Oulu Polytechnic
School of Vocational Education
Ismo Koponen
LEARNING, AND LEARNER AUTONOMY
as pedaphysical phenomena
A004005 Learner Autonomy and
Differentiation of Learning and Evaluation, 3 ectscr
Oulu 2005
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT
3
1. INTRODUCTION
3
2. LEARNING, AND LEARNER AUTONOMY
4
2.1. Learning
4
2.1.1. About behaviorism, the learning paradigm
7
2.1.2. About constructivism, the other learning paradigm
7
2.2. Learner autonomy
8
3. CONCLUDING DISCUSSION
10
LIST OF REFERENCES
12
2
ABSTRACT
This paper discusses the main learning theories - behaviorism and constructivism - in general, and learner autonomy within the context of these
theories, in particular. From the discussion, I learn that behaviorism and constructivism - as learning paradigms - do not opposite each others but
complete each others. Learner autonomy, on the other hand, is an essential
element of any learning process wether or not being manifested by a teacher.
Through the writing, I introduce - among a few other ones - the following
concepts: 1) concrete action/behavior, and 2) virtual action/behavior. I also
pay metaphysics a visit, returning with the idea that learning and learner
autonomy be phenomena that can be conceptualized using certain
pedaphysical terms and modeled in a certain pedaphysical space. I therefore
hypothesize an equity where learning (L) results from the multiplication of
studying (s) by teaching (t). The value of 's', however, must be treated by an
exponential variable 'x' that stands for learner autonomy.
On the pages of this paper, I have criticisized present day western
pedagogists for 'socializing' the originally marxist idea of constructivism.
1. INTRODUCTION
The course Learner Autonomy and Differentiation of Learning and Evaluation
(A004005) is part of the vocational pedagogical studies that I am taking at
Oulu Polytechnic, School of Vocational Education. The 3 ectscr course is
tutored by Doctor Hedvika Suchonova from the Silesian University, in
Karvina, Czech Republic.
With this essay I aim at developing my own understanding on the main
learning theories - behaviorism and constructivism - in general, and on
learner autonomy within the context of these theories, in particular. For this
purpose, I find it necessary to dig a little deeper in the history of these
theories. My starting point has been Lev S Vygotskij´s (spelled Vygotsky, in
some western writings) works. He was a psychologist and learning theorist in
The Soviet Union, active as a writer from 1925 until his death in 1934.
The discussion I am reporting on is theoretical, in the beginning, but I am
assuming a shift towards a more empirical approach (in chapter three), when
discussion develops. As a learner, I have been a subject of teaching, but - as
my autonomy develops - my own learning is taking a more and more important role in the 'play'. I am looking forward to a 'story' to be told to my possible
audience. Also, I am looking forward to some concepts being reconceptualized, and some new concepts emerging through synthesis. As an auto3
nomous learner, I have taken the liberty to encourage this development in
myself.
2. LEARNING, AND LEARNER AUTONOMY
In this main chapter I will report on the discussion on the two main themes of
my writing. I will also touch the concept of 'evaluation', however, without any
real in-depth-analysis.
2.1. Learning
Learning, and the idea of shared knowledge and understanding. Remember
having read that accidents do not happen, they are caused. What about
learning, does it occur or is it also caused ? 'Activity theory' can give an
answer: it is "…originated in the former Soviet Union as part of the culturalhistorical school of psychology established by Vygotskij, Leontjev and Lurija.
The theory is a philosphical framework for studying different forms of human
praxis as developmental processes, with both the individual and the social
level interlinked" (Rodriguez, 1998). Newton Duarte continues almost
seemlessly to the above: "Marx and Vygotskij not only defended the idea that
knowledge is objective, that it reflects the objectively existing reality, but also
defended that the existence of a process of development of knowledge that
results in the existence of some highly developed forms of knowledge"
(2004).
Table 1. The five principles of Activity Theory (some essentials)
1. Object-orientedness
2. Hierarchical structure of activity
3. Internationalization/Externationalization
4. Mediation
Actions are goal-directed processes
that must be undertaken to fulfill the
object.
