Competences, Learning Theories and MOOCsRecent Developments.docx

Competences, Learning Theories and MOOCs:
Recent Developments in Lifelong Learning
Karl Steffens
Introduction
We think of our societies as ‘knowledge societies’ in which
lifelong learning is
becoming increasingly important. Lifelong learning refers to the
idea that people
not only learn in schools and universities, but also in non-
formal and informal
ways during their lifespan.The concepts of lifelong learning and
lifelong education
began to enter the discourse on educational policies in the late
1960s (Tuijnman
& Boström, 2002). However, these are related, but distinct
concepts. As Lee (2014,
p. 472) notes ‘the terminological change (from lifelong
education, continuing
education and adult education, to lifelong learning) reflects a
conceptual departure
from the idea of organised educational provision to that of a
more individualised
pursuit of learning’.
One of the first important documents on lifelong learning was
the report of the
International Commission on the Development of Education to
UNESCO in
1972, titled ‘Learning to be. The world of education today and
tomorrow’. In his

introductory letter to the Director-General of UNESCO, the
chairman of the
Commission, Edgar Faure, stated that the work of the
Commission was based on
four assumptions (see Elfert pp. and Carneiro pp. in this issue).
The first was
related to the idea that there was an international community
which was united by
common aspirations and the second was the belief in democracy
and in education
as its keystones. The third was ‘that the aim of development is
the complete
fulfilment of man, in all the richness of his personality, the
complexity of his forms
of expression and his various commitments — as individual,
member of a family
and of a community, citizen and producer, inventor of
techniques and creative
dreamer’. The last assumption was that ‘only an over-all,
lifelong education can
produce the kind of complete man, the need for whom is
increasing with the
continually more stringent constraints tearing the individual
asunder’ (Faure,
1972, p. vi).
Following the Faure Report, the UNESCO Institute for
Education, which
was founded in Germany in 1951, started to focus on lifelong
learning and
subsequently became the UNESCO Institute for Lifelong
Learning (UIL, http://
uil.unesco.org/home/). It was under its leadership that a formal
model of lifelong
education was developed and published in the book ‘Towards a
System of Life-

long Education’ (Cropley, 1980). The concept of lifelong
learning also became
manifest in the ‘Education for All’ (EFA) agenda that was
launched at the World
Conference on Education for All which took place in Jomtien
(Thailand) in
1990 (Inter-Agency Commission, 1990). Ten years later, at the
World Education
Forum in Dakar (Senegal) in 2000, the Dakar Framework for
Action was
designed ‘to enable all individuals to realize their right to learn
and to fulfil their
responsibility to contribute to the development of their society’
(UNESCO,
2000, p. 15). Six development goals were set to promote
lifelong learning. These
were:
bs_bs_banner
European Journal of Education, Vol. 50, No. 1, 2015
DOI: 10.1111/ejed.12102
© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
1. Expanding and improving comprehensive early childhood
care and education,
especially for the most vulnerable and disadvantaged children.
2. Ensuring that by 2015 all children, particularly girls, children
in difficult
circumstances and those belonging to ethnic minorities, have
access to and
complete free and compulsory primary education of good

quality.
3. Ensuring that the learning needs of all young people and
adults are met
through equitable access to appropriate learning and life skills
programmes.
4. Achieving a 50 per cent improvement in levels of adult
literacy by 2015,
especially for women, and equitable access to basic and
continuing education
for all adults.
5. Eliminating gender disparities in primary and secondary
education by 2005,
and achieving gender equality in education by 2015, with a
focus on ensuring
girls’ full and equal access to and achievement in basic
education of good
quality.
6. Improving every aspect of the quality of education, and
ensuring their excel-
lence so that recognized and measurable learning outcomes are
achieved by
all, especially in literacy, numeracy and essential life skills.
The idea of lifelong learning was supported by the Report of the
International
Commission on Education for the Twenty-first Century to
UNESCO (Delors,
1996). In the same year, the OECD in its report ‘Lifelong
Learning for All’
(OECD, 1996) presented the following definition which also
refers to life-wide
learning, including formal and informal learning: ‘Lifelong

learning is best under-
stood as a process of individual learning and development
across the life-span,
from cradle to grave — from learning in early childhood to
learning in retirement.
It is an inclusive concept that refers not only to education in
formal settings, such
as schools, universities and adult education institutions, but also
to “life-wide”
learning in informal settings, at home, at work and in the wider
community’
(Tuijnman & Boström, 2002, p. 101).
At the same time, lifelong learning became a topic in European
educational
policies (Borg & Mayo, 2005). In 2000, the European
Commission, with its
‘Memorandum on lifelong learning’, initiated a Europe-wide
consultation which
resulted in a communication from the European Commission on
‘Making a
European Area of Lifelong Learning a Reality’ (European
Commission, 2001). In
this document, lifelong learning was defined as ‘all learning
activity undertaken
throughout life, with the aim of improving knowledge, skills
and competence with
a personal, civic, social and/or employment-related perspective’
(European
Commission, 2001, p. 9). The knowledge, skills and
competences that were
supposed to be acquired or improved through lifelong learning
needed to be
defined more specifically.The European Commission therefore
initiated a number
of activities which centred on the identification of key

competences which
were considered to be necessary for the achievement of personal
fulfilment, active
citizenship, social cohesion and employability in a knowledge
society. A catalogue
of eight key competences was finally suggested in ‘Key
Competences for Lifelong
Learning — A European Reference Framework’ (European
Council, 2006).
In the documents cited so far, the learning that takes places
throughout life is
not linked to any specific theory of learning. It therefore seems
useful to examine
how far recent developments may explain the process of
acquiring and improving
knowledge, skills and competences. There are basically three
new approaches to
42 European Journal of Education
learning: one that focuses on findings from neuroscience and
two that focus on
learning in digital networks using open educational resources.
They all stress the
fact that learning is an integral part of meaning- making. Since
the latter two
theories are strongly related to learning in technology-enhanced
learning environ-
ments, it is important to point out that this kind of learning
requires the compe-
tence to self-regulate one’s learning to a much higher degree

than in traditional
learning environments.
The importance of digital technologies has been recognised in
educational
policies for some time. In the Dakar Framework for Action, one
of the 12 Edu-
cation for All (EFA) strategies was to harness new information
and communication
technologies to help to achieve the EFA goals (UNESCO, 2000,
p. 21). Digital
technologies play an important role in the Europe 2020
framework for smart,
sustainable and inclusive growth in Europe (European
Commission, 2010a). The
Digital Agenda for Europe (European Commission, 2010b) is
part of this frame-
work and is based on seven pillars, most of which refer to
economic and techno-
logical aspects. However, the agenda does include a pillar that
is dedicated to
‘Enhancing digital literacy, skills and inclusion’ (Pillar VII).
Digital competence
was also listed by the European Parliament and Council
(European Council,
2006) as one of eight 21st century key competences, together
with the competence
for self-regulated learning (learning to learn). One important
aspect of digital
technologies is that they have the potential to support learning.
While it is not
prudent to ask if they do indeed support learning, one should
explore which kind
of digital technology can enhance which kind of learning. One
of the most recent
developments in the field of learning with digital technologies

is Massive Open
Online Courses (MOOCs).This is a relatively new development
and it is certainly
too early to say something definite about their potential to
enhance learning, but
they could have an impact on how we think about lifelong
learning. Although much
is being written about MOOCs, there is still relatively little
empirical evidence
concerning their potential to support learning, but it is likely
that they will stay.
From an educational point of view, I do not see the added value
of massive
participation in online courses, but there are certainly other
standpoints from
which MOOCs may seem a worthwhile adventure. I do believe
that a MOOC of
good quality will help people who are already experienced
learners to improve their
knowledge and skills in a specific area.Therefore, MOOCs are
likely to play a role
in lifelong learning.
Approaches to learning based on findings from neuroscience
seem very attrac-
tive because they are based on empirical studies of what is
happening in our brains.
It does seem that the search for meaning is a fundamental
characteristic of our
brains. However, the neural activities which take place when we
are learning are
extremely fine-grained and complex, and, while these
approaches may help us to
understand how we learn, it is still difficult to design teaching
strategies that
support brain-friendly learning. The other two theories,

connectivism (Siemens,
2004) and generativism (Carneiro, 2010) aim to explain
collaborative learning in
virtual learning environments.They could therefore better be
able to describe and
explain lifelong learning in a digital age. At the same time, they
present visions that
perceive learning as an integral part of meaning-making.
The acquisition and improvement of competences lie at the core
of lifelong
learning. Catalogues of 21st century key competences have been
suggested by the
major institutions involved in educational policies in the new
millennium. While
Karl Steffens 43
these do have their merits, I believe that we need a deeper
conception of what
people should know and be able to do. Delors’ (1996) four
pillars of lifelong
learning (learning to know, learning to do, learning to live
together and learning to
be) seem to me to be a good example of such a conception.
Erikson in his writings
(Erikson, 1974) emphasises that care should be an important
concept in lifelong
development and lifelong learning, a virtue to be acquired.
These concepts share
the belief that man is a lifelong learner and that lifelong
learning is an integral part

of his quest for meaning.
Lifelong Learning and Competences
Ever since education has been practised, there have been
discussions on what to
teach. Catalogues of learning goals go back to the septem artes
liberales in Greek and
Roman times and extend to present day lists of 21st century key
competences.The
basic question has, however, remained the same: how can
education help individ-
uals to develop their personality and prepare them for life in
society?
In 1997, the OECD initiated the ‘Definition and Selection of
Competencies’
(DeSeCo project, OECD, 2001) project which was to provide a
conceptual frame-
work for the identification of key competencies to be acquired
and improved in
lifelong learning. The project’s outcome served as a foundation
for international
surveys such as PISA which were to measure these
competencies (OECD, 2001;
OECD, 2005).
In 1995, the European Parliament and Council declared 1996 the
European
Year of Lifelong Learning (European Parliament, 1995), the
main objective of
which was to raise awareness among European citizens about
the need for and the
possibilities of lifelong learning. In 2000, the European
Commission issued a
Memorandum on Lifelong Learning which formed the basis of a
European-wide

