Introduction- Anderson et al quote
On the very first class of the semester we were presented with a syllabus that contained
driving questions. When I first read over these questions, I confess that I thought they were fairly
elementary. I also assumed that at some point as a class we would all collectively agree upon the
answers these questions would have guided us to. After admitting to all of this, it is certainly
evident that I am new to this masters program. To my surprise these questions continuously
challenged me, well at the same time also invited me to engage in a deeper reflection of how
students learn science, and how this learning process can affect the way science is taught. Four
months worth of pondering, contemplating, and discussing about these driving questions and I
am yet to feel as though I have discovered a universal answer. However, within this paper a light
will be shined on the ideas I have taken away from current theories and research being performed
in the field.
Defining and understanding learning is a difficult task because it is rooted in learning
processes that humans instinctively and innately allow to happen. Quote Anderson The
capability of higher-order thinking is natural, and involves mechanisms to these actions that we
try to understand. For many, the chicken-egg complex exists between the two schools of
thought. What comes first for learning to occur? The capability of individually learning through
cognition or the situative learning that occurs by social interactions? There is no denying that
both of these mechanisms play a great role in learning. Therefore I am going to place myself in
the middle, where I define learning as a process that occurs in multifaceted ways, aided by the
internal and individual accumulation of knowledge, while the social and situational perspectives
continues to aide in both the discovery of new knowledge and understanding of present
knowledge.
The two schools of thought that have greatly influenced the theoretical framework
discussed throughout this paper are the cognitive school and the situative school. The current
research performed in the science education field has been heavily shaped by the national push
for developing curricula to guide students towards “authentic science” (Taking Science To
School, Chapter 1). This national need to produce students who can be contributing citizens in
the field of science has aided the development of research. There has been a great debate
amongst these professional theorists of whether the cognitive model or the situative model of
learning explains the answer to how learning occurs and how teaching can influence and enhance
this process. My personal belief falls in between this continuum of theories, and therefore I can
call myself neither a cognitive or situative theorists, but rather a hybrid of the two. In this paper
I will highlight what I believe are the strengths and weaknesses of each school and how they
have enabled the development of my ideal learning theory.
OR
In this paper two major theoretical schools will be discussed: the cognitive school and the
situative school. The development of these two schools can be traced back to a schism that took
place within Constructivism. Constructivism has provided these schools with an epistemology
of the nature of learning (Schunk YEAR). The aspiration to develop a curriculum to guide
students towards “authentic science” has aided the development of research of these schools
(Taking Science To School, Chapter 1). Amongst these researchers exists a great debate. Is it
the situative model or the cognitive model that gives insight into how both learning occurs and
how teaching can influence and enhance this process? This paper will discuss these theories in
detail, discuss my own theoretical framework, and provide implications for how this can be
applied to the classroom.
Cognitive
A characteristic of cognitive theorists is the emphasis placed on the individual learner, as
well as the internal organization of concepts that contribute to the learning process. George
Posner and other researchers from Cornell University advocated for the cognitive theory in their
article titled Accommodation of a Scientific Conception: Toward a Theory of Conceptual
Change. Posner et al. defined learning in this article as being “a process of conceptual change”
(Posner et al. 1982 212). These theorists suggested learning to be developed in relation to
current concepts a learner holds true- the method for how this information is processed is termed
as either assimilation or accommodation. Assimilation of a new concept occurs when it is
transferred into preexisting concepts, and accommodation of a new concept occurs when an
entirely different concept replaces a preexisting one.
The work of Posner et al. developed from two commonly accepted concepts at the time.
The first being an understanding that learning results from the interaction between what is being
taught to a student and what the student already understands to be true concepts and ideas
(Posner et al. 1982 p 211). The second influencing factor in the Posner et al. conceptual change
theory was Jean Piaget’s research that took place earlier in the twentieth century. Piaget studied
how these learners brought forth scientific beliefs with them to learning situations, rather than
just coming in with no preexisting beliefs. By these earlier interactions, and new research that
focused on ______________, Posner et al. created conditions for conceptual change to take
place. Although this article was not meant to be looked at for practice within the classroom,
diSessa? Pointed out that many people looked towards Posner et al. as a guide for how to create
conceptual change for students within a classroom. Posner et al.’s research entailed a four step
guide to create conceptual change. First the learner must have to experience dissatisfaction with
an existing concept. This dissatisfaction allows the learner to look for a new concept that could
be intelligible to what they are learning about. From here, the new concept must be plausible.
Finally, the concept should suggest a possibility of other learning to occur (Posner et al. 1982).
Situative
The situative learning theorists believe that the process of constructing information is
greatly determined by the social interactions and situational contexts that the learner is involved
with at the time of learning (Blumenfeld, Marx, Patrick, Krajcik, & Soloway, 1997). The
situated theory has been significantly influenced by Vygotsky, acknowledged as a philosophical
and psychological pioneer. Vygotsky believed that learning is not solely the result of an internal
process. Rather it initially occurs externally through social interactions that allow for the coconstruction of knowledge. This co-construction of knowledge is developed between individuals
of a common culture (Cole & Scribner YEAR). The legacy of Vygotsky has persevered through
the work of many current researchers. Brown, Collins, and Duguid reported that concepts are
situated in and developed through activity. This conceptual knowledge created in activity, act as
cultural tools that can be utilized by the learner (1989).
Within the situative school there are varying degrees in which researchers believe social
interactions impact learning. Radicals, Lave and Wenger, in an attempt to both define and clarify
the concept of situative learning arrived at the notion that “learning is an integral and inseparable
aspect of social practice” (Lave & Wenger, YEAR, 31).

Talk about Greeno (“Situated learning involves relations between a person
and a situation; Cognitive processes do not reside solely in ones mind
(Greeno, 1989)” (Schunk YEAR 239).
Cognitive and Situative Debate:

Discuss Transfer and Context
The founding for the cognitive verse situative debate is not due to the belief that the other
does not exist at all. For example amongst the researchers in the situative field, many do not
disregard that cognition does occur. However these researchers believe that the process of
constructing information is heavily determined by the social interactions and situational contexts
that the learner is involved with at the time of learning (Blumenfeld, Marx, Patrick, Krajcik, &
Soloway, 1997).
My Theory
“Ideally in a community of learners, teachers and students serve as role models not only as
“owners” of some aspects of domain knowledge, but also as acquirers, users, and extenders of
knowledge in the sustained, ongoing process of understanding.” (Ann Brown p. 190)
Lave and Wenger’s idea of newcomer – old timer.
Conceptual change and cognitive learning does occur, but social interactions create meaning.
Practice In Schools:
“Clear instructional goal.” (Ann Brown p. 205)
Last resort- explicit instruction
Know misconceptions
Conclusion
Bibliography