Activity theory holds that the constituents of Activity theory are not
fixed but can dynamically change as
conditions changes.
Activity theory empasizes that it is not
just mental representation that gets
placed on someone's head; it is
holistic activity, including motor
activity and use of artifact.
…broadly define and include instruments, signs, language, and
machines, mediate activity and are
created by people to control their own
behavior. Culture. History. Structures.
4
5. Development
Activity theory requires that human
interaction with reality should be
analysed in the context of the
development. The activity itself is the
context.
Source: Rodriguez, 1998 (constructed by the author).
Ackording to Newton Duarte, "Vygotsky understood that psychology could
describe the laws governing and individual's reactions to art in general by
studying these exact most developed forms of art. This is the key to a
pedagogic approach inspired by Activity Theory" (2004). Henrry Rodriguez,
on the other hand, also places an interesting question, namely: "What are the
basic components of cognitive processes ? Are they subsumed by a common
mental mechanism ? What is the relationship between the physical apparatus
and cognition ?" (1998). Karlsson & Mansory (see 2003) contribute with kind
of an answer stating that objects are recognised when they are acted upon,
and that when new information does not fit into a structure, we start to
reorganize the information, or change the structure.
An important part of most present day learning takes place in specific learning
environments that are arranged and managed by institutional organizations,
e.g. schools. The premises of the school - the s.c. learning infrastructure play a role in the play, too. What is, probably, more important than the
infrastructure is the social construction that involves both teachers and
learners (later: learning community). Suppose Manning & Manning (1993)
share the same idea when talking about the psychological environment
people create from mutual assumptions and beliefs they hold about learning.
Any learning process requires knowledge. Knowledge is processed by the
people that are involved. The outcome of the process usually is an amount of
shared knowledge, and/or a number of skills. It is my own assumption that
both knowledge and skills should allways be accompanied with appropriate
understanding. Karlsson & Mansory do not go that far but support my idea to my own understanding - while stating that "Knowledge has to be
organized" (see 2003). Since learning processes often are long (measured in
time) they may result in understanding long after the learner has left the
institution. Evaluation of learning, on the other hand, usually takes place while
the learning process still is incomplete. This is a challenge for all the learning
community.
I apologize in advance for the following long citation (it is in German).
However, I find everything that I know about 'Gestalt Psychologie' and the
neopositivistic 'Wiener Kreiss' society of philosophers very important when
trying to understand what I keep calling 'the learning community'. "Das Ziel
5
der Philosphie des Wiener Kreises war - im Anschluss an die Forschungen
von Ernst Mach - die Vereinigung von Empirismus und moderner Logik zu
einer Einheitswissenschaftlichen Aussagen in ein umfassende formale
Sprache (zum Beispiel in die der Mathematik oder Physik) zu uebersetzen,
um die Objekte der Philosophie (die Sätze, Begriffe und Theorien der
Wissenschaft) darzustellen" (http://www.aeiou.at/…). Professor Mach mentioned as an influenter of 'The Circle' - is both a physicist and a
philosopher. The main idea of 'gestalt' psychology is that everything affects
everything. Such a broad research approach to science and research must
require a broad set of research methods and tools, as well. Learning, and the
learning community, form a specific - but still a versatile - research object.
Studying it has benefited from gestalt thinking, and still can do so.
Another, in addition to the a.m. Czech professor, influenter of The Circle was
an Austrian professor, Ludwig Wittgenstein. He brought to light the need for a
mutual language that is essential for all sciences, nontheless for the
educational sciences. One of his main statements is: "Without sharing certain
attitudes towards the things around us, sharing a sense of relevance and
responding in similar ways, communication would be impossible
(http://www.iep.utm.edu/w/…), and communication is of crucial importance
within the learning community. Wittgenstein studied e.g. the relation between
life and language. It is, perhaps, his original idea that language is a set of
agreements - every word has a meaning - that are shared within a
community. Karlsson & Mansory can be seen claiming that learning be the
acquisition of concepts and understanding the relations between them (see
2003). David Little, on the other hand, states that: "Social interaction is a
discursive activity (that is, it proceeds by means of linguistic communication),
which means that talk is central to the process of social-interactive learning"
(XXXX). Little also - refering to Vygotskij - points out that "language plays a
central role in learning because it is the symbolic tool by which we guide
problem-solving behaviour" (ibid.).