consultation, the results of which were published by the
European Commission in
2001 (European Commission, 2001). In this publication, the
European Commis-
sion stated: ‘In addition to the emphasis it places on learning
from pre-school to
postretirement, lifelong learning should encompass the whole
spectrum of formal,
non-formal and informal learning.The consultation also
highlighted the objectives
of learning, including active citizenship, personal fulfilment and
social inclusion,
as well as employment-related aspects’. (European Commission,
2001, p. 3). In
outlining the idea of an innovative pedagogy for lifelong
learning, the European
Commission observed that a shift from knowledge to
competence and from
teaching to learning was taking place (European Commission,
2001, p. 23).
In 2006, the European Parliament and the Council recommended
a catalogue
of eight key competences for lifelong learning:
1. communication in the mother tongue;
2. communication in foreign languages;
3. mathematical competence and basic competences in science
and technology;
4. digital competence;
5. learning to learn;
6. social and civic competence;
7. sense of initiative and entrepreneurship;
8. cultural awareness and expression (European Council, 2006).
The first three are domain-specific. Their definition,
implementation in

school curricula and measurement seem to be fairly simple. The
last five are
domain-general or transversal. As Halász and Michel (2011)
pointed out, they may
be perceived and interpreted differently in different European
countries.
In line with the idea that lifelong learning refers to learning
throughout life, the
European Commission proposed a ‘New skills for new jobs’
programme in 2008.
Its activities aimed to ‘upgrade skills of the EU population and
to ensure a better
match with labour market needs’ (European Commission, 2008,
p. 11).
Lifelong Learning and Learning Theories
Lifelong learning is a very general concept. It applies to all
learning activities in
which individuals engage throughout their life in formal (school
and university),
non-formal (other forms of institutionalised learning) or
informal settings (at
home, with family members of peers). It is therefore impossible
to single out a
theory of learning that is capable of explaining all forms of
lifelong learning. Yet
new theories that could have an impact on our understanding of
lifelong learning

have recently been suggested.
Although there are several definitions of learning, the one
proposed by Driscoll
(2000) seems very fitting because it makes a distinction
between performance and
performance potential, thus allowing us to make a distinction
between overt and
observable behaviour on the one hand and competences as
performance potential
on the other. At the same time, it seems wide enough to include
different
approaches to learning. Driscoll (2000, p. 11) defines learning
as ‘a persisting
change in human performance or performance potential . . .
[which] must come
about as a result of the learner’s experience and interaction with
the world’.
Theories of learning were developed in behaviourism,
cognitivism and con-
structivism.They are well-established, but they explain only
relatively simple forms
of learning. They could therefore be called nano- or micro-level
theories of learn-
ing. To explain learning activities in lifelong learning, it is
desirable to have
macro-level theories of learning.Theories of this type were
developed only recently
and include learning theories based on findings from the
neuroscience,
connectivism as proposed by Siemens (2004), and generativism
as suggested by
Carneiro (2010).
Brain Research and Learning

Neuroscience has benefited from advances in molecular biology,
electrophysiology,
and computational neuroscience in the second part of the last
century and has
become an interdisciplinary adventure (Finger, 2001). Findings
from neuroscience
may help us to overcome the fragmented view of human beings
that psychology has
been presenting in the last decades. It may help us to understand
the relationship
between body and mind (see Damasio, 1994, for a very readable
presentation),
between emotion and cognition (Damasio, 2003) and between
the brain and
consciousness (Damasio, 2010). There is also evidence that
social competence
(formerly social intelligence, Goleman, 2006) has neurological
foundations: mirror
neurons trigger in us behaviour and emotions that we observe in
others.
In 1991, Renate and Geoffry Caine proposed 12 principles of
brain-based
learning:
1. The brain is a complex adaptive system.
2. The brain is a social brain.
3. The search for meaning is innate.
4. The search for meaning occurs through patterning.
Karl Steffens 45
5. Emotions are critical to patterning.

6. Every brain simultaneously perceives and creates parts and
wholes.
7. Learning involves both focused attention and peripheral
attention.
8. Learning always involves conscious and unconscious
processes.
9. We have at least two ways of organizing memory.
10. Learning is developmental.
11. Complex learning is enhanced by challenge and inhibited by
threat.
12. Every brain is uniquely organized (Caine & Caine, 1991).
Admittedly, these are very general principles, and, although
they are in line with
findings from neuroscience (Kandel et al., 2012), they do not
allow us to fully
understand the enormously complex processes that take place in
our brains while
we learn. At the same time, understanding how the brain works
when we learn only
provides us with limited clues on how to guide and improve
learning processes
(Bruer, 1997; Goswami, 2004). Yet there are suggestions for
what is called
neurodidactics (Herrmann, 2009). Whereas this area of research
has benefited
from advances in brain research, the next two examples aim at
integrating advances
in technology and open educational resources.
Connectivism
In 2004, George Siemens published an article on the Internet
called
‘Connectivism: a learning theory for the digital age’. His basic
argument was that
classical theories of learning (in behaviourism, cognitivism and

constructivism)
were developed when today’s technologies were not available
and that they did not
address learning that is taking place outside of people and
within organisations.
Connectivism, according to Siemens, is ‘the integration of
principles explored by
chaos, network, and complexity and self-organization theories’
and includes the
following principles:
1. Learning and knowledge rest in diversity of opinions.
2. Learning is a process of connecting specialized nodes or
information sources.
3. Learning may reside in non-human appliances.
4. Capacity to know more is more critical than what is currently
known.
5. Nurturing and maintaining connections is needed to facilitate
continual
learning.
6. Ability to see connections between fields, ideas, and concepts
is a core skill.
7. Currency (accurate, up-to-date knowledge) is the intent of all
connectivist
learning activities.
8. Decision-making is itself a learning process. Choosing what
to learn and the
meaning of incoming information is seen through the lens of a
shifting reality.
While there is a right answer now, it may be wrong tomorrow
due to alterations
in the information climate affecting the decision (Siemens,
2004).

In his 2006 publication (Siemens, 2006, p. 25) on knowing
knowledge, we find a
more systematic approach to learning. ‘Learning is to come to
know’ and this
process takes place in three phases: (1) a preparatory phase
(exploration, inquiry,
decision making, selecting, and deselecting), (2) the actual
learning phase (acqui-
sition of knowledge) and (3) evaluation and assessment (which
can also occur
during the second phase). According to Siemens (2006, p. 29),
‘Learning is the
process of creating networks. Nodes are external entities which
we can use to form
a network. Or nodes may be people, organizations, libraries,
web sites, books,
journals, database, or any other source of information.The act of
learning (things
become a bit tricky here) is one of creating an external network
of nodes — where
we connect and form information and knowledge sources. The
learning that
happens in our heads is an internal network (neural)’. Hence, he
uses the metaphor
of a network to describe both learning in a community of
learners and individual
learning.
Generativism

One of the most recent ideas on learning was espoused by
Carneiro (2010). His
basic argument is that Open Educational Resources (OER) have
provided us with
rich opportunities for learning and that classical learning
theories such as those
presented in behaviourism, cognitivism and constructivism are
unable to capture
the complexity of learning that is made possible in technology-
enhanced learning
environments. He is also critical of the concept of connectivism
as developed by
Siemens (2004) because, in his point of view, Siemens’ concept
focuses too much
on the individual. What we may need, according to Carneiro,
are new sets of
competences and different ways of enhancing social learning. In
his approach,
called generativism, he conceives of learning as a knowledge-
generating activity,
i.e. an activity which generates new knowledge out of
previously codified
knowledge. ‘Generativism understood as a constant re-creation
of knowledge
appeals to the unique human ability to derive new meaning from
experience
and to build sense out of a shared body of conventional
knowledge’(Carneiro,
2010).
Generative learning is considered to be different from
conventional (adaptive
learning). These differences are enumerated in Table I.
Learning, according to Carneiro (Carneiro & Draxler, 2008;
Carneiro, 2010),

is a step in a meaning-making process where data are
transformed into meta-data,
yielding information; information is transformed into meta-
information as a result
of learning, and learning in the form of meta-learning leads to
meaning (see
Figure 1); these transformations have their correspondences in
transformations
from simple to complex, from science of quantities to science of
qualities and from
product to service.
The underlying vision is that our societies which used to
be‘clockwork orange
societies’ (Carneiro, 2007) in which industrialism dominated
and which were
largely bureaucracy-led are going through a knowledge age
which is characterised
by globalisation and market-led arrangements and will
eventually become
TABLE I. Adaptive learning versus generative learning (from
Carneiro, 2010)
.
ADAPTIVE LEARNING GENERATIVE LEARNING
Adjusting to change Expanding capabilities
(preference for ‘fit’) (preference for ‘stretch’)
Coping with threats Enhancing creativity
Reacting to symptoms Looking in new ways
Capturing trends and incorporating early signs Adressing
underlying causes
Eliciting flexibility Thinking differently
Projecting trends Anticipating futures
Seeking conventional knowledge Rewarding knowledge re-

construction
Karl Steffens 47
learning societies, characterised by the advent of a New
Renaissance and learning
communities that are fully empowered to conduct the business
of education and
training in accordance with their communal identities (Carneiro,
2007, p. 157; see
Figure 2).
FIGURE 1. Generativism: learning as an integral part of
meaning making
(from Carneiro, 2010)
FIGURE 2. Scenarios leading to a Learning Society
(from Carneiro, 2007, p. 158)
In his more recent writings, Carneiro (2013, p. 369) developed
the concept of
a learning society further, slightly changing the focus from the
learning society to
the learning city. ‘The learning city becomes a powerful symbol
of the living and of
the learning that humanity so much aspires to achieve in a

sustainable way’. Like
in the concept of the learning society, the quest for meaning is
seen as the
dominant aim of mankind. The learning city is where a new
humanism can grow
and a new citizenship which is acutely aware of the democratic,
social, egalitarian
(gender-balanced), intercultural and environmental aspects of
life can develop.
Self-regulated Learning
Theories of self-regulated learning may be considered to be
meta-learning theories
because they do not describe learning per se. Rather, they focus
on how individuals
organise their learning. In fact, the concept of self-regulated
learning bears some
resemblance with that of metacognition. According to
Zimmerman and Schunk
(2008, p. 1), those who know how to self-regulate their learning
‘set better learning
goals, implement more effective learning strategies, monitor
and assess their goal
progress better, establish a more productive environment for
learning, seek assis-
tance more often when it is needed, expend effort and persist
better, adjust
strategies better, and set more effective new goals when present
ones are com-
pleted’. Although several models have been developed in the
past, the best known
is probably the one proposed by Zimmerman. Zimmerman
(2000) assumes that
self-regulation consists of cycles of forethought, performance or
volitional control,
and self-reflection. Self-regulation involves ‘cognitive,

