Task 1C
Theories of learning in relation to my lesson.
There are many different theories of learning that can support teachers within the education sector,
some of these theories have been around for many years, whilst new theories are being worked on
and adapted as new research comes through. According to Shuell (1986) ‘there is no one definition of
learning that is universally accepted by theorists, researchers, and practitioners’, therefore it is
common for these theories to overlap (Schunk, 2012) and so whilst teaching a class, it is likely that
you will, in some way, relate your work to these theories. There are five predominant paradigms of
educational learning theories that can be used to support teachers in their teaching, these are
behaviourism, constructivism, cognitivism, social learning and humanism.
Within the Equestrian Industry, a large majority of the work is practical based, for this reason when
students study this subject at a college or university setting, it is likely that they will complete a number
of practical sessions a week. The lesson that I will be discussing in this report was a practical session
involving the learners working on the yard, the students had an approaching formative assessment so
they had been given time within their lesson in order to ‘brush up’ on their practical skills and improve
on any that they struggled with, this also allowed the students to build on their work-based portfolio
and gain more practical hours. When creating lessons plans for this subject, it is easy to link the work
to many different learning theories as the cohort was a mixed group of learners, some of these
learners had SEN, Child (1995) stated that the label Special educational needs (SEN) extends to a broad
range of children with varying forms of difficulty in learning, opposed to the majority of their peers of
a similar age and so would be taught in a slightly different way in relation to what was their preferred
method. One theory that I looked at when creating this lesson was Arnold Gesell’s Maturation Theory
(1925), this behaviourist theory investigated the physiological stages of child development. Gesell
stated that children matured in stages and not ages, it was written that the development of children
was not chronological like it was with age. This theory also stated that the development of children
was influenced by internal and external factors, this can be seen within my lesson as many of the
learners come from different walks of life and the levels of development reflects the learners
upbringing. Support from this comes from John Watson (1928), who argued that children are born as
blank slates and parents are totally responsible for their upbringing. This supports the different levels
of development within the lesson, however it does not account for the pupils with SEN, they may have
an excellent upbringing but they still have trouble learning, for this reason we can look at Skinner’s
Operant Conditioning (1938) in ways in which to support these students, rather than looking at the
upbringing, we can condition the pupils when educating them. This is an easy task when working
practically as students can be rewarded with positive feedback when they have done something
correctly, this in turn will illicit a desired response from the students, such as correctly approaching a
horse. Their behaviour will be reinforced and so they will be conditioned, and learning has taken place.
Another key theory that can be aligned with teaching practical work is cognitivism, this theory was
first developed by Piaget (1936), it explains the ways in which a learner constructs a mental model of
the world. Child (1995) explains how this theory is genetic, maturational and hierarchical, as with
Gesell’s theory, Piaget claims that development is in stages that can occur at different rates,
depending on the individual, he also stated that children need rich environments that allow for active
exploration and hands on activities in order to learn (Schunk, 2012), which supports the use of
practical activities, such as those used by myself. However, according to Piaget’s theory, development
is universal and cultural differences have no effect on the stages (Pressley and McCormack, 2007),
which led to criticism from Dasen (1984) who found differences in stages of development of Western
children compared to Aboriginal children. This led to Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory which stressed
the role of social interaction on cognitive development (Vygotsky, 1978). Vygotsky believed that
children gain knowledge from conceptual tools which is transferred to them by the more intellectually
developed, this could be in the form of parents, same age peers or teachers (Snowman and Biehler,
2006). This theory can align with my form of teaching in the way that I believe the pupils will learn
from my experience and subject knowledge, as I have experience within the industry I can pass this
on to the learners to allow them to create their own ideas and understanding of the industry and how
it is run. This style will also align with the constructivist theory, this states that learners construct their
own understanding and knowledge of the world (Bruning et al, 2004), which supports Vygotsky (1978)
who argued that ‘the development of language and thought go together and that the origin of thought
and reasoning is more to do with our ability to communicate with others than our interaction with the
material world’, this can also link to Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development (ZPD) (see appendix,
table 1). This constructivist theory relates to my lesson, as it is a practical, learners will be working
with both myself and the horses, they will learn by my instruction as well as the behaviour of the horse
regarding if what they are doing is correct, according to Houpt (2004) the behaviour of a horse will
reflect negative emotions and management.