It is my own assumption that the relative shortage of time - and the need to
express a lot - has resulted in spoken languages (that consist of words and
centences, perhaps of Sätze, Begriffe und Theorien) of nations. Wittgenstein
postulates that a solitary-from-birth individual would never have come up with
a language (see ibid.). Obviously, such a human would have used images
(pictures) to document his or her life and work.
The constant buziness of the modern human, and the need for immediate
feedback and reflection triggered the development of languages; from
pictures to words and centences.
National cultures are different, however. When e.g. a Finnish would say:
"Tänään on… ", i.e. "Today, it is cold otdoors", a Russian might - more
6
compactly - express the same idea like this: "Holodna" (Cold.). Other than
national cultures can be exampled by e.g. the modern cell-phone-cociety. The
need to communicate through short messages (SMSs) has affected
language. Symbols are used instead of centences, even instead of words.
Quick access to fastly transmittable pictures makes instant communication
possible.
2.1.1. About behaviorism, the learning paradigm
In De Vries (XXXX), Vygotskij states that learning be a system of stimulusresponse actions. "Since the laws of stimulus-response connections are the
basis of natural behavioral laws, it is impossible to control a response before
controlling the stimulus. …a system of stimuli is a social force provided
externally…" (ibid.). Little reminds us about Vygotskij's idea that "learning is
essentially a matter of supported performance" (XXXX). In Duarte (2004),
Leontjev states that: "Labour, by realizing the production process (in both its
forms - material and spiritual) is imprinted in its product". Does Leontjev see
an analogue between working and learning ? Obviously, he does. I claim,
another analogue being between learning and modern - present day marketing, in selling/buying behavior, to be more precise. Marketing is a
social learning process whereas both sellers and buyers learn from each
others actions and reactions, and learn how to affect the other's behavior.
School work can be seen as a social process where e.g. knowledge and skills
are marketed. All actors involved in the process obtain a certain strategy, and
learn from their own and the other part's behavior. Learning results in
developed behavior that again exaggerates further development stages. "The
mission of school education should be to lead new generations towards the
appropriation of the most developed forms of human knowledge…" (Vygotskij
in Duarte, 2004).
The outcome of the above is that behaviorism is not a learning philosophy per
se. It is a mere approach to learner evaluation. If behaviorism is to be
criticized as a learning philosophy, the problem with it is - if we want to see it
as a problem - that it is so evaluation oriented. But that behaviorism would
necessarily need an active teacher, and a number of passive learners is a
mere misconception. Learners in 'learning' are as active as e.g. buyers in
'marketing'. A certain pedagogical approach does not change this.
2.1.2. About constructivism, the other learning paradigm
Ackording to Dimitirios Thanasoulas "Constructivism is an elusive concept"
(XXXX, a/b). I like to think that he wants to say that learners tend to construct
events and ideas that they experience in a certain context, in certain
7
situations (see ibid.). "In contrast to positivism, constructivism posits the view
that, …, individuals reorganise and restructure their experiences" (ibid.).
The marxist psychologists, and the then so emerging constructivism. In her
writing 'Vygotsky, Piaget, and Education: A Reciprocal Assimilation…', Rheta
DeVries sees a paradox in Vygotskij: "…evidence is found both for claiming
that Vygotsky was a behaviorist and that he was a constructivist" (XXXX).
Could one be a behavioristic constructivist, or vice-versa ? Vygotskij has
called the psychological tool a construction, and claimed humans - when
acting on and changing external nature - also acting and changing their own
nature simultaneously. Also, social factors are central for a learner in his/her
development process (see ibid.).