affective, motivational and
behavioural components that provide the individual with the
capacity to adjust his
or her actions and goals to achieve the desired results in light of
changing envi-
ronmental conditions’ (Zeidner et al., 2000, p. 751).
The concept of self-regulation of learning has recently received
greater atten-
tion in publications and policy statements in the field of
lifelong learning. Delors
(1996) in his report to UNESCO ‘Learning: The treasure within.
Education
throughout life’ listed four pillars for lifelong learning. The
first was ‘learning to
know’, which not only included the desire to know and a
positive attitude towards
learning, but also learning to learn. ‘Learning to know, by
combining a sufficiently
broad general knowledge with the opportunity to work in depth
on a small number
of subjects. This also means learning to learn, so as to benefit
from the opportu-
nities education provides throughout life’ (Delors, 1996, p. 37).
Self-regulated
learning or learning to learn is also one of the eight
competences listed in the
‘Recommendations on Key Competences for Lifelong Learning’
which were
adopted by the European Parliament and the Council in
December 2006
(European Council, 2006). The capacity to self-regulate one’s
learning has also
become a competence to be assessed in PISA surveys. The PISA
2009 study saw
it as: (1) awareness of strategies to understand and remember

information, (2)
awareness of effective strategies to summarise information and
(3) use of
memorisation, elaboration and control strategies (OECD,
2010b). PISA results
show that self-regulated learning is related to reading
proficiency and to learning
outcomes. It is an important concept in lifelong learning.While
in formal learning
settings, teachers and tutors may guide individuals in their
learning, this may not
be the case in non-formal and informal learning settings. The
capacity to self-
regulate one’s learning is of particular importance in relatively
open learning
environments such as those where learning is enhanced by
digital technologies
Karl Steffens 49
(Carneiro et al., 2011; Carneiro & Steffens, 2013). A point in
case may be learning
with MOOCs. Empirical studies show that there is an extremely
high drop-out rate
(Armstrong, 2013) which may be due to the fact that this kind
of technology-
enhanced learning requires a great deal of self-regulation.
Providing scaffolding in
technology-enhanced learning environments could be a good
option to improve
the situation (Azevedo & Hadwin, 2005; Van de Pol et al.,
2010; Devolder et al.,

2012).
Digital Technologies in Lifelong Learning and MOOCs
The last three decades have seen an amazing development of
digital technologies,
allowing for an unprecedented degree of connectivity. They
seem to have become
indispensable in our daily lives and have not only entered
households and com-
panies, but also educational institutions. Much money has been
invested in ICT
for educational purposes.The expectations were that: (1) schools
would equip their
students with ICT skills, (2) schools would bridge the digital
divide and (3) ICT
would make teaching and learning more effective (OECD,
2010a).
At the European level, several policy proposals and research
programmes were
designed to foster the use of ICT for learning. In 1996, the
European Council
issued a resolution on educational multimedia software in the
fields of education
and training (European Council, 1996) which was ‘to help
improve the quality and
effectiveness of education and training systems and provide
access to the informa-
tion society for teachers, students and apprentices by giving
them an insight into
the use of these new tools and into training in the subject’
(Europa, n.d.). Based
on this resolution, a programme on ‘Learning in the information
society, action
plan for a European education initiative’ was developed.
Following the Lisbon

European Council meeting in March 2000, the European
Commission issued a
paper on ‘eLearning — Designing tomorrow’s education’
(European Commission,
2000). Since then, technology-enhanced learning has been a
priority in all Frame-
work Programmes of the European Commission. ICT is also one
of the four
transversal programmes (key activities) of the European
Commission’s Lifelong
Learning Programme (EACEA, n.d.).
Although the use of ICT in schools has increased in the last ten
years, it is still
quite rare. Young people use digital technologies, but much
more for leisure
activities than for educational purposes (Steffens, 2014). There
is a new develop-
ment in technology-enhanced learning that could change this
situation, particu-
larly for young people studying at the higher education level:
Massive Open Online
Courses (MOOCs). MOOCs have received a great deal of
attention in recent years
(Armstrong, 2013).While they may be considered to be online
courses which have
a long tradition in distance education, their innovative aspect
lies in the fact that
they are online courses in which huge numbers of students
participate. Some
2,200 participated in one of the first MOOCs, a course on
‘Connectivism and
Connective Knowledge (CC08) developed by George Siemens
and Stephen
Downes (https//sites.google.com/site/themoocguide). Sebastian
Thrun and Peter

Norvig from Stanford University offered an online course called
‘Introduction to
Artificial Intelligence’ in which over 160,000 students from
more than 190 coun-
tries enrolled. Coursera tells potential students ‘Take the
world’s best courses,
online, for free’ and invites them to ‘join 8,612,319
Courserians, learn from 702
courses, from our 110 partners’ (https://www.coursera.org/).
EdX advertises ‘great
online courses from the world’s best universities’
(https://www.edx.org/) and
Udacity encourages potential students to ‘STAND OUT. Get
that ideal job. Grab
that promotion. Stand out by learning in-demand tech skills
from the best com-
panies in SiliconValley’ (https://www.udacity.com/).The
increase in the number of
MOOCs has been quite impressive. Starting with about 100 in
2012, their number
has increased to some 1200 in 2014 (see Figure 3). Coursera is
the largest provider
of courses in the US (839 in October 2014), followed by edX
(326) and Udacity
(45).
MOOCs are also receiving a great deal of attention in Europe.
In 2013, the

Commission published a communication on opening up
education in which the
use of open educational resources and MOOCs in particular was
strongly advo-
cated (European Commission, 2013). In the same year,
OpenupEd (http://
www.openuped.eu/) was launched by a group of mostly distance
teaching
European universities to open up education by offering MOOCs.
The MOOCs
provided by OpenupEd must fulfil the following eight criteria
which are related to
equity, quality and diversity:
Openness to learners
Digital openness
Learner-centred approach
Independent learning
Media-supported interaction
Recognition options
Quality focus
Spectrum of diversity (OpenupEd, n.d.)
MOOCs have also been the topic of eLearning Papers (Mor &
Koskinen, 2013),
a digital publication on eLearning by elearningeuropa.info, and
a portal created by
FIGURE 3. Growth of MOOCs
(from Shah, 2013)
Karl Steffens 51

the European Commission to promote the use of ICT in
education and training.
The European Commission is financing a number of European
projects on
MOOCs: Elearning Communication Open Data (ECO)
(http://ecolearning.eu/),
European Multiple MOOC Aggregator (EMMA)
(http://europeanmoocs.eu/),
Higher Education Online. MOOCs the European Way (HOME)
(http://home
.eadtu.eu/about), and the MOOCKnowledge project
(http://is.jrc.ec.europa
.eu/pages/EAP/OpenEduMOOC.html). EFQUEL, the European
Foundation for
Quality in eLearning (http://efquel.org/) is currently preparing a
MOOC on
eLearning Quality (EFQUEL, n.d.).The European MOOCs
scoreboard provides
an overview of European-provided MOOCs available on
different open websites
(Open Education Europa, n.d.).The list of available MOOCs is
classified accord-
ing to the providing (mostly European) countries (also included
are Russia — 14,
Turkey — 4 and Cyprus — 1) and regularly updated. At the
time of writing (June
2014), it included 673 MOOCs, with Spain clearly leading the
list (240 MOOCs).
The fact that that there are still fewer MOOCs in Europe than in
the US can
probably be explained by the time lag in the onset of their
creation. As can be seen
in Figure 3, even a lag of six months can create a significant
difference.
Discussion

Of the three developments in lifelong learning, the advent of
MOOCs is the most
recent. It is still too early to tell if they constitute a revolution
in higher education
or just a fad. Kartensi (2013) reviewed some 100 studies on
their use in univer-
sities. He found that proponents of MOOCs claim that they have
the potential to:
• resolve problems of access to education, such as distance, the
job-family-school
balance and high tuition fees,
• foster students’ autonomy and
• create learning communities.
Sceptics argue that:
• many of the advantages of MOOCs are actually advantages
associated with
traditional distance learning,
• success rate among MOOC participants is in general very low,
• there are copy right issues concerning course content,
• assessment for certification purposes is problematic,
• it is difficult to ensure support for the learning process which
requires students
to be highly autonomous (Kartensi, 2013, p. 33)
Our own observations are that MOOCs are not really open, in
the sense that there
is the same probability for all to participate in one. On the
contrary, studies show
that the unemployed, women and participants from developing
countries are
clearly underrepresented. The successful MOOC participant
already holds a uni-

versity degree (Bartolomé & Steffens, 2015).
From a pedagogical and psychological point of view, there is no
difference
between traditional distance courses and MOOCs as far as
learning content is
concerned. In both cases, digital technologies are used to
present learning content
in a way that is favourable to learning. MOOCs seem to have
some disadvantages
compared with traditional online courses in that interaction with
tutors and peers
and feedback from these, as well as assessment and
accreditation may be more
limited. Blogs, chats and forums, which are usually not very
well organised, cannot
replace the guidance provided by teachers or tutors.Yet MOOCs
may play a role
in lifelong learning.They provide those who are curious and
eager to learn with the
opportunity to increase their knowledge and improve their
skills. As for assessment
and accreditation, these services will not be available free of
charge. MOOCs may
continue to exist alongside traditional university courses and
some providers have
already started to offer nanodegrees, i.e. degrees which certify
the completion of a
course or a small number of courses (Ferenstein, 2014).