A common application that can be used to aid the cognitive skills of learners is the concept of
instructional scaffolding (Schunk, 2012) (see appendix, rationale) it refers to the process of controlling
tasks which are beyond the learner’s capabilities so they can focus on and master the task they can
grasp quickly (Puntambekar and Hubscher, 2005). It works in a way that the teacher will initially take
most of the responsibility whilst gradually passing this on to the learner so that they can perform
independently (Campione et al, 1984), this allows the learner to stay within their ZPD and was
discussed by Bruner (1984). This method is used within my lessons to allow pupils to gain more
confidence within their own work before being expected to work independently, it also allows
differentiation between learners, those at higher level will spend longer with more help.
Overall, I found that theories relating to active learning, such as cognitivism and constructivism,
supported my lessons more than the rest. However, according to Bruner (1985) theories attempt to
explain various types of learning but differ in their ability to do so and as most these theories are aged,
and proposed by theorists that can be seen as ‘pale, male and stale’, it may be time for a reform
regarding educational theories.
Reference List
BRUNER, J. S., 1984. Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development: The hidden agenda. In B. Rogoff & J. V.
Wertsch, Children’s learning in the “zone of proximal development” pp. 93–97. San Francisco: JosseyBass.
BRUNER, J. S., 1985. Models of the learner. Educational Researcher, 14 (6), pp. 5–8.
BRUNING, R. H., SCHRAW, G. J., NORBY, M. M., and RONNING, R. R., 2004. Cognitive psychology and
instruction. 4thed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
CAMPIONE, J. C., BROWN, A. L., FERRARA, R. A., AND BRYANT, N. R., 1984. The zone of proximal
development: Implications for individual differences and learning. In B. Rogoff & J. V. Wertsch, Children’s
learning in the “zone of proximal development” pp. 77–91. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
CHILD, D., 1995. Psychology and The Teacher. 1st ed. Cassell Press: London.
DASEN, P. R., 1984. The cross-cultural study of intelligence: Paget and the Baoule. International Journal of
Psychology. 19 (1-4) pp. 407-434.
GESELL, A., 1928. Maturation and infant behaviour pattern. Psychological Review. 36 (4) pp. 307-319.
HOUPT, K., 2004. Horse Behaviour. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 89 (1-2) pp. 181-182.
MEECE, J. L., 2002. Child and adolescent development for educators. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
PIAGET, J., 1936. Origins of intelligence in the child. 1st ed. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
PRESSLEY, M. and MCCORMACK, C.B., 2007. Child and Adolescent Development for Educators. Guilford
Press: London.
PUNTEMBEKAR, S., and HUBSCHER, R., 2005. Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning
environment: What have we gained and what have we missed? Educational Psychologist. 40 pp. 1–12.
SCHUNK, D., 2012. Learning theories. 6th ed,. Boston: Pearson, pp.3-9.
SCHUNK, D., 2012. Learning theories. 6th ed,. Boston: Pearson, pp. 238-260.
SHUELL, T. J., 1986. Cognitive conceptions of learning. Review of Educational Research. 1 (56) pp. 411–436.
SKINNER, B. F., 1938. The Behaviour of organisms: An experimental analysis. New York: AppletonCentury.
SNOWMAN, J. and BIEHLER, R., 2006. Psychology Applied to Teaching. Houghton Mifflin Company, U.S.A.
VYGOTSKY, L. S., 1978. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
WATSON, J. B., 1928. Psychological care of infant and child. New York, NY, US: W W Norton & Co.
Table 1
Table 6.4
Key points in Vygotsky’s theory.





Social interactions are critical; knowledge is coconstructed between two or more people.
Self-regulation is developed through internalization (developing an internal representation) of actions
and mental operations that occur in social interactions.
Human development occurs through the cultural transmission of tools (language, symbols).
Language is the most critical tool. Language develops from social speech, to private speech, to covert
(inner) speech.
The zone of proximal development (ZPD) is the difference between what children can do on their own
and what they can do with assistance from others. Interactions with adults and peers in the ZPD
promote cognitive development.
(Meece, 2002)