Learning Cycles – Curricula Based on Research
Physics Education Research Conference
University of Nebraska – Lincoln
August 1-2, 1998
Self-Regulation
Self-regulation is Piaget's all-encompassing term for describing how people gradually change their
patterns of reasoning and advance from one level of understanding to another. In this process a person
actively searches for relationships and patterns to resolve contradictions and to bring coherence to a new set
of experiences. Implicit in this notion is the image of a relatively autonomous individual, or, at the least, a
decision-making individual not under the constant guidance and control of a teacher or strict precedent.
Piaget, operating from a constructivist view of knowing, argues that knowledge is not preformed
either in the mind or in the environment, but rather is constructed. Thus, intelligent knowing consists not of
a primacy of either assimilation or accommodation, but rather of balance of the two. True understanding,
for Piaget, consists of neither assimilation nor accommodation in isolation, but rather of a dynamic
balancing of both. This balancing makes it possible to assimilate reality without distorting it and
simultaneously to accommodate to that reality without compromising the integrity of present cognitive
structures.
The subtle but crucial concept of self-regulation provides the link between Piaget's views on how
schemes function and his closely related views on how, during the course of their functioning, new
schemes are constructed. Self-regulation is probably best understood when viewed within its biological
context. Biologists have long understood that the functioning and development of an organism within its
environment cannot be understood simply as the sum of the organism's effects on that environment (in
Piaget's terms, its assimilation of the environment) and the environment's effect on the organism (that is,
the organism's forced accommodations to the environment). Rather, the nature of living systems is to
maintain their internal coherence in the face of environmental intrusions via complex feedback mechanisms
involving interaction between organism and environment. Piaget argues that cognition is another aspect of
an organism's adaptation to its environment and thus involves analogous self-regulating mechanisms. In
the face of new environmental demands, then, the construction of new knowledge is not the
accommodation of old schemes to the altered environment (as empiricists would have it), but the active
construction of new schemes that maintain a balance between the assimilatory and accommodatory aspects
of knowing. Through such self-regulation the active thinking student finds a path between the extremes of
automatically assimilating educational input to present schemes (and thus distorting it) and passively
accommodating to educational input (and thus merely imitating it). Only in this way can the integrity of a
person as a living, knowing, self-regulating system be maintained. The ideal for the educator is to provide
input that will not force distorting assimilations or blind accommodations but rather will facilitate the
ongoing self-regulating process.
The Learning Cycle
The concept of self-regulation forms the basis for the learning cycle. The entire learning cycle consists of
three phases that are named exploration, concept introduction, and application. During exploration the
students learn through their own more or less spontaneous reactions to a new situation. In this phase, they
explore new materials or ideas with minimal guidance or expectation of specific achievements. Their
pattern of reasoning may be inadequate to cope with the new data, and they may begin self-regulation. The
first exercise with the LEDs and IR detector cards gave you an exploration experience.
During the concept introduction phase, a new concept is defined, a new principle introduced or an
application is explained to expand the students' knowledge, skills, and/or reasoning. This step should
always follow an exploration and relate to the exploration activities. It will thereby assist in your students'
self-regulation. Our introduction of an energy band and gap model to explain the light emitted by LEDs
was our concept introduction phase. An appropriate approach to the concept introduction is to build on the
exploration and encourage individual students to "invent" part or all of a new idea for themselves, before
you present it to the class.
Learning Cycle Essays
Page 2
During the last phase of the learning cycle, application, a student finds new uses for the concepts
or skills he or she has invented or learned in the Concept Introduction earlier. Using the energy bands and
energy gap model to understand the IR detection card was our application. The application phase provides
additional time and experiences for self-regulation to take place. It also gives you the opportunity to
introduce the new concept repeatedly to help students whose conceptual re-organization proceeds more
slowly than average or who did not adequately relate your original explanation to their experiences.
Individual conferences with these students to identify their difficulties are especially helpful.
As another example of the learning cycle, we direct your attention to this tutorial. We did not
begin it with a definition of the learning cycle, but had you complete a learning cycle. That entire cycle
served as exploration. Next we described the three-phase learning cycle in this essay, (the concept
introduction) with references to your exploratory experience with the LED and IR Detector example.
Finally, after the conclusion of this tutorial, we would like you to examine, our tutorial plan, which is also
formulated according to a learning cycle. That examination will form an application activity for you. Thus
our Learning Cycle contained a Learning Cycle inside of it.
(These essays are based on ones that originally appeared in Karplus, R., et al. (1975). Workshop on
Physics Teaching and the Development of Reasoning. Stony Brook: American Association of Physics
Teachers.)
Further Reading
Atkin, J. M., & Karplus, R. (1962). Discovery or invention? Science Teacher, 29(5), 45.
Fuller, R., & et al. (1977). Multidisciplinary Piagetian-based Programs for College Freshman. Lincoln,
NE: ADAPT Program.
Hestenes, D. (1987). Toward a modeling theory of physics instruction. Americana Journal of Physics,
55(5), 440-445.
Karplus, E., & Karplus, R. (1970). Intellectual development beyond elementary school. School Science and
Mathematics, 70, 398-406.
Karplus, R. (1977). Science Teaching and the Development of Reasoning. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 14, 169.
Karplus, R., Renner, J., Fuller, R., Collea, F., & Paldy, L. (1975). Workshop on Physics Teaching and the
Development of Reasoning. Stony Brook: American Association of Physics Teachers.
Karplus, R., & Thier, H. (1967). A new look at elementary school science. Chicago: Rand-McNally.
Laws, P. (1991). Calculus-based Physics without Lectures. Physics Today, 44(12), 24-31.
Lawson, A. (1995). Science Teaching and the Development of Reasoning. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Lawson, A., Abraham, Michael & Renner, J. (1989). A Theory of Instruction: Using the Learning Cycle to
Teach Science Concepts and Thinking Skills.
Manhattan, KS: National Association for Research in Science Teaching.
Lawson, A., & Wollman, W. (1975). Physics Problems and Self-Regulation. The Physics Teacher, 13(8),
470-475.
McKinnon, J. W., & Renner, J. W. (1971). Are colleges concerned about intellectual development?
American Journal of Physics, 39, 1047-1052.
Renner, J., & Lawson, A. (1973). Promoting intellectual development through science teaching. The
Physics Teacher, 11(5), 273-276.
Scott, P. H., Asoko, H. M., & Driver, R. H. (1991). Teaching for conceptual change: a review of strategies.
In R. Duit, F. Goldberg, & H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues
and Empirical Studies (pp. 310-329). Kiel, Germany: Institute fur die Padagogik der
Naturwissenschaften.
Wells, M., Hestenes, D., & Swackhamer, G. (1995). A Modeling Method for High School Physics
Instruction. American Journal of Physics, 63, 606-6 19.
Zollman, D. (1990). Learning Cycles in a Large Enrollment Class. The Physics Teacher, 28, 20-25.