It is, however, important to make a distinction between
traditional MOOCs or
xMOOCs and cMOOCs. xMOOCs seem to support adaptive
learning in the
Carneiro sense (2010); they help students to acquire knowledge,
but do not
encourage them to create knowledge. Depending on the
individual course, the
content may be presented using different media (texts, pictures,
videos) and
students may or may not be provided with different forms of
interaction, with the
learning content and with tutors and peers (through blogs,
forums, chatrooms,
skype sessions). Hence, they tend to resemble traditional
college courses. However,
in most cases, certification of participation will not be part of
an xMOOC.
cMOOCs are based on Siemens’ (2006) concept of connectivism
whose basic idea
is that those who are interested in a specific topic communicate
and interact in
order to create knowledge out of existing codified
knowledge.They therefore create
a community of learners that engages in generative learning, or,
in a broader sense,
that collaborates in the quest for meaning. As Carneiro (2010)
pointed out,
learning is an integral part of the search for meaning. This is
clearly evidenced in
neurophysiological approaches to learning. Among the 12
principles of brain-
based learning enumerated by Caine & Caine (1991), two are
directly related to
the quest for meaning: (3) The search for meaning is innate and

(5) The search for
meaning occurs through patterning.
In his concept of connectivism, Siemens (2006) describes
collaborative learning
that takes place in a community of people who are interested in
a specific subject.
This is reminiscent of ideas that other authors have proposed.
Ivan Illich (1972), for
example, suggested that schools should be abandoned and
replaced by knowledge
centres. Although schools will probably never be abandoned,
Internet may be seen
as one big knowledge centre. The idea of a community of
practice had also been
proposed by Lave & Wenger (1991; Wenger, 1998).There does
exist a more specific
digital version of Ivan Illich’s idea of knowledge centres: the
school in the cloud
(https://www.theschoolinthecloud.org/) which was developed by
Sugata Mitra, a
professor of educational technology at Newcastle University. In
1999, he conducted
the ‘hole in the wall’ experiment in which he placed a free
computer in a Delhi slum.
He found that street children who were attracted by the
unknown device not only
learned how to use it, but also learned the English language. In
November 2013, the
first School in the Cloud was opened in Killingworth, England.
Since then, four
more have opened, one more in the UK and three in India,
including the first
independent School in the Cloud (TED, 2013).
Connectivism as a learning theory for the digital age has met

with some
criticism. According to Verhagen (2006), it is more of a
pedagogical view than a
learning theory. Duke, Harper & Johnston (2013, p. 10) come to
the conclusion
that connectivism as described by Siemens is ‘a tool to be used
in the learning
process for instruction or curriculum rather than a standalone
learning theory. One
must acknowledge, however, that many theories in the social
sciences will probably
not meet the rigorous criteria of a scientific theory as defined in
the discourses of
philosophy of science.
Karl Steffens 53
As described above, Carneiro (2010) in his approach called
generativism
assumes that learning is a step in a meaning-making process
where data are
transformed into meta-data, yielding information, information is
transformed into
meta-information as a result of learning, and learning in the
form of meta-learning
leads to meaning. His vision is that our societies will become
learning societies
where people are deeply aware of democratic, social, egalitarian
(gender-
balanced), intercultural and environmental aspects of life.
Of the three developments studied in this article, the search for

competences
which are essential for lifelong learning seems to me to be the
most important
because they are the most closely related to the human quest for
meaning. While
the current discourse on competences presents us with some
new proposals on the
issue of learning goals, we could ask if they are not proposals
with a broader vision
on the subject.
In the 1996 Delors report for UNESCO, the Commission
expressed its view
‘that, while education is an ongoing process of improving
knowledge and skills, it
is also — perhaps primarily — an exceptional means of bringing
about personal
development and building relationships among individuals,
groups and nations’
(Delors, 1996, p. 12). It wanted to stress the point that
‘education is at the heart
of both personal and community development; its mission is to
enable each of us,
without exception, to develop all our talents to the full and to
realise our creative
potential, including responsibility for our own lives and
achievement of our per-
sonal aims. This aim transcends all others. Its achievement,
though long and
difficult, will be an essential contribution to the search for a
more just world, a
better world to live in’ (Delors, 1996, p. 17).
According to the Commission, Learning to know encompasses
more than
acquiring knowledge, it also includes the desire to know, a

positive attitude
towards learning and learning to learn. Learning to do refers to
applying the
acquired knowledge, but also to the ‘acquisition of a
competence that enables
people to deal with a variety of situations, often unforeseeable,
and to work in
teams’ (Delors, 1996, p. 21). Learning to live together requires
people to develop
an understanding of other people and respect the values of
pluralism, mutual
understanding and peace. Finally, learning to be refers to the
development of
people’s personalities and their talents as well as to their
responsibilities towards
their communities. When we talk about personality
development, it is certainly
worth looking at theories and models developed in the field of
psychology. Erikson
(1950, 1959) proposed a life-span model of personality
development which
encompasses eight stages which he named (1) basic trust versus
basic mistrust, (2)
autonomy versus shame and doubt, (3) initiative versus guilt,
(4) industry versus
inferiority, (5) identity versus identity diffusion, (6) intimacy
and distantiation
versus self-absorption, (7) generativity versus stagnation and
(8) integrity versus
despair and disgust. One of the basic assumptions of the model
is that at each
stage, internal or external changes may lead individuals into a
crisis, and accord-
ing to how individuals manage to cope with the crisis, their
personality will
develop more towards the positive or more to the negative pole

of each stage. In
presenting his developmental model, Erikson alluded to Maria
Jahoda’s concept
of a healthy personality (1950), whereby ‘a healthy personality
actively masters his
environment, shows a certain unity of personality, and is able to
perceive the world
and himself correctly’ (Erikson, 1950, p. 53). Erikson also
remarked that Sigmund
Freud was once asked what a normal person should be able to
do well, and he is
supposed to have answered: ‘to love and to work’ (Erikson,
1950, p. 102). While
Erikson’s model is a model of human development, it could be
argued that it can
also be interpreted as a catalogue of development tasks where,
at each stage,
successfully coping with the corresponding crisis would mean
having completed
another development tasks. In his later years, Erikson related
these tasks to the
concept of care. ‘In youth you find out what you care to do and
who you care to be
— even in changing roles. In young adulthood you learn whom
you care to be with
— at work and in private life, not only exchanging intimacies,
but sharing inti-
macy. In adulthood, however, you learn to know what and whom
you can take care

of’ (Erikson, 1974, p. 124).To take care of is — or should be —
a dominant theme
in adulthood, a stage which Erikson named ‘generativity vs.
self-absorption and
stagnation’. ‘The new “virtue” emerging from this antithesis,
namely, Care, is a
widening commitment to take care of the persons, the products,
and the ideas one
has learned to care for. All the strengths arising from earlier
developments in the
ascending order from infancy to young adulthood (hope and
will, purpose and
skill, fidelity and love) now prove, on closer study, to be
essential for the genera-
tional task of cultivating strength in the next generation. For
this is, indeed, the
“store” of human life’ (Erikson & Erikson, 1997, p. 67). While
achieving ego-
identity is certainly one of the most important development
tasks, it should not be
overlooked that Erikson places at least as much emphasis on the
development of
the virtue of ‘care’ as on the fundamental route to derive
meaning and construct
sense in life.
Lifelong learning continues to be an important issue in the new
millennium
(Majhanovich & Brook Napier, 2014). In the last 25 years,
significant changes have
taken place in the way people learn and are supported in their
learning activities by
digital technologies. Learning in pursuit of the acquisition and
improvement of
competences for lifelong learning is an integral part of human
meaning-making. As

Albert Schweitzer once pointed out: ‘Three kinds of progress
are significant for
culture: progress in knowledge and technology; progress in the
socialisation of
man; progress in spirituality.The last is the most important . . .
technical progress,
extension of knowledge, does indeed represent progress, but not
in fundamentals.
The essential thing is that we become more finely and deeply
human’ (Schweitzer,
1965, pp. 33–41, cited from Carneiro, 2010).
Karl Steffens, University of Cologne, Institute of Didactics and
Educational Research,
Albertus-Magnus-Platz, 50923 Cologne, Germany,
[email protected]
REFERENCES
ARMSTRONG, L. (2013) 2013- the year of ups and downs for
the MOOCs,
Changing Higher Education.
http://www.changinghighereducation.com/
2014/01/2013-the-year-of-the-
moocs.html?goback=.gde_2774663_member
_5832211875772788740#!
AZEVEDO, R. & HADWIN, A. F. (2005) Scaffolding self-
regulated learning and
metacognition — implications for the design of computer-based
scaffolds,
Instructional Science, 33, pp. 367–379.
BARTOLOMÉ, A. R. & STEFFENS, K. (2015) Are MOOCs
promising learning
environments?, Comunicar, 44.

BORG, C. & MAYO, P. (2005) The EU Memorandum on
lifelong learning. Old
wine in new bottles? Globalisation, Societies and Education, 3,
pp. 203–225.
Karl Steffens 55
BRUER, J. T. (1997) Education and the brain: a bridge too far,
Educational
Researcher, 26, pp. 4–16.
CAINE, R. & CAINE, G. (1991) Making Connections: teaching
and the human brain
(Alexandria, VA, ASCD).
CARNEIRO, R. (2007) The Big Picture: understanding learning
and meta-learning
challenges, European Journal of Education, 42, pp. 151–172.
CARNEIRO, R. (2010) Open Educational Practices and
Generativism. http://
cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/3827
CARNEIRO, R. (2013) Living by learning, learning by living:
the quest for meaning,
International Review of Education, 59, pp. 353–372.
CARNEIRO, R. & DRAXLER, A. (2008) Education for the 21st
century: lessons and
challenges, European Journal of Education, 43, pp. 149–160.
CARNEIRO, R., LEFRERE, P., STEFFENS, K. &

UNDERWOOD, J. (2011) Self-
regulated Learning in Technology-Enhanced Learning
Environments: a European
perspective (Rotterdam, Sense Publishers).
CARNEIRO, R. & STEFFENS, K. (2013) Research on self-
regulated learning
in technology-enhanced learning environments: two examples
from
Europe, in: R. AZEVEDO & V. ALEVEN (Eds) International
Handbook
of Metacognition and Learning Technologies (New York,
Springer), pp. 601–
614.
CROPLEY, A. (Ed) (1980) Towards a System of Lifelong
Education: some practical
considerations (Hamburg, UNESCO Institute for Education, and
Oxford,
Pergamon Press).
DAMASIO, A. R. (1994) Descartes’ Error: emotion, reason, and
the human brain (New
York, Grosset/Putnam).
DAMASIO, A. R. (2003) Looking for Spinoza: joy, sorrow and
the feeling brain
(New York, Harcourt).
DAMASIO, A. R. (2010) Self Comes to Mind: constructing the
conscious brain (New
York, Pantheon Books).
DELORS (1996) Learning: The Treasure Within. Education
Throughout Life.
International Commission on Education for the Twenty-first

