PD Dr. Felicitas Thiel
Daniela Ulber
Cognitive and motivational effects of situated learning in schools[*]
Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, University of Crete, 22-25 September 2004
1.Criticism of traditional classroom instruction
Situated learning is a new theoretical approach which challenges both the cognitive paradigm in learning theory as well as traditional classroom instruction. Representatives of the situated learning approach are harsh critics of the mismatch between what is learned in schools and the requirements at work.
Criticism of traditional school instruction stresses four main aspects:
-Traditional school instruction builds up general knowledge that doesn’t transfer to real world situations (inert knowledge).
-Traditional school instruction views learning as an accumulation of a disparate range of skills and knowledge. Students are not prepared for the task of applying skills in a complex work environment.
-The step-by-step instruction approach normally applied in schools fails to develop problem-solving competencies, such as identifying problems and developing strategies for solving them.
-Schools tend to focus the students’ attention on figuring out what is expected in tests rather than to develop a goal orientation which is an important pre-condition for self-regulated learning.
In contrast to traditional school instruction, situated learning programs provide students with complex learning environments. As Anderson, Greeno, Reder and Simon (2000) put it, learning is considered as an “improvement in the ability to interact with things and other people in a situation”. Knowledge is regarded as a tool for solving complex problems, and the social character of learning is strongly emphasized.
Accordingly, situated learning programs create “powerful learning environments” where facts, algorithms or concepts are integrated, become applied and are put to effective use. For this purpose, advocates of situated learning analyse learning and problem-solving as it takes place in everyday life and particularly in learning settings in traditional societies where apprenticeship and mentoring play an important role in building up and passing on knowledge.
Based on this analysis of non-school learning, a theoretical framework for situated learning programs has been developed. Examples of situated learning programs are problem-based learning and anchored instruction.
There are four main principles which characterize “situated learning”:
-Situatedness: Learning takes place in real or near-real contexts. The learning environment offers contact with a culture of practice.
-Authenticity: Students are forced to solve complex practical problems which gives them the opportunity to handle knowledge as a tool.
-Self-regulation: Students are carrying out projects that require self-determination and self-regulation in the learning process.
-Co-operation: Learning is directly or indirectly embedded in a community of practice, and collaborative learning is encouraged.
2.Principles of “Schulen im gesellschaftlichen Verbund” –
a brief overview of the situated learning program which our group evaluated in a longitudinal study from 2000 to 2004
“Schulen im gesellschaftlichen Verbund” (“socially integrated schools”) is a school reform project based on the four principles of situated learning which were outlined above. As such, the project claims to bridge the gap between school and society.
This reform project was conducted by a Hauptschule in Berlin. There are three types of schools in the German secondary school system: the Gymnasium, the Realschule and the Hauptschule. (In the 1970s a fourth type of secondary school has been established: the comprehensive school, but this is – in contrast to Great Britain – only an additional type of school.)
Paradoxically, nowadays only a minority of students attend a Hauptschule (translated as “main school”). In Berlin, for example, only 11 per cent of an age group go to a Hauptschule while 39 per cent attend a Gymnasium which was historically regarded as a school for a few sophisticated and talented pupils. Thus, the Hauptschule is at present cynically called a “Restschule” – a school for the left-overs! Students of Hauptschulen usually have a weak socio-economic background. They receive little support from their parents, their performance levels are low and they often display serious behavioural problems.
The Hauptschule which instigated the reform project is located in a deprived district in Berlin (Kreuzberg) where the teachers are often confronted with serious problems.
In order to increase the motivation, to reduce the disturbance in the classroom and to support the learning process, the headmistress and some teachers of the school established a special learning environment:
-They implemented long-term projects (i.e. a bicycle garage, a theatre project, the production of a CD-ROM with the subject “cultural diversity”).
-Experts from various vocational fields were recruited to support the pupils in their project work (i.e. media experts, motorcar experts, artists).
-Core school subjects such as reading and writing literacy, mathematics and science were integrated into so-called learning arenas (i.e. “media”, “theatre”, “economy”). These arenas function as a stable setting for different learning projects.
-A co-operative learning approach was adopted which allows mixed age groups to work together on projects or sub-projects.
In terms of learning theory, “Schulen im gesellschaftlichen Verbund” as a program of situated learning claims:
-To improve problem-solving abilities and the appropriate use of learning strategies by undertaking authentic complex tasks. This requires competencies like formulating the general indication of a particular problem, generating sub-goals, communicating arguments as well as discussing effectively the arguments that others present.
-To promote the transfer of knowledge learned in the classroom to situations where the knowledge has to be applied and to stimulate inert knowledge by embedding learning in real world environments.
-To facilitate the development of practical knowledge by engaging experts who are modelling and scaffolding the problem-solving abilities of the students (known as “cognitive apprenticeship”).
-To foster task-orientation and intrinsic motivation by creating a meaningful and challenging learning environment that provides opportunities to develop self-efficacy.
