styles  Instructional © 2011 Autodesk Design 5
  6. 6. Different people take different approaches to learning:  Human Computer Interaction (HCI) researchers    Classroom teachers    Student learning is a black box Design learning experiences around desired learning outcomes Trainers   Focus on information processing View learning as information transfer Use demonstration and practice to help users learn Designers  © 2011 Autodesk Focus on usability 6
  7. 7. It’s not the specifics that matter. Instructional designers can combine theory and research from multiple angles to design user-centered learning experiences. The goal of this slide deck is to highlight the main points as a resource for further consideration. © 2011 Autodesk 7
  8. 8. Learning Domains  Accretion: Continuous Learning     Transmission: Traditional Learning     Courses, lectures, formal training, help manuals & websites, ‘information transfer’ Benefits: Builds core knowledge & develops sound mental models with basic information Drawbacks: Not user-centered, slow process, treats the learner as an empty vessel, at odds with natural learning Acquisition: Learner Chosen     On demand, on location, in the moment & comes from many sources and media Benefits: Strong links to learning needs & high relevance, learning takes place “IRL” Drawbacks: Learners are less aware of learning, less reflection, accretion is unlike traditional learning Exploratory, inquiry-driven, learner-directed Benefits: Learner is highly motivated, learning is relevant, interesting, personalized Drawbacks: Learners often miss critical skills, little or no feedback, no prompts for reflection Emergence: Reasoning & Reflection    © 2011 Autodesk Meta-cognition, reflection on life experiences, adjustment of mental models Benefits: Tacit, deep learning, fosters higher order critical thinking skills & creativity Drawbacks: Time consuming, difficult to facilitate, requires expert mentor 8
  9. 9. Where does the teacher/designer fit in?  Accretion: Learning is an embedded process. Designer’s Role   Facilitate community of practice  © 2011 Autodesk Create learning ecology Develop connections between learner and that community 9
  10. 10. Where does the teacher/designer fit in?  Transmission: Learning is formal instruction. Designer’s Role   Share information  Execute workshops & lessons  © 2011 Autodesk Design courses & curricula Write documentation & instructions 10
  11. 11. Where does the teacher/designer fit in?  Acquisition Learning is self-directed. Designer’s Role   Design information and experiences to make learning possible  © 2011 Autodesk Ensure availability of resources Set up guideposts, but don’t draw the map 11
  12. 12. Where does the teacher/designer fit in?  Emergence: Learning is cognition & reflection. Designer’s Role   Facilitate non-linear thinking  © 2011 Autodesk Provide feedback Encourage reflection 12
  13. 13. Learning Theories & Styles Learning Theories Models that explain knowledge construction. Learning Styles A learner’s personality and preferences that influence learning needs. There are a LOT of ideas floating around out there… © 2011 Autodesk 13
  14. 14. © 2011 Autodesk 14
  15. 15. © 2011 Autodesk 15
  16. 16. Most people group learning theories into one of six categories. Six questions are asked regarding each of the six learning theories. Click on the tab color that matches the learning theory you wish to explore, then click on the question and its answer will open. Each model explains learning from a different perspective. In essence, they represent six different windows looking into the same room. Behaviorist Theory Cognitive Theory Constructivist Theory Social Learning Theory Connectivism Adult Learning Click Here Click Here Click Here Click Here Click Here Click Here Matrix Grid References Image Links The specifics matter less than the overarching themes. End Show (Lyn Goodnight (2011) compiled them into an interactive PowerPoint that does a good job of summarizing the highlights. Click here to view it now or find the same link in the Appendix). © 2011 Autodesk 16
  17. 17. So, how do we work with multiple theories? ‘Cognitive Apprenticeship’ Learning is: active and constructive process self-directed, within Zone of Proximal Development facilitated © 2011 Autodesk situated, & embedded by a mentor (or our software?) 17
  18. 18. Cognitive Apprenticeship (First introduced by Collins, Brown, & Newman, 1989) As an instructional strategy, Cognitive Apprenticeship is characterized by six methods applied in varying combinations:  Modeling   Coaching   Prompting the learner to articulate his developing knowledge, reasoning, or internal problem solving process to expose and clarify thinking and to separate component knowledge from skills (which allows the learner to understand them better). Reflection   Supporting the learner’s progress by providing assistance (completing difficult tasks for the learner) where needed, and gradually scaling back that guidance over time. Articulation   Observing the learner’s task performance and offering feedback & hints along the way. Scaffolding   Demonstrating a task explicitly so the learner can experience and build a conceptual model. Encouraging the learner to reflect and analyze performances and skills with a desire to understand and improve performance. Exploration  © 2011 Autodesk Giving the learner room to solve problems independently within low-risk circumstances and focusing the instruction around problem solving methodology itself. 18
  19. 19. How does this relate to software learning? © 2011 Autodesk 19