Century. Report
to UNESCO (Paris, UNESCO).
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0010/
001095/109590eo.pdf
DEVOLDER, A., VAN BRAAK, J. & TONDEUR, J. (2012)
Supporting self-regulated
learning in computer-based learning environments: systematic
review of
effects of scaffolding in the domain of science education,
Journal of Computer
Assisted Learning, 28, pp. 557–573.
DRISCOLL, M. (2000) Psychology of Learning for Instruction
(Needham Heights,
MA, Allyn & Bacon).
DUKE, B., HARPER, G. & JOHNSTON, M. (2013)
Connectivism as a digital
age learning theory?, The International HETL Review, Special
Issue,
pp. 4–13.
https://www.hetl.org/wpcontent/uploads/2013/09/HETLReview
2013SpecialIssueArticle1.pdf
EACEA (n.d.) About lifelong learning programme.
http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/llp/
about_llp/about_llp_en.php
EFQUEL (n.d.) EFQUEL MOOC on eLearning Quality.
http://efquel.org/efquel
-mooc-on-e-learning-quality/
ERIKSON, E. H. (1950) Growth and crises of the “healthy
personality”, in: M. J. E.
SENN (Ed) Symposium on the Healthy Personality, Supplement

II: Problems of
Infancy and Childhood. Transactions of the fourth conference,
March 1950
(New York, Josiah Macy Jr. Foundation).
ERIKSON, E. H. (1959) Identity and the Life Cycle (New York,
International
University Press).
ERIKSON, E. H. (1974) Dimensions of a New Identity (New
York, Norton).
ERIKSON, E. H. & ERIKSON, J. M. (1997) The Life Cycle
Completed (New York,
Norton).
EUROPA (n.d.) Summaries of EU legislation.
http://europa.eu/legislation
_summaries/other/c11031_en.htm
EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2000) e-Learning — Designing
Tomorrow’s Educa-
tion. http://ec.europa.eu/education/archive/elearning/comen.pdf
EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2008) Communication to the
European Parliament,
the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and
the Committee
of the Regions. New Skills for New Jobs. Anticipating and

matching labour
market and skills needs. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/PDF/
?uri=CELEX:52008DC0868&from=EN
EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2001) Making a European Area of
Lifelong Learning
a Reality. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:
52001DC0678&from=EN
EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2010a) Communication from the
Commission.
Europe 2020. A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive
growth
(Brussels, European Commission).
http://ec.europa.eu/news/economy/
100303_en.htm
EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2010b) Communication from the
Commission to the
European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and
Social Committee
and the Committee of the Regions. A Digital Agenda for Europe
(Brussels, Euro-
pean Commission).
http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri
=CELEX:52010DC0245R%2801%29:EN:NOT
EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2013) Communication from the
Commission to the
European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and
Social Committee
and the Committee of the Regions. Opening up Education:
Innovative teaching and
learning for all through new Technologies and Open

Educational Resources
(Brussels, European Commission). http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/
TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52013DC0654&from=EN
EUROPEAN COUNCIL (1996) Council Resolution of 6 May
1996 relating to
educational multimedia software in the fields of education and
training,
Official Journal C 195, 6 July 1996. http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/
TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:31996Y0706(03)&from=EN
EUROPEAN COUNCIL (2006) Recommendation of the
European Parliament
and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on key competences
for lifelong
learning.
http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:20
06
:394:0010:0018:en:pdf
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT (1995) Decision No 2493/95/EC of
the European
Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 1995 establishing
1996 as the ‘Euro-
pean year of lifelong learning’. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/
PDF/?uri=CELEX:31995D2493&from=EN
FAURE, E. (1972). Letter from the Chairman, Edgar Faure, to
René Maheu,
Director-General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural
Organization., in: E. FAURE, F. HERRERA, A.-R.
KADDOURA, H. LOPES, A.V.

Karl Steffens 57
PETROVSKY, M. RAHNEMA & F. C. WARD (Eds) Learning
to Be:TheWorld of
Education Today and Tomorrow (Paris, UNESCO) pp. v—viii.
FERENSTEIN, G. (2014) AT&T and Udacity partner to create
the ‘nanodegree,’ a new
type of college degree. http://venturebeat.com/2014/06/16/att-
and-udacity
-partner-to-create-the-nanodegree-a-new-type-of-college-
degree/.
FINGER, S. (2001) Origins of Neuroscience: a history of
explorations into brain function
(3rd ed) (New York, Oxford University Press).
GOLEMAN, D. (2006) Social Intelligence. The New Science of
Human Relationships
(New York, Bantam Dell).
GOSWAMI, U. (2004) Neuroscience and education, British
Journal of Educational
Psychology, 74, pp. 1–14.
HALÁSZ, G. & MICHEL, A. (2011) Key competences in
Europe: interpretation,
policy formulation and implementation, European Journal of
Education, 46,
pp. 289–306.

HERRMANN, U. (2009) Neurodidaktik. Grundlagen
undVorschläge für gehirngerechtes
Lehren und Lernen (2nd ed) (Weinheim, Beltz).
ILLICH, I.(1972) Deschooling Society (London, Marion
Boyars).
INTER-AGENCY COMMISSION (1990) Meeting Basic
Learning Needs: a vision
for the 1990s. Background Document. World Conference on
Education for All.
Jomtien,Thailand. 5–9 March 1990 (New York, UNICEF
House).
JAHODA, M. (1950) Toward a social psychology of mental
health, in: M. J. E. SENN
(Ed) Symposium on the Healthy Personality, Supplement II:
Problems of infancy
and childhood.Transactions of the fourth conference, March
1950 (NewYork,
Josiah Macy Jr. Foundation).
KANDEL, E. R., SCHARTZ, J. H., JESSEL, T. M.,
SIEGELBAUM, S. A. &
HUDSPETH, A. J. (Eds) (2012) Principles of Neural Science
(5th ed) (NewYork,
McGraw-Hill).
KARTENSI, T. (2013) The MOOC.What the research says,
International Journal of
Technologies in Higher Education, 10, pp. 23–37.
http://www.ritpu.org/
spip.php?rubrique73&lang=en
LAVE, J. & WENGER, E. (1991) Situated Learning: legitimate
peripheral participation

(Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).
LEE, W. O. (2014). Lifelong learning and learning to learn: an
enabler of new
voices for the new times, International Review of Education,
60, pp. 463–479.
MAJHANOVICH, S. & BROOK NAPIER, D. (2014). Lifelong
learning in the new
millennium: voices from the XV World Congress of
Comparative Education
Societies, International Review of Education, 60, pp. 449–462.
MOR, Y. & KOSKINEN, T. (2013) MOOCs and Beyond.
eLearning Papers, 33.
http://www.elearningpapers.eu
OECD (1996) Lifelong Learning for All: meeting of the
Education Committee at
Ministerial Level, 16–17 January 1996 (Paris, OECD).
OECD (2001) Defining and Selecting Key Competences (Paris,
OECD).
OECD (2005) The Definition and Selection of Key
Competencies. Executive Summary.
http://www.oecd.org/pisa/35070367.pdf
OECD (2010a) Are the new Millennium Learners making the
Grade? Technology Use
and Educational Performance in PISA (Paris, Centre for
Educational Research
and Innovation).
OECD (2010b) PISA 2009 Results: learning to learn — student
engagement, strategies

and practices (Vol. Volume III) (Paris, OECD).
OPEN EDUCATION EUROPA (n.d.) European MOOCs
Scoreboard. http://
openeducationeuropa.eu/en/european_scoreboard_moocs
OPENUPED (n.d.) Our Framework.
http://www.openuped.eu/mooc-features/our
-framework
SCHWEITZER, A. (1965) The Teaching of Reverence for Life
(New York, Henry Holt
& Company).
SHAH, D. (2013) MOOCs in 2013: breaking down the numbers.
https://www
.edsurge.com/n/2013-12-22-moocs-in-2013-breaking-down-the-
numbers
SIEMENS, G. (2004) Connectivism: A learning theory for the
digital age. http://
www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm
SIEMENS, G. (2006) Knowing knowledge.
http://www.elearnspace.org/
KnowingKnowledge_LowRes.pdf
STEFFENS, K. (2014) ICT use and achievement in three
European countries: what
does PISA tell us? European Educational Research Journal, 13,

pp. 553–562.
TED (2013). School in the Cloud — Sugata Mitra. School in the
Cloud — Sugata
Mitra. http://www.ted.com/participate/ted-prize/prize-winning-
wishes/school
-in-the-cloud-sugata-mitra
TUIJNMAN, A. & BOSTRÖM, A. K. (2002) Changing notions
of lifelong education
and lifelong learning, International Review of Education, 48,
pp. 93–110.
UNESCO (2000) The Dakar Framework for Action (Paris,
UNESCO).
VAN DE POL, J., VOLMAN, M. & BEISHUIZEN, J. (2010)
Scaffolding in teacher-
student interaction: a decade of research, Educational
Psychology Review, 22,
pp. 271–296.
VERHAGEN, P. (2006) Connectivism:A new learning theory?
http://elearning.surf.nl/
e-learning/english/3793
WENGER, E. (1998) Communities of Practice: learning,
meaning, and identity
(Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).
ZEIDNER, M., BOEKAERTS, M. & PINTRICHP, P. (2000)
Self-regulation. Direc-
tions and challenges for future research, in: M. BOEKAERTS,
P. PINTRICH &
M. ZEIDNER (Eds) Handbook of Self-regulation (New York,
Academic Press),

pp. 749–768.
ZIMMERMAN, B. J. (2000) Attaining self-regulation: a social
cognitive
perspective, in: M. BOEKAERTS, P. PINTRICH & M.
ZEIDNER (Eds) Handbook
of Self-Regulation (New York, Academic Press), pp. 13–39.
ZIMMERMAN, B. J. & SCHUNK, D. (2008) Motivation, in D.
H. SCHUNK &
B. J. ZIMMERMAN (Eds) Motivation and Self-regulated
Learning. Theory,
Research and Application (New York, Lawrence Earlbaum
Associates),
pp. 1–30.
Karl Steffens 59
Copyright of European Journal of Education is the property of
Wiley-Blackwell and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted
to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users
may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.
A Valediction: Forbidding Mourning
The Poem
John Donne’s nine quatrains of iambic pentameter make up one
of the most beautiful love poems in the English language. In the

