Learning and Cognition Essay

This essay investigates the use of three different theories in Educational Psychology; Pavlov’s Classical Conditioning Theory,

Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences, Vygotsky’s Socio Cultural Theory and the implementation, future pedagogy and

professional practice in an educational setting at the Primary and Middle level. ACARA (2015) express that educators can enhance

student learning by providing students with opportunities to work with learning area content in more depth, covering explicit

parts of the general capabilities learning continua. For example, the higher order cognitive skills of the critical and creative

thinking capability or focusing on cross-curriculum priorities. Teachers can also fast-track student learning with the content from

later levels in the Australian Curriculum. (ACARA, 2015)

Classical Conditioning Theory by Ivan Pavlov

Ivan Pavlov’s theory of Classical Conditioning can be applied in classrooms anywhere in the Primary and Middle year levels by

repetitively exposing children to positive learning experiences to ensure they have a desired response of positive thoughts about

all subjects, learning and school in general.

Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov, discovered what we call “Classical Conditioning,” which focuses on the learning of uncontrolled

responses, to various sounds, sights and smells, such as; fear, increased muscle tension, salivation or sweating (Woolfolk &

Margetts, 2013). Woolfolk & Margetts (2013) explain that through his research and testing he discovered that ‘humans and

animals can be trained to react involuntarily to a stimulus that previously had no effect.’

Pavlov’s experimentation of ‘Classical Conditioning’ involved the use of three elements; food, salivation and the sound of a tuning

fork (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013). Tested on a dog, his aim was to condition it to salivate every time it heard the sound of the

tuning fork, or have a “Conditioned Response” (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013).

This was achieved by knowing that every time the dog was fed, it would salivate, hence the food is an “Unconditioned Stimulus”

and the salivation is an “Unconditioned Response” to the food (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013).

At the beginning of the experiment, the dog had no reaction or response to the tuning fork, so at this stage the tuning fork was a

“Neutral Stimulus” (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013). Knowing the effect of the food, Pavlov would repeatedly sound the tuning fork

and then quickly feed the dog (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013). Eventually the desired outcome was achieved, and the dog would

salivate at the sound of the tuning fork (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013).

The relevance of this experiment in a classroom context is that, in the same way Pavlov conditioned the dog, educators should be

able to use a an “Unconditioned Stimulus” to condition children to achieve a desired response. In addition to being able to

condition children, educators should also be aware of previous experiences that students may have had which has unintentionally

conditioned them to react a negative way in the classroom, so that educators can work on reconditioning them accordingly.

In a Primary/Middle classroom, a teacher can implement strategies that directly link to the ideas and key concepts outlined by

Pavlov through the findings in classical conditioning, in their future pedagogy. McLeod (2008) states that ‘the implications of

Classical Conditioning in the classroom are less important than those of Operant Conditioning, but there is a still need for teachers

to try to make sure that students associate positive emotional experiences with learning.”

Students may have had previous experiences in classes, whereby, for example, students associate certain subjects, such as

math's, with negative feelings like it being too hard or just simply not fun.

There may have been instances in classrooms where having a lesson of math's has been perceived negatively by students due to

the way the teacher approaches it. For example a teacher may, time after time warn students by saying, “If you continue to mess

around we will stop and do math's,” giving the impression that doing math's is some sort of punishment, therefore unintentionally

conditioning students into having a negative outlook on the subject.

If a teacher constantly has a negative attitude towards chosen subjects, it can fall back onto the way students approach it, if even

at all. As outlined by Scott (1999), without one of the essential ingredients in numeracy, ‘confidence,’ students may be so anxious

that they don’t attempt it at all. This can dramatically impact the way students learn if they are too worried to even give

something a go, hence it is of imperative importance that teachers bring the same positive attitude to subjects such as Math's, or

English, as they do to Physical Education or Art, and that they are consistent in their attitude across the board.

Woolfolk & Margetts (2013) suggest that Classical Conditioning can be applied in the classroom by ‘associating positive, pleasant

events with learning tasks’ in all learning areas (pg 223). During silent reading students may sit on pillows, beanbags, couches and

other comfortable areas set up in the classroom. In Math's, students can learn division using refreshments or food, followed by

being able to eat the results (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013).