  20. 20. Another way to look at learning (with classroom examples): meaningful learning concept mapping lectures textbooks presentations multimedia studies laboratory assignments & writing exercises © 2011 Autodesk applying formulas to solve problems receptive/passive rote learning multiplication tables guided discovery 20 original research new music, architecture, etc. routine research & other intellectual pursuits trial & error puzzle solutions autonomous discovery
  21. 21. How might this look for software instead of classroom assignments? Using Autodesk software to design infrastructure… meaningful learning interactive tutorials traditional tutorials, help videos & written content toolclips, command suggestions & similar tools workflow visualization ‘playground mode’ (low-stakes trial & error) rote learning receptive/passive © 2011 Autodesk guided discovery 21 autonomous discovery
  22. 22. There is a wealth of research relating traditional learning to software learning. © 2011 Autodesk 22
  23. 23. Beyond Command Knowledge: Identifying and Teaching Strategic Knowledge for Using Complex Computer Applications (Bhavnani, Reif, John 2001) The Main Ideas:  Strategic Knowledge vs. Command Knowledge  Efficiency comes from greater strategic knowledge, not just greater awareness of commands  Strategic Knowledge is difficult to acquire spontaneously; to develop, users must: 1. 2. 3. 4. First be aware that different strategies exist. Then, learn when to use different strategies. Next, they learn how to execute those strategies. Finally, learn to use these strategies in different contexts. How can we encourage these four steps within the software itself? © 2011 Autodesk 23
  24. 24. The Paradox of the Guided User: Assistance Can Be Counter-Effective (van Nimwegen 2008) The Main Ideas:  Current HCI research differentiates between:  Plan-based problem solving: using internally formed mental models that adjust and improve over time   (requires a high mental workload) Display-based problem solving: using information available on the interface to guide decision making  (requires little mental workload)  Usability guidelines generally encourage the use of externalized interfaces, to promote display-based problem solving and allow for cognitive offloading.  However, a “strong reliance on external information leads to a negative effect with regard to planning of behavior.” Users stop reflecting, internalizing, or truly learning.  This type of usability may be desirable for systems that are used infrequently or associated with extreme error costs, but it “seduces users into more shallow cognitive behavior and discourages undertaking cognitive activities aimed at strategy and knowledge construction.” How can we strike a balance between externalizing the more difficult processes and promoting internalization and reflection at the same time? © 2011 Autodesk 24
  25. 25. Out of the Video Arcade, Into the Office: Where Computer Games Can Lead Productivity Software (Larson 2007) The Main Ideas:  Games use a lot of user-assistance strategies that might be applicable to non-game software.  Larson identifies five common difficulty-regulation strategies found in games that he believes can provide software designers with new approaches to learnability for complex programs with ever expanding functionality. 1. User difficulty selection. 2. Implicit & explicit stage progression. 3. Tool unlocking 4. Hinting 5. Tutorials These are sounding pretty familiar… © 2011 Autodesk 25
  26. 26. Autodesk is working on this too. © 2011 Autodesk 26
  27. 27. Autodesk Knowledge Network Readout from May 2012 © 2011 Autodesk 27
  28. 28. © 2011 Autodesk 28
  29. 29. © 2011 Autodesk 29
  30. 30. LXD can use these insights to design better learning experiences… © 2011 Autodesk 30
  31. 31. Visualization © 2011 Autodesk 31
  32. 32. Mike Myles (AEC UX, 2010) suggested visualizing the community knowledge base: Steve Ransom (AKN- GCSO) is currently working on the idea of a Learning Map: © 2011 Autodesk 32
  33. 33. © 2011 Autodesk 33
  34. 34. Uber Learning: CIP Command Data (Autodesk Research 2008) © 2011 Autodesk 34
  35. 35. Tutorials © 2011 Autodesk 35
  36. 36. “Tutorial” means different things to different people: “Tutorial” in Infrastructure Modeler © 2011 Autodesk 36
  37. 37. “Tutorial” in Autodesk Research © 2011 Autodesk 37
  38. 38. “Tutorial” in Inventor © 2011 Autodesk 38
  39. 39. Using CIP Data © 2011 Autodesk 39
  40. 40. Uber Learning: CIP Command Data (Autodesk Research 2008) “We can use the predictability of the next command to create a user interface to highlight commands that expert users tend to use, but an individual user is not. In this way users could discover new functionality and progress towards a more efficient workflow.” © 2011 Autodesk 40
  41. 41. Questions to consider: (& what I’ve been thinking about)  What do accretion, transmission, acquisition and emergence look like, for our users and our software specifically?  How could the software, (in place of a mentor), facilitate a cognitive apprenticeship approach to learning?  How should in-canvas workflow visualizations and interactive tutorials be designed to encourage reflection and internalization of the user’s work process?  © 2011 Autodesk Currently working on this problem, creating design wireframes, hopefully showing lo-fi prototypes to users in the coming weeks. 41
  42. 42. Appendix © 2011 Autodesk 42
  43. 43. Interactive Learning Theory: Six Learning Styles Autodesk Knowledge Network: Learning in a Connected World Autodesk Research: Learning Projects ‘Uber Learning’ Paper Mike Myles’ 2010 PowerPoint: Graph Navigation in CKB Research papers & links: LXD Learning Resources SharePoint folder © 2011 Autodesk 43