-To improve social competencies by implementing a multi-age group with collaborative learning programs where students get the opportunity to learn by teaching, to take over the perspective of others and to develop empathy.
3.Sample and design
The sample comprised 44 students at the project school and 33 students at a comparable control school. 42 per cent of them were girls. 73 per cent of the students were born in Germany and 85 per cent of the parents were foreigners, mostly from Turkey and Lebanon.
The two samples were checked to ensure that they were comparable in terms of sex, age, native country as well as parents’ education and professional background. The sample groups consisted of 7th grade pupils at the respective schools in the year 2000. At the first measurement point in the summer of 2000 (which was immediately after their change to the secondary school) the average age of the students was 12,9 years. The sample was followed until the end of the 9th grade, and the measurements were repeated in June 2002 and June 2003).
The central constructs of the longitudinal section were motivational orientation, self-related cognitions, cooperative orientation, self-regulation, learning strategies and attitudes towards school, work/profession and the future. At the third measurement point, achievement tests in mathematics and German as well as a problem-solving test were used additionally.
4.Results
Mathematics
A vocationally-oriented mathematics test by Balser, Ringsdorf and Traxler (1986) was used in order to ascertain the pupils’ performance in mathematics. The tasks in this test correspond to the demands of vocational schools and vocational training institutions.
The pupils could achieve a maximum of 16 points in this test. The control pupils obtained better results: They could solve an average of five tasks while the students of the project school averaged less than four arithmetic problems (see graph 1). This applies also for tasks with relevance to the learning arenas, such as the calculation of areas. The difference between the performance levels of the two groups is statistically significant (T=-2.2, df = 71, p = .00).
Graph 1: Mathematics test
German: comprehension and vocabulary
The pupils had to read texts (an instruction manual and job advertisements) and answer questions about them in order to ascertain their comprehension abilities. Again, the pupils of the control school obtained significantly better results (see graph 2; Comprehension 1: T=-2.073, df = 71, p = 0 .042; Comprehension 2: T=-1.940, df = 71, p = 0 .056).
In terms of vocabulary, no differences were found (Vocabulary 1: T=-.248, df = 71, p = 0 .805; Vocabulary 2: T=-.016, df = 71, p = 0 .987). The pupils had to find synonyms and antonyms for words. The tasks were part of the general German language test.
Graph 2: German comprehension and vocabulary
Orthography
The test “Hamburger Schreibprobe” was used to examine the pupils’ orthographical competencies. In this test, the students had the task to correct orthographical mistakes in a text.
The results of the students from the project school were again significantly lower than those of the students from the control school (see graph 3; T=-2.3, df = 71, p = 0.0).
Graph 3: German orthography
Problem-solving competencies
We used a problem-solving test which integrated the different stages of setting a target, analysing the initial situation, planning, carrying out and evaluating in order to determine the level of the interdisciplinary competencies of the pupils who did not need any specialized knowledge as a precondition to carry out the test. The students had to deal with two authentic projects which were close to reality: organising a school trip and a school party. Within the test, they were for example confronted with the following tasks: choosing a youth hostel, taking into account the different interests of their fellow students, preparing the party room etc.
Once again, the performance of the students from the project school was significantly lower than that of the students from the control school (see graph 4; school trip: T=-3.945, df = 53, p = .000; school party: T=-4.534, df = 51, p = .000). This is a surprising result because the complex, case-based learning environments and the opportunities for self-regulated learning at the project school should have supported the application and the transfer of knowledge.
Graph 4: Problem-solving test
Task orientation
Task orientation is a motivational orientation, i.e. its aim is to acquire competencies (whereas the aim of learning is to accumulate knowledge). It is claimed that authentic tasks with concrete results, real and interesting contexts, opportunities for self-determination and group learning have a positive influence on task orientation.
Task orientation tends to decline in a young age when extracurricular interests, pressure to perform and competition exert more influence on the students.
Source of Variation / Sum of Squares / df / Mean Squares / F / prepeated measures / 75,540 / 2 / 37,770 / 2,078 / ,130
Interaction school X repeated measures / 101,494 / 2 / 50,747 / 2,792 / ,066
chool / 86,933 / 1 / 86,933 / 3,196 / ,080
Graph 5: Task orientation
Graph 5 shows that task orientation at the project school remained at the same level and that the developmental psychological decline failed to occur. Compared with that, there was a clear decline between the first and the second measurement points at the control school. However, the task orientation increased again at the control school after this decline.
A variance analysis using the general linear model shows peripheral significant effects for the main effect school and the interaction between school and repeated measures.
School-related self-efficacy
School-related self-efficacy was examined as another variable of motivation. In this respect, we have found no significant difference between the schools – only the repeated measure is significant, i.e. school-related self-efficacy increased significantly at both schools (see graph 6).