Woolfolk & Margetts (2013) also suggest that teachers should ‘help students to try anxiety-producing situations both voluntarily

and successfully’ (pg 223). Teachers can encourage shy students by assigning them a task to teach two peers how to complete a

specific task, that the teacher knows they are good at (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013). Slowly the teacher can monitor their progress

and assign them tasks in front of a bigger group, effectively building their confidence in a way that the teacher knows they can

achieve success, even if slightly challenging at first (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013).

It is also suggested that teachers can, ‘help students recognise differences and similarities among situations so they can

discriminate and generalize appropriately’ (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013). In a Primary/Middle classroom situation this can be

achieved by ensuring when students feel anxious or under pressure before, for example, sitting the NAPLAN test, that teachers

emphasize that it is just like any other tests they have taken throughout the beginning of this year and previous years and is

nothing to stress about (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013).

Just like any theory, Pavlov’s Classical Conditioning theory presents its strengths and limitations. Because the theory is based on

firsthand evidence carried out by controlled experiments, a strength of his theory is that it is actually scientific (McLeod, S. 2008).

One of the limitations identified is generalization, where the Conditioned Response is generalized to a range of Conditioned

Stimuli (Good & Brophy, 1990).

It is important as teachers to have an understanding of the limitations associated with the theory because the way in which we

teach and our attitudes towards students, learning and school in general can have a massive impact on our students. Teachers

must ensure everything is presented positively so that students who perhaps don’t enjoy one subject don’t begin to generalize

and develop a phobia of school altogether (McLeod, S. 2008).

The Australian Professional Standards for Teachers links to Pavlov’s Classical Conditioning theory and has been identified in

Standard 4: Create and maintain supportive and safe learning environment, “Establish and implement inclusive and positive

interactions to engage and support all students in classroom activities.” (AITSL, 2015)

Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences

The process involved in applying Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences in a classroom of Primary/Middle students can be

achieved by utilising the 8 recognised theories in order to cater for all students who each possess various different intelligences in

each area, to ensure success is achievable for all.

Howard Gardner, the man behind the theory of Multiple Intelligences, defined intelligence as ‘the ability to solve problems or to

develop outcomes and products that are valued in one or more cultural settings’ (Good & Brophy, 1990). According to Gardner,

‘there are least eight separate intelligences; logical-mathematical, linguistic (verbal), musical, spatial, bodily kinaesthetic

(movement), interpersonal (understanding others), intrapersonal (understanding self), and naturalist (observing and

understanding natural and human made patterns and systems)’ (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013). (Appendix 1)

According to this theory, each human being is capable of eight relatively independent forms of information processing, with

individuals differing from one another in the specific type of intelligences that they present (Gardner & Hatch, 1989). It has also

been argued that these intelligences work together as a system to solve problems and to produce useful personal and societal

outcomes (Good & Brophy, 1990). We all have a unique combination of intelligences, which, is the reason why we are all different

(Good & Brophy, 1990).

Gardner emphasized that his theory of multiple intelligences was not the same as learning styles, a common misconception, as he

does not believe that anyone actually has a consistent learning style, and because we mature over time we adopt new ways and

strategies to learn (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013).

Many scientists, theorists and critics have tried to point out the limitations of Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences, outlining that some

of the intelligences such as bodily kinesthetic and musical ability are just talents, and that interpersonal is simply a personality

trait (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013). Lynn Waterhouse (2006) concluded that there have been no published studies that validate

Multiple Intelligences theory and others argued that the theory is too broad to tell teachers how to teach (Woolfolk & Margetts,

2013). Nonetheless it is important to acknowledge that all students are intelligent in their own right and in their own different

ways, excelling in only a few of these eight areas whilst having no remarkable abilities in the others (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013).

One of the strengths behind Gardner’s notion of separate abilities is based on the evidence that claims that brain damage usually

affects the functioning of one area, for example language, but does not affect functioning in other areas (Woolfolk & Margetts,

2013).
As Good & Brophy (1990) outlined, Gardner’s vision of the ideal school is based on two assumptions; not all people have the same

interests and abilities, and no one can learn everything because this is simply too much to learn.

In a classroom context, learning about and being aware of this perspective of Multiple Intelligences is an advantage as it expands

the teachers pedagogy and thinking about abilities and different avenues for teaching, rather than teaching every lesson for every

subject by standing at the front of the class in front of the whiteboard (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013). A disadvantage is the lack in

research educators and teachers undertake when attempting to implement theories like this into the classroom (Woolfolk &

Margetts, 2013). It can be easily misinterpreted and misused, resulting in teachers trying to incorporate every single type of

intelligence in every lesson, no matter how inappropriate (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013).