1675 (fourth) edition of his Life of Donne, Izaak Walton
claimed that the author gave these lines to his wife in 1611 just
before leaving for France. Whether the details of Walton’s
account are true, the title reflects the content of the piece: a
farewell. The poem is thus in the tradition of the congé
d’amour, a consolation when lovers part.
The poem begins with the image of virtuous men mildly
accepting death. The separation of body and soul is so gentle
that those friends surrounding the dying cannot tell whether the
men are alive or not. So, Donne says, should he and his beloved
part, because they do not want to reveal the quality of their love
to the uninitiated. Here, then, is the first reason to forbid
mourning.
Through a series of elaborate metaphors, Donne offers a second
reason. When an earthquake occurs, causing only small cracks
in the ground, everyone is disturbed and regards the event as
ominous, but when planets move apart, though the distances are
great, no harm results. Earthly lovers, Donne continues, cannot
accept separation; they fear it as people do earthquakes, because
sensory and sensual stimuli make up the entirety of their
affection. Donne and his beloved, however, who love spiritually
as well as physically, are less troubled by being apart. Their
two souls, being one, remain united even when their bodies are
apart, just as gold stretches thinly without breaking.
Even if the lovers retain their individual souls, they are divided
only like the two parts of a compass used to describe a circle,
linked at the top and working in unison. When the compass
draws a circle, one point remains stationary in the center but
leans toward the other, and by remaining firmly in one place,
the fixed point guarantees that its partner will complete its
circuit. So the beloved will, by remaining at home, ensure
Donne’s return; since he will certainly come back, mourning is
inappropriate.
Forms and Devices
In “The Life of Cowley,” Samuel Johnson labeled the poetry of

John Donne and others of his ilk “metaphysical.” In such
writing, Johnson observed, “The most heterogeneous ideas are
yoked by violence together.” The images that Donne employs
seem removed from the occasion of the lovers’ parting: death,
celestial motion, twin compasses. All, however, carry within
them the promise of reunion, resurrection, and permanence after
change. The virtuous man does not fear death because he knows
that at the Last Judgment his body and soul will be rejoined
forever in bliss. Though Donne and his beloved are “dead”
when divided, they may part confident in having a life together
hereafter in this world. The comparison of lover and beloved to
body and soul is conventional; Donne extends the idea to make
it fresh by incorporating religious implications, a technique he
uses often in his poetry. Since both love and religion are
mysterious and forms of transcendence, the fusion of the two is
justified.
The geological-astronomical imagery that introduces the second
argument similarly promises reunion. The separation of sensual
lovers is like an earthquake in part because these people are
“sublunary”; Donne here draws on the belief that everything
beneath the moon is subject to mutability and death. Sublunary
lovers fear parting because they can never be certain that they
will see each other again. Just as the cleavages caused by
earthquakes do not necessarily repair themselves, these
terrestrial, hence inferior, lovers may not reunite.
Likening lovers to Earth and other planets is typical of Donne
and his fellow Metaphysical poets. Yet the metaphors are not
mere poetical trickery. The macrocosm of the universe and the
microcosm of the individual become interchangeable because
the metaphors convey the lovers’ feelings. Donne and his
beloved are the world to each other.
Donne and his beloved are, like the planets, beyond the realm of
change because they are joined spiritually as well as physically.
Since their love is not subject to alteration, they need not fear
parting. Moreover, medieval cosmology maintained that in
36,000 years the planets and stars would return to their

positions at the moment of creation. The completion of this
epoch will mark the apocalypse and resurrection. This image
thus unites with and extends the previous one anticipating the
Last Judgment.
The conceit of the twin compasses, probably the most famous of
Donne’s metaphors, similarly builds on the previous one. Just as
the planets describe a circuit in 36,000 years, so the compasses
make a circle of 360 degrees. It is no accident that the poem has
thirty-six lines. The circle is a traditional symbol of eternal
love, since it has no beginning and no end (hence the tradition
of the wedding ring). The completion of the circle once more
promises the lovers’ meeting at journey’s end.
In a curious sexual reversal, Donne likens his beloved to the
masculine principle. Hers is the foot that grows erect as his
point approaches. Hers is the firmness that, phalluslike, fills his
circle and makes it “just”; the word not only implies the
completed round and physical reunion but also circles back to
the virtuous (just) man at the beginning of the poem, so that the
poem, like Donne, ends where it began.
Themes and Meanings
The sexual imagery that concludes the poem does not contradict
the pervasive spirituality of the piece, but complements it. John
Donne has been called the poet of mutual love, and though he
may play diverse roles — the cynical lover of “The Indifferent,”
the Platonic lover in “The Relic” — he is also the advocate of
physical and spiritual love united. “Dull, sublunary lovers” rely
totally on the physical, so their love cannot survive absence.
Donne and his beloved may “care less, eyes, lips, and hands to
miss,” but they do care. The need for both types of love is
evident in the metaphor of the twin compasses. The circular
motion of the compasses, like the circular orbits of the planets
in Aristotelian physics, symbolizes heavenly love, since all
movement above the moon takes this shape. Sublunary motion is
linear, and that is the figure the two points of the compass
describe when they move together in a plane. Together, the

divine circle and animal line create the human spiral. Donne
rejects the duality of body and soul: Love for him is not one or
the other, but both — a single, indivisible entity.
Hence, Donne rejects the Petrarchan idealization of the beloved
as untouchable and godlike. He employs the imagery of Petrarch
in the second stanza when he speaks of “tear-floods” and “sigh-
tempests,” but in forbidding such forms of mourning the poem
distances itself from the philosophy that relies on such
metaphors. Donne’s love is human, as is his beloved. The
opening lines may imply that she is body and he soul, thereby
suggesting that he is purer than she; the second stanza dispels
such a reading, linking the lovers in the pronoun “us.” In the
third stanza, each is a planet, and later their souls are one. The
twin compasses may be understood as portraying that same
fusion, one foot being the will, the other reason. As body and
soul require each other for life, so will and reason cannot
operate independently. The sexual reversal of the last stanza
corresponds to the beloved’s assuming the controlling role of
reason, which guides the errant will; its fixedness converts the
will’s centrifugal force into the circle, a pattern of constancy.
Love reconciles opposites and accepts no mastery of one party
over the other.
In chapter 12 of La vita nuova (c. 1292; The New Life), Dante
writes, speaking as love, “I am as the center of a circle, to
which all parts of the circumference stand in equal relation.”
This passage may have provided Donne with the idea for his
famous conceit of the twin compasses; it certainly expresses the
same vision of love’s unifying and godlike power, of love as the
still center around which the world revolves and to which all
things return to find that rest that they can experience nowhere
else.
The image of the dying men that introduces the piece indicates
the fusion of Donne and his beloved as body and soul and
promises resurrection, but the focus on death is too gloomy for
the purpose the author intends. The planets have much to
recommend them as a metaphor: Again the imagery promises

return, and the orbits of the planets in Donne’s Ptolemaic
system describe circles. Yet if the first metaphor falls short
because of its rootedness in mortality, the second proves
equally unsatisfactory because it divorces itself from humanity.
Only with the twin compasses does the poet find that perfect
fusion of human and divine, flesh and spirit, line and circle, that
constitutes true love. The author has succeeded in his quest for
the correct language in which to couch his meaning, and in the
process of creating his poem he has moved from death and
separation to life and reunion, imitating the experience the
verses promise.
Essay by: Joseph Rosenblum
Source: Masterplots II: Poetry, Revised Edition
36151 Topic: Wk 1 Individual: Explaining Learning Theory to
Clients
Number of Pages: 4 (Double Spaced)
Number of sources: 1
Writing Style: APA
Type of document: Essay
Academic Level:Master
Category: Psychology

Language Style: English (U.S.)
Order Instructions: Attached
I will upload the instruction
Reference/Module
Chapter 1 Introduction to the Study of Learning
Russ Nyland teaches a graduate education course on learning
and cognition. It is toward the end of the semester, and as class
finishes one day, three students approach him: Jeri Kendall,
Matt Bowers, and Trisha Pascella.
Jeri:
Dr. Nyland, can we talk with you? It’s late in the course and
we’re still confused.
Russ:
About what?
Jeri:
Well, we’ve been studying all these theorists. It seems like
they’re saying different things, but maybe not. Bandura,
Skinner, Vygotsky, and the others. They make different points,
but then some of what they say seems to overlap what others
say.
Matt:
I’m confused too. I read these theorists and think I agree with
that. But it seems like I agree with everything! I thought you
were supposed to have one theory, to believe one way and not
others. But it seems like there’s a lot of overlap between
theories.
Russ:
You’re right, Matt, there is. Most of what we’ve studied in this
course are cognitive theories, and they are alike because they
say that learning involves changes in cognitions—knowledge,
skills, beliefs. Most theorists also say that learners construct

their knowledge and beliefs; they don’t automatically adopt
what somebody tells them. So yes, there is much overlap.
Trisha:
So then what are we to do? Am I supposed to be something like
an information processing theorist, a social cognitive theorist, a
constructivist? That’s what I’m confused about.
Russ:
No, you don’t have to be only one. There may be one theory
that you like better than the others, but maybe that theory
doesn’t address everything you want it to. So then you can
borrow from other theories. For example, when I was in grad
school I did research with a professor whose specialty was
cognitive learning. There was another professor who did
developmental research. I really liked her research, probably
because I had been a teacher and was interested in development,
especially the changes in kids from elementary to middle
school. So I was a learning theorist who borrowed from the
developmental literature and still do. It’s okay to do that!
Jeri:
Well, that makes me feel better. But it’s late in the course, and I
guess I want to know what I should be doing next.
Russ:
Tell you what—next class I’ll spend some time on this. A good
place to start is not to decide which type of theorist you are, but
rather determine what you believe about learning and what
types of learning you’re interested in. Then you can see which
theory matches up well to your beliefs and assumptions and
maybe do as I did—borrow from others.
Matt:
Isn’t that being eclectic?
Russ:
Perhaps, but you may still have one preferred theory that you
adapt as needed. That’s okay to do. In fact, that’s how theories
are improved—by incorporating ideas that weren’t in them
originally.
Trisha:

Thanks, Dr. Nyland. This is really helpful.
Learning involves acquiring and modifying knowledge, skills,
strategies, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors. People learn
cognitive, linguistic, motor, and social skills, and these can take
many forms. At a simple level, children learn to solve 2 + 2 = ?,
to recognize y in the word daddy, to tie their shoes, and to play
with other children. At a more complex level, students learn to
solve long-division problems, write term papers, ride a bicycle,
and work cooperatively on group projects.
This text focuses on how human learning occurs, which factors
influence it, and how learning principles apply in educational
contexts. Animal learning is de-emphasized, which is not
intended to downgrade its importance because we have gained
much knowledge about learning from animal research. But
human learning is fundamentally different from animal learning
because human learning is more complex, elaborate, rapid, and
typically involves language.
This chapter provides an overview of the study of learning.
Initially, learning is defined and examined in settings where it
occurs. An overview is given of some important philosophical
and psychological precursors of contemporary theories that
helped to establish the groundwork for the application of
learning theories to education. The roles of learning theory and
research are discussed, and methods commonly used to assess
learning are described. The links between learning theories and
instruction are explained, after which critical issues in the study
of learning are presented.
The opening scenario describes a situation that many students
find themselves in when they take a course in learning,
instruction, or motivation and are exposed to different theories.
Students often think that they are supposed to believe in one
theory and adopt the views of those theorists. They may be
confused by the perceived overlap between theories.
As Russ says, that is normal. Although theories differ in many
ways, including their general assumptions and guiding
principles, many rest on a common foundation of cognition.