Source of Variation / Sum of Squares / df / Mean Squares / F / prepeated measures / 89,979 / 1,697 / 53,009 / 7,027 / ,002
Interaction school X repeated measures / 24,942 / 1,697 / 14,694 / 1,948 / ,154
school / 14,183 / 1 / 14,183 / 1,030 / ,314
Graph 6: School-related self-efficacy
This effect can be explained as the “big fish – little pond”-effect and the change of school and associated the variation of the frames of reference before the first measurement point. While pupils at a “Hauptschule” usually record poor marks in their primary school years, they find themselves within a comparable group at secondary school. As they compare their own abilities with those of their peers, they use this social comparison as a basis for assessing their own academic performance and get more sense of success which promotes school-related self-efficacy.
Summary of the results
In relation to cognitive effects, project school students had significantly lower performance levels in mathematics, comprehension, orthography and problem-solving competencies. In other words, project school students show deficits in both subject-related disciplinary competencies and interdisciplinary, procedural knowledge.
In terms of motivational effects, project school students exhibited a more positive development in relation to task orientation. In contrast, there is no difference between schools in relation to school-related self-efficacy.
5.Discussion
During the last ten years a number of evaluation studies were carried out which evaluated situated learning or problem-based learning programs.
While a positive effect on the motivation seems to be well confirmed, results in relation to cognitive effects of situated learning are inconsistent.
A meta-analysis on problem-based learning was published recently in “Learning and Instruction” (Dochy et al., 2003). The authors reported
-robust positive effects on problem-solving and
-a tendency to negative effects on declarative knowledge.
These results regarding problem-solving abilities do not match the findings of our evaluation study. We have to consider the following two aspects in order to explain the deficits in problem-solving in our study:
-Declarative and procedural knowledge cannot be seen as two independent types of knowledge. Procedural knowledge and problem-solving depend (as Weinert and Helmke, 1995, put it) on a rich, well organized and hierarchically structured knowledge system. Here we have to take into account aptitude-treatment-interaction effects. Pupils with low performance levels normally lack systematically organized subject-related knowledge. Thus, there are barriers to the application of knowledge in complex problem-solving situations.
-Learning strategies and meta-cognitive competencies are preconditions for the self-regulated learning required in situated learning programs. Here we also have to consider aptitude-treatment-interaction effects. Particularly pupils with low performance levels often lack learning strategies and meta-cognitive skills. Thus the self-regulated processing of new information, the continuous evaluation of the learning process and the vertical transfer of knowledge which is required in problem-solving are impaired.
This interpretation offers a perspective on what could be improved in the reform project:
-Teachers have to improve their level of support to pupils so that they can build up and organise knowledge in a systematic way.
-Teachers have to provide explicit, methodical instructions because without such instructions most of their pupils fail to solve complex problems.
The effect of time:
-If deficits in problem-solving are moderated through deficits in declarative knowledge, we also have to consider the effect of time. Situated learning needs time, and school-based learning has to make an effective use of time. The challenges of classroom management are higher in open learning settings than in direct instruction models because the level of the interruptive behaviour of the students is normally higher.
References
Allal, L. (2001). Situated cognition and learning – From conceptual framework to classroom investigations. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Bildungswissenschaften; 23 (3), 407–420.
Anderson, J. R., Greeno, J. G., Reder, L. M. & Simon, H. A. (2000). Perspectives on learning, thinking, and activity. Educational Researcher, 29 (4), 11-13.
Anderson, J. R., Reder, L. M. & Simon, H. A. (1997). Situative versus cognitive perspectives: Form versus substance. Educational Researcher, 26 (1), 18-21.
Anderson, J. R., Simon, H. A. & Reder, L. M. (1996). Situated learning and education. Educational Researcher, 25 (4), 5-11.
Balser, H., Ringsdorf, O. & Traxler, A. (1986). Berufsbezogener Rechentest (BRT). Weinheim.
Dochy, F., Segers, M., Van den Bossche, P. & Gijbels, D. (2003). Effects of problem-based learning – a meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 13, 533-568.
Gerstenmaier, J. & Mandl, H. (2001). Methologie und Empirie zum situierten Lernen. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Bildungswissenschaften, 23 (3), 453-526.
Gräsel, C. & Mandl, H. (1993). Förderung des Erwerbs diagnostischer Strategien in fallbasierten Lernumgebungen. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 21, 355-370.
Kohler, B. (1998). Problemorientierte Gestaltung von Lernumgebungen - Didaktische Grundorientierung von Lerntexten und ihr Einfluss auf die Bewältigung von Problemlöse- und Kenntnisaufgabe. Weinheim.
Scharnhorst, U. (2001). Anchored Instruction – Situiertes Lernen in multimedialen Lernumgebungen. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Bildungswissenschaften, 23 (3), 471-492.
Schlager, M. S., Poirier, Ch. & Means, B. M. (1996). Mentors in the classroom: Bringing the world outside in. In: McLellan, H. (Ed.), Situated learning perspectives (pp. 243-261). Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Weinert , F. E. & Helmke, A. (1995). Learning from wise Mother Nature or Big Brother Instructor: The wrong choice as seen from an educational perspective. EducationalPsychologist, 30 (3), 135-142.
1
[*]Presented at the EERA Conference 2004 in Crete.