"Knowledge and reality are different social contexts. The knowledge about
reality is socially constructed or as Karl Marx puts it: "man's consciousness is
determined by his social being" (Karlsson & Mansory, 2003). The same
source also recalls Marx' concept of 'inner speech'. Vygotskij name the same
phenomenon 'egocentric speech'. "…it (inner or egocentric speech) is
communicative and social in character and the language function develops
rapidly into a tool for thought (see ibid.). Both Marx and Vygotskij refer to the
idea that a human be capable of self reflective processing of information.
"Marx and Vygotsky not only defended the idea that knowledge is objective,
that it reflects the objectively existing reality, but also defended that the
existence of a process of development of knowledge that results in the
existence of some highly developed forms of knowledge" (Duarte, 2004).
The outcome of the above is that constructivism is just another approach to
learner evaluation. The problems with constructivism in general are: 1)
learning by constructing knowledge takes place in the brain of a learner.
Neither the teacher nor the learner him/herself has direct access to the brain
and the process within. Teaching and studying are indirect attempts to take
control of a learning process. 2) Constructivist teachers have to step back to
behaviorism whenever they see evaluation of learning necessary. Constructivistic evaluation is not possible. Now I see it: neither behaviorism, nor
constructivism is a complete learning philosophy, alone.
2.2. Learner autonomy
David Little: "Teachers must always be looking for opportunities
to hand over control to their learners".
Here, I start from what can be seen as supportive for 'Gestalt Psychologie',
discussing learner autonomy, furtherly coming up with a proposal for a
Specific Relativity Theory of Learning.
8
Supporting our motto, Thanasoulas calls for a shift of locus of responsibility
from teachers to learners (XXXX, a; alternatively, see XXXX, b). Let it also
give learner autonomy a descripition as a concept: "…autonomy can be
thought of in terms of a departure from education as a social process, as well
as in terms of redistribution of power attending the construction of knowledge
and the roles of the participants in the learning process" (ibid.). But is it
refering e.g. to a learner that can retreat to solitude ? Here, we have to
remember what Vygotskij has said about the social being of mankind - a
learner (perhaps with the exception of that solitary-from-birth individual
mentioned by Wittgenstein) would be part of a social construct even without
any actual social contacts. A learner would - perhaps, using his/her inner or
egocentric speech - take a virtual social construct in consideration when
constructing knowledge. I find it noteworthy to mention that e.g. Dimitrios
Thanasoulas, refering to one of David Little's writings, claims that learner
autonomy is 1) not something that is done to learners, and 2) is not another
teaching method (ibid.).
As I have seen behaviorism and constructivism as ideas that complete each
others, rather than confilicting paradigms, I would also like to integrate learner
autonomy to any useful learning process. Learning is a learner's personal
experience. Experience may be gained by an individual learner only when the
conditions of autonomy are supportive. The learner also needs to react to the
conditions, taking the liberty that - rightfully - is his or her. Thanasoulas
supports this when claiming that "…the autonomous learner takes a (pro-)
active role in the learning process, generating ideas…" (XXXX, a). This
'taking' is choosing between what to accept, and what to neglect. Acceptance
is crucial for learning. Accepted be the 'building blocks' that are used for
constructing knowledge. Little seems to have the same idea in different
words: "It is unlikely that every member of the group ('group' is 'class' in the
original citation) would have the interest to engage individually with whatever
task is assigned…" (XXXX). Little thus sees both accepters and neglecters
within any group of learners. Dynamism of the learning cituation is based on
the existence of these different populations (see ibid.). From Thanasoulas I
understand that only open ended study programmes can fully support learner
autonomy (XXXX, a). It is my own idea that a supportive programme
curriculum not be enough. To benefit from learner autonomy, all the learning
community must be committed to the ideal. Who might be the resistive
individuals in a case of failure ? If not the teachers, then the learners ! "If
learners labour under the misconception that learning is successful only
within the context of the 'traditional classroom', where the teacher directs,
instructs, and students must follow in the teacher's footsteps, they are likely
to be imprevious or resistant to learner-centred strategies aiming at
autonomy, and success is likely to be undermined", as Thanasoulas (XXXX,
a) expresses the very same idea. When talking about successful experiences
9
of learner autonomy, it describes the teacher's role as 'a facilitator of
learning', 'a councellor', and 'a resource' (see ibid.)