This text focuses on these cognitive theories of learning, which
contend that learning involves changes in learners’ thoughts,
beliefs, knowledge, strategies, and skills. These theories differ
in how they predict that learning occurs, which learning
processes are important, and which aspects of learning they
stress. Some theories are oriented more toward basic learning
and others toward applied learning (and, within that, in different
content areas); some stress the role of development, others are
strongly linked with instruction; and some emphasize
motivation (Bruner, 1985).
Russ advises his students to examine their beliefs and
assumptions about learning rather than decide which type of
theorist they are. This is good advice. Once we are clear about
where we stand on learning in general, then the theoretical
perspective or perspectives that are most relevant will emerge.
As you study this text, it will help if you reflect on your beliefs
and assumptions about learning and decide how these align with
the theories.
This chapter should help to prepare you for an in-depth study of
learning by providing a framework for understanding learning
and some background material against which to view
contemporary theories. When you finish studying this chapter,
you should be able to do the following:
· ■ Define learning and identify instances of learned and
unlearned phenomena.
· ■ Distinguish between rationalism and empiricism and explain
the major tenets of each.
· ■ Discuss how the work of Wundt, Ebbinghaus, the
structuralists, and the functionalists helped to establish
psychology as a science.
· ■ Describe the major features of different research paradigms.
· ■ Discuss the central features of different methods of
assessing learning and criteria for assessment methods.
· ■ Explain what value-added assessment of learning is and how
it can be used to determine progress in student learning.
· ■ Explicate the ways that learning theory and educational

practice complement and refine each other.
· ■ Explain differences between behavior and cognitive theories
with respect to various issues in the study of learning.
LEARNING DEFINED
People agree that learning is important, but they hold different
views on the causes, processes, and consequences of learning
(Alexander, Schallert, & Reynolds, 2009). There is no one
definition of learning that is universally accepted by theorists,
researchers, and practitioners (Shuell, 1986). Although people
disagree about the precise nature of learning, the following is a
general definition of learning that is consistent with this text’s
cognitive focus and that captures the criteria most educational
professionals consider central to learning:
· Learning is an enduring change in behavior, or in the capacity
to behave in a given fashion, which results from practice or
other forms of experience.
Let us examine this definition in depth to identify three criteria
for learning (Table 1.1).
Table 1.1 Criteria of learning.
· ■ Learning involves change.
· ■ Learning endures over time.
· ■ Learning occurs through experience.
One criterion is that learning involves change—in behavior or
in the capacity for behavior. Change is a central ingredient of
learning (Alexander et al., 2009). People learn when they
become capable of doing something differently. We do not
observe learning directly but rather its products or outcomes. In
other words, learning is inferential—it is demonstrated based on
what people say, write, and do. The definition also says that
learning involves a changed capacity to behave in a given
fashion because it is not uncommon for people to learn skills,
knowledge, beliefs, or behaviors without demonstrating them at
the time they learn them (Chapter 4).
A second criterion is that learning endures over time. This
excludes temporary behavioral changes (e.g., slurred speech)
brought about by such factors as drugs, alcohol, and fatigue.

Such changes are temporary because when the cause is removed,
the behavior returns to its original state. Although learning is
enduring, it may not last forever because forgetting occurs.
Researchers debate how long changes must last to be classified
as learned, but most people agree that changes of brief duration
(e.g., a few seconds) do not qualify as learning.
A third criterion is that learning occurs through
experience (e.g., practice, observation of others). This criterion
excludes behavioral changes that are primarily determined by
heredity, such as maturational changes in children (e.g.,
crawling, standing). Nonetheless, the distinction between
maturation and learning often is not clear-cut. People may be
genetically predisposed to act in given ways, but the actual
development of the particular behaviors depends on the
environment. Language offers a good example. As the human
vocal apparatus matures, it becomes able to produce language;
but the actual words produced are learned from interactions
with others. Although genetics are critical for children’s
language acquisition, teaching and social interactions with
parents, teachers, and peers exert a strong influence on
children’s language achievements (Mashburn, Justice, Downer,
& Pianta, 2009). In similar fashion, with normal development
children crawl and stand, but the environment must be
responsive and allow these behaviors to occur. Children whose
language and movements cannot be expressed freely in an
environment may not develop normally.
PRECURSORS OF MODERN LEARNING THEORIES
The roots of contemporary theories of learning extend far into
the past. Many of the issues addressed and questions asked by
researchers today are not new but rather reflect a desire for
people to understand themselves, others, and the world about
them.
This section traces the origins of contemporary learning
theories, beginning with a discussion of philosophical positions
on the origin of knowledge and its relation to the environment
and concluding with some early psychological views on

learning. This review is selective and includes historical
material relevant to learning in educational settings. Readers
interested in a comprehensive discussion should consult other
sources (Bower & Hilgard, 1981; Heidbreder, 1933;
Hunt, 1993).
Learning Theory and Philosophy
From a philosophical perspective, learning can be discussed
under the heading of epistemology, which refers to the study of
the origin, nature, limits, and methods of knowledge. How can
we know? How can we learn something new? What is the source
of knowledge? The complexity of how humans learn is
illustrated in Plato’s Meno (427?–347? B.C.):
· I know, Meno, what you mean … You argue that a man
cannot enquire (sic) either about that which he knows, or about
that which he does not know; for if he knows, he has no need to
enquire (sic); and if not, he cannot; for he does not know the
very subject about which he is to enquire (sic). (Plato, 1965, p.
16)
Two positions on the origin of knowledge and its relationship to
the environment are rationalism and empiricism. These
philosophies are recognizable in current learning theories.
Rationalism.
Rationalism reflects the idea that knowledge derives from
reason without recourse to the senses. The distinction between
mind and matter, which figures prominently in rationalist views
of human knowledge, can be traced to Plato, who distinguished
knowledge acquired via the senses from that gained by reason.
Plato believed that things (e.g., houses, trees) are revealed to
people via the senses, whereas individuals acquire ideas by
reasoning or thinking about what they know. People have ideas
about the world, and they learn (discover) these ideas by
reflecting upon them. Reason is the highest mental faculty
because through reason people discover abstract ideas. The true
nature of houses and trees can be known only by reflecting upon
the ideas of houses and trees.
Plato escaped the dilemma expressed in Meno by assuming that

true knowledge, or the knowledge of ideas, is innate and is
brought into awareness through reflection. Learning is recalling
what exists in the mind. Information acquired with the senses by
observing, listening, tasting, smelling, or touching constitutes
raw materials rather than ideas. The mind is innately structured
to reason and provide meaning to incoming sensory information.
The rationalist doctrine also is evident in the writings of René
Descartes (1596–1650), a French philosopher and
mathematician. Descartes employed doubt as a method of
inquiry. By doubting, he arrived at conclusions that were
absolute truths and not subject to doubt. The fact that he could
doubt led him to believe that the mind (thought) exists, as
reflected in his dictum, “I think, therefore I am.” Through
deductive reasoning from general premises to specific instances,
he proved that God exists and concluded that ideas arrived at
through reason must be true.
Like Plato, Descartes established a mind–matter dualism;
however, for Descartes the external world was mechanical, as
were the actions of animals. People are distinguished by their
ability to reason. The human soul, or the capacity for thought,
influences the body’s mechanical actions, but the body acts on
the mind by bringing in sensory experiences. Although
Descartes postulated dualism, he also hypothesized mind–matter
interaction.
The rationalist perspective was extended by the German
philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724–1804). In his Critique of
Pure Reason (1781), Kant addressed mind–matter dualism and
noted that the external world is disordered but is perceived as
orderly because order is imposed by the mind. The mind takes
in the external world through the senses and alters it according
to subjective, innate laws. The world never can be known as it
exists but only as it is perceived. People’s perceptions give the
world its order. Kant reaffirmed the role of reason as a source
of knowledge, but contended that reason operates within the
realm of experience. Absolute knowledge untouched by the
external world does not exist. Rather, knowledge is empirical in

the sense that information is taken in from the world and
interpreted by the mind.
In summary, rationalism is the doctrine that knowledge arises
through the mind. Although there is an external world from
which people acquire sensory information, ideas originate from
the workings of the mind. Descartes and Kant believed that
reason acts upon information acquired from the world; Plato
thought that knowledge can be absolute and acquired by pure
reason.
Empiricism.
In contrast to rationalism, empiricism reflects the idea that
experience is the only source of knowledge. This position
derives from Aristotle (384–322 B.C.), who was Plato’s student
and successor. Aristotle drew no sharp distinction between mind
and matter. The external world is the basis for human sense
impressions, which, in turn, are interpreted as lawful
(consistent, unchanging) by the mind. The laws of nature cannot
be discovered through sensory impressions, but rather through
reason as the mind takes in data from the environment. Unlike
Plato, Aristotle believed that ideas do not exist independently of
the external world, which is the source of all knowledge.
Aristotle’s contribution to psychology was his principles of
association as applied to memory. The recall of an object or
idea triggers recall of other objects or ideas similar to, different
from, or experienced close, in time or space, to the original
object or idea. The more that two objects or ideas are
associated, the more likely that recall of one will trigger recall
of the other. Such associative learning is reflected in many
learning theories (Shanks, 2010).
Another influential figure was British philosopher John Locke
(1632–1704), who developed an empirical school of thought
that stopped short of being truly experimental
(Heidbreder, 1933). In his Essay Concerning Human
Understanding (1690), Locke noted that there are no innate
ideas; all knowledge derives from two types of experience:
sensory impressions of the external world and personal