A teacher can appropriately adopt and implement this theory in their professional practice and future pedagogy by designing the

lesson, identifying which of these intelligences fall into the subject and applying them accordingly. The purpose is to have an

understanding and some awareness of the Multiple Intelligences in planning lessons to assist student’s development and not

restrict them by teaching every lesson the same. At the end of the day the teacher wants all students to be given the best chance

to achieve success.

If teaching a Primary/Middle class, when introducing Indigenous Studies, teachers could assign a project, where students must

research a specific area in indigenous culture which appeals to them, and in a form of their choice present it to the class. Applying

the theory of Multiple Intelligences, teachers can play traditional indigenous music during these classes, playing sounds of the

Didgeridoo and kookaburras, for those who have a strong musical intelligence. The teacher may show the class age appropriate

videos of traditional indigenous dances, and if the students are dominant in bodily kinaesthic intelligence, they may choose to

present what they have learnt in the form of dance. Students may be exposed to maps of various aboriginal trails that different

tribes and clans followed, supporting those with a strong spatial/logical-mathematical intelligence. Those dominant in the

linguistic intelligence may be given books and appropriate websites to research and write an essay or report on a chosen area in

the indigenous studies.

This theory puts an emphasis on differentiated instruction to address individual difference, and to teach any skills, disciplines and

concepts in many appropriate ways, but not in 8 ways every time (Gardner, 2009).

The Australian Professional Standards for Teachers links to Gardner’s theory of Multiple Intelligences and has been identified in

Standard 1: Know students in how they learn, “Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of strategies for differentiating

teaching to meet the specific learning needs of students across the full range of abilities.” (AITSL, 2015)
Vygotsky’s Socio Cultural Theory

Vygotsky’s Socio Cultural Theory can be applied in Primary/Middle year levels by identifying students Zones of Proximal

Development by utilising the concept of Scaffolding, giving students maximum assistance in new tasks, then reducing the

assistance and encouraging conversation with More Knowledgeable Others and use inner speech in order to learn.

Russian psychologist, Lev Vygotsky, discovered what we know as the Social Cultural Theory. His theory involves various aspects

including the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), the More Knowledgeable Other (MKO), Scaffolding, language and inner

speech.

Vygotsky once mentioned that at any given point in development, there are certain problems that a child is on the verge of being

able to solve (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013). Woolfolk & Margetts (2013) added that all they need is some structure, clues,

reminders, help with remembering details or steps and a little bit of encouragement to keep trying.

The Zone of Proximal Development has been interpreted as the zone between what a child can already do on their own without

any assistance or help, or, their current achievement, and what a child cannot do, which is currently out of reach, even with

guidance (Cole, 2013). Hence, the Zone of Proximal development is the zone where the child presents the most potential to learn,

and where skills and understandings have not yet emerged or developed but can do so if the child engages in interactions with

More Knowledgeable Others, including peers, adults, teachers, parents, coaches, experts/professionals, children and computers

(Tools of the Mind, 2015) (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013) (Psycho Hawks, 2010). It defines the mental functions that have not yet

matured but are in the process of Maturation (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013). With the appropriate support, giving children

experiences that are within their Zones of Proximal Development encourages and advances their individual learning (Berk &

Winsler, 1995).

The application of ZPD in a Primary/Middle classroom setting involves the use of “Scaffolding,” where students begin learning

with maximum assistance, and then slowly as the student begins to understand, and develop a higher mental function, the

assistance is reduced (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013).

Most of the assistance is communicated through language and observation where teachers either give instructions or

demonstrations to help students understand and complete the given task (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013). Once full assistance from

the More Knowledgeable Other, in this case the Teacher, is reduced, children use both inner or private speech and language to

talk to themselves in their heads or discuss and collaborate ideas with peers, presenting arguments, hypothesis and ideas of how

to go about the task (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013). Woolfolk & Margetts (2013) pointed out that sometimes the best teacher is

another student or peer who is facing a similar problem, because they are probably more in tune with the learner’s Zone of

Proximal Development (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013).