When learning has taken place, it ought to be possible for a pedagogist to
extract the learner autonomy element from the process, describing it
qualitatively; perhaps quantitatively, too.
At this very stage of my own learning process that I am illustrating on these
pages, I have to admit that some of my concepts, and the Relativity Theory
do not necessarily directly emerg from this study alone. I do, however, claim
having 'seen these objects' in the various contexts of the topics in focus. My
readers should take the concepts and the theory as mere assumptions on
something existing. Thank you.
3. CONCLUDING DISCUSSION
In the beginning, I aimed my writing, firstly, at discussing the two learning
paradigms - behaviorism and constructivism - seeking for a description of
them as the key concepts of this essay. Secondly, I aimed my work at
studying learner autonomy in particular. I had foreseen learner autonomy as
an essential element of any learning process.
My now updated ideas on the learning paradigms. As an actor/behavior strongly believing in action resulting in active reaction, i.e. I believe that good
teacher behavior can be experienced - after a certain delay - in good student
behavior, this being analogous to the individual's learning - I also admit that
learning is based on constructing learning elements. I find Leontjev's idea
(communicated by e.g. Duarte) supportive to the above, when claiming that:
"Labour, by realizing the production process (in both its forms - material
(behavioristic?) and spiritual (constructivistic?)) is imprinted in its product"
(see e.g. 2004; the two questions added by the author). What is it, then, that
can be constructed as elements, or objects ? If we frame out simple repetition
- repeating behavior by behavior - reflections of (concrete or virtual)
action/behavior can be. Verbal images built up from words and centences can
be. Here, I have presumed that wether the teacher performs in direct speech
(to be heard by the learner), or by e.g. body language (to be sensed through
the learner's eyesight), a learner uses language to construct verbal
constructions, in a systemic way that he/she is capable of managing. The
necessary 'building blocks' are all verbal images, or images that can be
translated into verbal images; all with specific meanings to the learning
community. The relevant constructions can be recalled - in a new context,
and/or in a new situation - and furtherly transformed into appropriate action/
behavior that can again be experienced, and evaluated, too. Constructions
that never realize in new (better than original) action/behavior may be of no
10
use at all. It is, of-course, possible that building blocks that seem to be
useless, become of some importance in relation to other learning. For a
continuing (iterative) learning process it is not necessary that new
action/behavior be concrete. It is my assumption that virtual monitoring, or
self reflection of virtual action/behavior also be usefull. A human constructs
both for his/her primary uses, and for secondary uses, as-well. The a.m.
'building blocks' can be described e.g. as more static contextual, and as more
dynamic situational elements of a systemic learning construction.
When learners obtain higher education, and become more capable of
managing abstract thinking a shift from a dominantly concrete action/behavior
towards a more virtual action/behavior may occur. The above idea of mine
receives some support from Karlsson & Mansory: " …the incoming material is
interpreted and structured by some innate mechanism. … Learning outcomes
are equal to observable changed behavior… " (see 2003). To be honest, I
have to admit that I have combined the above two statements changing their
order of appearance in the original text. I now find the whole idea more
logical, and the source now more entitled to refer to Gestalt psychology, in
this very context (see ibid.).
Learner autonomy, and its contribution to my pedaphysical thinking. The
metatheoretical basis for this writing has been metaphysical, or
metapsychological of nature. To use an as concrete as possible expression, I
claim the basis lying on the gestalt psychology. In gestalt thinking, everything
is related to everything. Today, decades after the very pride of the Wienna
Circle, we can see changing phenomena in changing relations to each others.
'Gestalt' thus lives on, and is developing.