awareness. At birth the mind is a tabula rasa (blank tablet).
Ideas are acquired from sensory impressions and personal
reflections on these impressions. What is in the mind originated
in the senses. The mind is composed of ideas that have been
combined in different ways. The mind can be understood only
by breaking down ideas into simple units. This atomistic view
of thought is associationist; complex ideas are collections of
simple ones.
The issues Locke raised were debated by such profound thinkers
as George Berkeley (1685–1753), David Hume (1711–1776),
and John Stuart Mill (1806–1873). Berkeley believed that mind
is the only reality. He was an empiricist because he believed
that ideas derive from experiences. Hume agreed that people
never can be certain about external reality, but he also believed
that people cannot be certain about their own ideas. Individuals
experience external reality through their ideas, which constitute
the only reality. At the same time, Hume accepted the empiricist
doctrine that ideas derive from experience and become
associated with one another. Mill was an empiricist and
associationist, but he rejected the idea that simple ideas
combine in orderly ways to form complex ones. Mill argued that
simple ideas generate complex ideas, although the latter need
not be composed of the former. Simple ideas can produce a
complex thought that might bear little relation to the ideas of
which it is composed. Mill’s beliefs reflect the notion that the
whole is greater than the sum of its parts, which is an integral
assumption of Gestalt psychology (Chapter 5).
In summary, empiricism holds that experience is the only form
of knowledge. Beginning with Aristotle, empiricists have
contended that the external world serves as the basis for
people’s impressions. Most accept the notion that objects or
ideas associate to form complex stimuli or mental patterns.
Locke, Berkeley, Hume, and Mill are among the better-known
philosophers who espoused empiricist views.
Although philosophical positions and learning theories do not
neatly map onto one another, conditioning theories (Chapter 3)

typically are empiricist whereas cognitive theories (Chapters 4–
8) are more rationalistic. But overlap often occurs; for example,
most theories posit that learning occurs through association.
Cognitive theories stress association between cognitions in
memory; conditioning theories emphasize the association of
stimuli with responses and consequences.
Beginnings of the Psychological Study of Learning
The formal beginning of the psychological study of learning is
difficult to pinpoint (Mueller, 1979), although systematic
psychological research began to appear in the latter part of the
19th century. Two persons who had a significant impact on
learning theory are Wundt and Ebbinghaus.
Wundt’s Psychological Laboratory.
The first psychological laboratory was opened by Wilhelm
Wundt (1832–1920) in Leipzig, Germany, in 1879, although
William James had started a teaching laboratory at Harvard
University four years earlier (Dewsbury, 2000). Wundt wanted
to establish psychology as a new science. His laboratory
acquired an international reputation with an impressive group of
visitors, and he founded a journal to report psychological
research. The first research laboratory in the United States was
opened in 1883 by G. Stanley Hall (Dewsbury, 2000).
Establishing a psychological laboratory was particularly
significant because it marked the transition from philosophical
theorizing to an emphasis on experimentation and
instrumentation (Evans, 2000). The laboratory included scholars
who conducted research aimed at scientifically explaining
phenomena (Benjamin, 2000). In his book Principles of
Physiological Psychology (1874), Wundt contended that
psychology is the study of the mind. The psychological method
should be patterned after the physiological method; that is, the
process being studied should be experimentally investigated in
terms of controlled stimuli and measured responses.
Wundt’s researchers investigated such phenomena as sensation,
perception, reaction times, verbal associations, attention,
feelings, and emotions. Wundt also was a mentor for many

psychologists who subsequently opened laboratories in the
United States (Benjamin, Durkin, Link, Vestal, & Acord, 1992).
Although Wundt’s laboratory produced no great psychological
discoveries or critical experiments, it established psychology as
a discipline and experimentation as the method of acquiring and
refining knowledge.
Ebbinghaus’s Verbal Learning.
Hermann Ebbinghaus (1850–1909) was a German psychologist
who helped to validate the experimental method and establish
psychology as a science. Ebbinghaus investigated higher mental
processes by conducting research on memory. He accepted the
principles of association and believed that learning and the
recall of learned information depend on the frequency of
exposure to the material. Properly testing this hypothesis
required using material with which participants were unfamiliar.
Ebbinghaus invented nonsense syllables, which are three-letter
consonant-vowel-consonant combinations (e.g., cew, tij).
Ebbinghaus often used himself as the subject of study. In a
typical experiment, he would devise a list of nonsense syllables,
look at each syllable briefly, pause, and then look at the next
syllable. He determined how many times through the list (trials)
it took to him learn the entire list. He made fewer errors with
repeated study of the list, needed more trials to learn more
syllables, forgot rapidly at first but then more gradually, and
required fewer trials to relearn syllables than to learn them the
first time. He also studied a list of syllables some time after
original learning and calculated a savings score, defined as the
time or trials necessary for relearning as a percentage of the
time or trials required for original learning. He found that
meaningfulness of material made learning easier. The results of
his research are compiled in the book Memory (1885/1964).
Although important historically, there are concerns about this
research. Ebbinghaus typically employed only one participant
(himself), and it is unlikely he was unbiased or a typical
learner. We also might question how well results for learning
nonsense syllables generalize to meaningful learning (e.g., text

passages). Nonetheless, he was a careful researcher, and many
of his findings later were validated experimentally. He was a
pioneer in bringing higher mental processes into the
experimental laboratory.
Structuralism and Functionalism
The work by Wundt and Ebbinghaus was systematic but
confined to particular locations and of limited influence on
psychological theory. The turn of the century marked the
beginning of more widespread schools of psychological thought.
Two perspectives that emerged were structuralism and
functionalism. Although neither exists as a unified doctrine
today, their early proponents were influential in the history of
psychology as it relates to learning.
Structuralism.
Edward B. Titchener (1867–1927) was Wundt’s student in
Leipzig. When he became the director of the psychology
laboratory at Cornell University in 1892, he imported Wundt’s
experimental methods into U.S. psychology.
Titchener’s psychology, which eventually became known
as structuralism, represented a combination of associationism
with the experimental method. Structuralists believed that
human consciousness is a legitimate area of scientific
investigation, and they studied the structure or makeup of
mental processes. They postulated that the mind is composed of
associations of ideas that to be studied must be broken down
into single ideas (Titchener, 1909).
The experimental method used often by Wundt, Titchener, and
other structuralists was introspection, a type of self-analysis.
Participants in introspection studies verbally reported their
immediate experiences following exposure to objects or events.
For example, if shown a table they might report their
perceptions of shape, size, color, and texture. They were told
not to label or report their knowledge about the object or the
meanings of their perceptions. Thus, if they verbalized “table”
while viewing a table, they were attending to the stimulus rather
than to their conscious processes.

Introspection was a uniquely psychological process and helped
to demarcate psychology from the other sciences. It was a
professional method that required training in its use so that an
introspectionist could determine when individuals were
examining their own conscious processes rather than their
interpretations of phenomena.
Unfortunately, introspection often was problematic and
unreliable. It is difficult and unrealistic to expect people to
ignore meanings and labels. When shown a table, it is natural
that people say “table,” think of uses, and draw on related
knowledge. The mind is not structured to compartmentalize
information so neatly, so by ignoring meanings introspectionists
disregarded a central aspect of the mind. Watson (Chapter 3)
decried the use of introspection, and its problems helped to
rally support for an objective psychology that studied only
observable behavior (Heidbreder, 1933). Edward L. Thorndike,
a prominent psychologist (Chapter 3), contended that education
should be based on scientific facts, not opinions
(Popkewitz, 1998). The ensuing emphasis on behavioral
psychology dominated U.S. psychology for the first half of the
20th century.
Another problem was that structuralists studied associations of
ideas, but they had little to say about how these associations are
acquired. Further, it was not clear that introspection was the
appropriate method to study such higher mental processes as
reasoning and problem solving, which are more complex than
immediate sensation and perception.
Functionalism.
While Titchener was at Cornell, other developments challenged
the validity of structuralism. Among these
was functionalism, the view that mental processes and behaviors
of living organisms help them adapt to their environments
(Heidbreder, 1933). This school of thought flourished at the
University of Chicago with John Dewey (1859–1952) and James
Angell (1869–1949). Another prominent functionalist was
William James (1842–1910). Functionalism was the dominant

American psychological perspective from the 1890s until World
War I (Green, 2009).
James’s principal work was the two-volume series, The
Principles of Psychology (1890), which is considered one of the
greatest psychology texts ever written (Hall, 2003). An abridged
version was published for classroom use (James, 1892). James
was an empiricist who believed that experience is the starting
point for examining thought, but he was not an associationist.
He thought that simple ideas are not passive copies of
environmental inputs but rather are the product of abstract
thought and study (Pajares, 2003).
James (1890) postulated that consciousness is a continuous
process rather than a collection of discrete bits of information.
One’s “stream of thought” changes as experiences change.
“Consciousness, from our natal day, is of a teeming multiplicity
of objects and relations, and what we call simple sensations are
results of discriminative attention, pushed often to a very high
degree” (Vol. I, p. 224). James described the purpose of
consciousness as helping individuals adapt to their
environments.
Functionalists incorporated James’s ideas into their doctrine.
Dewey (1896) believed that psychological processes could not
be broken into discrete parts and that consciousness must be
viewed holistically. “Stimulus” and “response” describe the
roles played by objects or events, but these roles could not be
separated from the overall reality (Bredo, 2003). Dewey cited
an example from James (1890) about a baby who sees a candle
burning, reaches out to grasp it, and experiences burned fingers.
From a stimulus–response perspective, the sight of the candle is
a stimulus and reaching is a response; getting burned (pain) is a
stimulus for the response of withdrawing the hand. Dewey
argued that this sequence is better viewed as one large
coordinated act in which seeing and reaching influence each
other.
Functionalists were influenced by Darwin’s writings on
evolution and studied how mental processes helped organisms

Competences, Learning Theories and MOOCsRecent Developments.docx

Competences, Learning Theories and MOOCsRecent Developments.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Competences, Learning Theories and MOOCsRecent Developments.docx

Similar to Competences, Learning Theories and MOOCsRecent Developments.docx (20)

More from bartholomeocoombs

More from bartholomeocoombs (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Competences, Learning Theories and MOOCsRecent Developments.docx