Woolfolk & Margetts (2013) suggest that teachers can implement Vygotsky’s ideas in a Primary/Middle classroom by ensuring

students are given access to influential resources that support thinking. This can include not only giving access to tools such as

dictionaries, Internet searches, spreadsheets and word-processing programs, but actually modeling the use of these tools and

teaching students how to use them.

The implementation in future pedagogy, also outlined by Woolfolk & Margetts (2013) can be achieved if teachers have an

emphasis on discussion and group learning including; peer tutoring, cooperative learning and modeling thinking out loud for

revision and clarification.

Woolfolk & Margetts (2013) also recommend tailoring scaffolding to the needs of the students in the primary and middle class

which can be achieved by providing models, prompts, sentence starters, coaching and feedback when introducing new topics and

tasks (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013). Teachers should also encourage students to challenge themselves but offer their assistance,

providing strategies for addressing any difficulties (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013).

With any theory, Vygotsky’s theory comes with limitations, which need to be recognised in order to successfully apply the theory

in an educational setting. For new educators, the use of scaffolding in theory seems simple to apply in the classroom, however

due to the nature of the term, scaffolding unfortunately does not provide educators with clear and definite guidelines on exactly

how it should be used to achieve successful teaching (Ro.uow.edu.au 2015).

The Australian Professional Standards for Teachers links to Vygotsky’s Socio Cultural Theory and has been identified in Standard 1:

Know students in how they learn, “Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of research into how students learn and the

implications for teaching.” (AITSL, 2015)

It has also been identified in Standard 3: Plan for and Implement effective teaching and learning, “Set learning goals that provide

achievable challenges for students of varying abilities and characteristics.” (AITSL, 2015)
The theories discussed in this essay are just three of many theories in cognitive development in educational psychology. To be a

successful teacher it is important to be aware of the different external factors that have an impact on student’s growth, cognitive

development, morals, personalities, attitudes over various social and cultural contexts. The more awareness and knowledge we

have on these influences and factors will affect how well we can take on the appropriate role and apply these into our future

pedagogy and professional practice, giving our students a healthy classroom and school environment with access to the right

tools to grow into successful individuals.

Reference List

Acara.edu.au,. 'Student Diversity | ACARA'. N.p., 2015. Web. 4 Apr. 2015.

Aitsl.edu.au,. 'Standards | Australian Institute For Teaching And School Leadership'. N.p., 2015. Web. 4 Apr. 2015.

Gage, N. L, and David C Berliner. Educational Psychology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1984. Print.

Gardner, H., and T. Hatch. 'Educational Implications Of The Theory Of Multiple Intelligences'. Educational Researcher 18.8 (1989):
4-10. Web. 2 Apr. 2015.

Gardner, H. (2009). Birth and the spreading of meme. In J.-Q. Chen S. Moran & H. Gardner (Eds.) Multiple intelligences around the
world (pp. 3 – 16). San Francisco: Wiley.

Good, Thomas L, and Jere E Brophy. Educational Psychology. New York: Longman, 1990. Print.

McLeod, Saul. 'Classical Conditioning | Simply Psychology'. Simplypsychology.org. N.p., 2008. Web. 5 May 2015.

Scott, D 1999, ‘Essential ingredients for numeracy’, Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, vol 4, no.1, pp. 4-8.

Waterhouse, L. (2006). Multiple intelligences, the Mozart effect, and emotional intelligence: A critical review. Educational
Psychologist, 41, 207 – 225.

Woolfolk, A & Margetts, K 2013, Educational Psychology, 3rd ed, Australasian ed, Pearson Education, French Forest, NSW,
Australia.

Berk, L & Winsler, A. (1995). "Vygotsky: His life and works" and "Vygotsky's approach to development". In Scaffolding children's
learning: Vygotsky and early childhood learning. Natl. Assoc for Educ. Of Young Children. p. 24

Psycho Hawks,. 'Theories Of Cognitive Development: Lev Vygotsky.'. N.p., 2010. Web. 9 May 2015.

Ro.uow.edu.au,. N.p., 2015. Web. 4 Apr. 2015.

Tools of the Mind,. 'Zone Of Proximal Development And Scaffolding - Tools Of The Mind'. N.p., 2015. Web. 4 May 2015.

Yourself?, Teaching. 'Teaching Problem Solving : Mastering Bit By Bit Vs Try It All By Yourself?'. Cogsci.stackexchange.com. N.p.,
2015. Web. 4 May 2015.
Appendix 1

Gardner & T. Hatch (1989)