The process described on above pages have opened my understanding to
the fact that learning is a function of teaching, and studying. Together we
have seen learner autonomy as a phenomenon with an increasing
importance. Perhaps, we should see teacher autonomy, in the same sence. A
progression of my Specific (social) Relativity Theory of Learning might result
in a new formula: L=sXtY, where X stands for learner autonomy, and Y for
teacher autonomy. This formula, and the pedaphysical thinking as a whole,
can be suggested for further study; both theoretical, and empirical.
ismo.koponen@oamk.fi
11
LIST OF cited (*), and studied only ( ) REFERENCES
Carter, Karen & Jane McNeill (1998). Coping With The Darkness of
Transition: Students as The Leading Lights of Guidance at Induction to
Higher Education. British Journal of Guidance and Councelling, Vol 26, N:r 3.
Chan, Victoria (2001). Readiness for Learner Autonomy: what do our learners
tell us ? Teaching in Higher Education, Vol 6, N:r 4.
Dillenbourg, P & M Baker & A Blaye & C O'Malley (1996). The evolution of
research on collaborative learning. In Spada E & P Reiman (Eds.) Learning in
Human and Machine: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science. Oxford:
Elsevier, pp 189-211.
* Duarte, Newton (2004). Schooling and the Dialectical Reproduction of
Knowledge from the Perspective of Activity Theory. Article acquired through
the Internet. Cited: Sep 29:th, 2005.
Ilyenkov, Evald (1977). Introductory chapter to his work 'Dialectical Logic'.
- http://www.marxists.org/archive/ilyenkov/works/essays/essayint.htm
Cited: Sep 29:th, 2005.
Jung, Insung (2001). Building a theoretical framework on web-based instruction in the context of distance education. British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol 32, N:r 5, pp 525-534.
* Karlsson, Pia & Amir Mansory (2003). Western Learning. An Overview of
Theories of Learning. Stockholm: Stockholm University, Institute of International Education. Discussion paper. Acquired through the Internet. Cited:
Sep 26:th, 2005.
Leontjev, Aleksei N (1977). Toiminta, tietoisuus ja persoonallisuus. Helsinki:
Kansankulttuuri Oy (in Finnish).
Leontjev, Aleksei N (1978). Psychic Reflection. Chapter "2" in his work: 'Activity, Consciousness, and Personality'.
- http://www.marxists.org/archive/leontev/works/1978/ch2.htm
Cited: Sep 29:th, 2005.
* Little, David (XXXX). Learner autonomy: A fundamental principle in
pedagogy and education. Article acquired through the Internet. Cited: Sep
29:th, 2005.
Luria, Alexander R (1976). Cognitive Development. Its cultural and Social
foundations.
12
- http://www.marxists.org/archive/luria/works/1978/problem.htm
Cited: Sep 29:th, 2005.
* Manning, Gary and Maryann (1993). Teaching Reading and Writing - Creating a Good Psychological Environment. Teaching K-8, Nov/Dec 1993.
Raya, Manuel Jiménez & Jose María Péres Fernándes (2002). Learner
Autonomy and New Technologies.
- http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Cited: Sep 29:th, 2005.
* Rodrigues, Henrry (1998). Activity theory and Cognitive Sciences.
- http://www.nada.kth.se/~henrry/papers/ActivityTheory.html
Cited: Sep 29:th, 2005.
* Thanasoulas, Dimitrios (XXXX, a). Autonomy and Learning: An Epistemological Approach.
- http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/french/as-sa/ASSA-No10/No10-A4.html
Cited: Sep 29:th, 2005.
* Thanasoulas, Dimitrios (XXXX, b). What is Learner Autonomy and How Can
It Be Fostered ?
- http://iteslj.org/Articles/Thanasoulas.Autonomy.html
Cited: Sep 29:th, 2005.
* de Vries, Rheta (XXXX). Vygotsky, Piaget, and Education: A Reciprocal
Assimilation of Theories and Educational Practices. Article acquired through
the Internet. Cited: Sep 29:th, 2005.
Vygotskij, Lev Semenovich (1934). Thought and Word. Chapter "7" in his
work 'Thinking and Speaking'.
- http://www.marxists.org/archive/leontev/works/1978/ch2.htm
Cited: Sep 29:th, 2005.
Vygotskij, Lev Semenovich (1978). Mind in Society - The development of
higher psychological processes. London: Harvard University Press.
13