Download Learning in the world-manuscript

Learning in the world – Towards a culturally aware concept of learning
Eurpean Conference on Educational Research, Gothenburg, 10th September 2008
Henning Pätzold
1. Introduction
The aim of the presentation is to develop a contribution to a comprehensive pedagogical
theory of learning as a phenomenon taking place for individuals in a social and cultural
context. It will be shown that such a perspective is achievable and can be founded on several
existing contributions from (mainly European) theories on learning. This view is expected to
be useful for didactic considerations.
2. Cultural contexts
Terry Eagleton defines culture as a field of “social subjectivity” (Eagleton 2001: 39). This
definition emphasises, that culture has to do with the individual as well as the sociality and,
by that, overcomes the common differentiation between social processes being related to
culture and subjective processes being related to the individual. This idea may as well be
related to learning. Though theories of learning often are related only to individual, subjective
processes, a pedagogical view on learning requires to take into account also the social and
material dimension. This obviously holds for aspects like social learning, but also with respect
to social and material circumstances in general.
Figure 1: Culture as a field of social subjectivity
To take cultural and social change into account from a systematic point of view, a theory of
change is necessary. The following thoughts therefore are related to the branch of theories of
modernisation, as presented by Beck (1986) or van der Loo and van Rejnen (1992), among
others.
Modernisation – in this theoretical framework – is a process with a direction in time, leading
from pre-modernity to modernity (and – depending on the particular author – beyond). Still it
doesn't state that all aspects of modernisation have to appear at the same time. Therefore it
may serve to distinguish present learning concepts with respect to the concepts of permodernity, modernity and post-modernity (c.f. Seitter 2007).
3. Learning
The most common current definition of learning might be that of Hilgard and Bower, for
whom „learning refers to a change in a subject’s behavior potentials to a given situation,
brought about by the subject’s repeated experiences in that situation, provided that the
behavior change cannot be explained on the basis of subject’s native response tendencies,
maturation or temporary states such as fatigue, drunkenness, drives and so on“ (Bower &
Hilgard, 1981: 11).
Not only generations of students of psychology learned it, but also the majority of the students
of pedagogical subjects (at least in Germany). This is rather surprising: On the one hand, there
is for example a variety of theories on social learning, on the other hand learning itself, as the
core process of this, is captured by a definition, which states it as something to be described
without respect to a particular cultural or social background. This can be observed even more
distinctly when one looks at the great expectations towards neurophysiological theories of
learning.
The central point is that learning has to be defined in a way, which is aware of the importance
of sociality and culture as well as of subjectivity. An example may clarify this: Looking at a
learning process form an individualistic point of view (as taken in the psychological
mainstream theories) means that learning is a name for a process in which an individual
changes his relationship towards a constant environment. But actually can also take place the
other way around – which means one may also observe learning as a process in which
somebody doesn't change though his environment does.1 From this point of view, learning
doesn't happen within the person, but between the person and the environment.
Yet a concept of learning must not be related to a particular cultural and social background
too tightly, because it shall be adoptable in different context. Therefore a way out might
consist in integrating the concept of “social subjectivity” itself into the notion of learning. A
promising starting point for the lies in P- Jarvis “comprehensive theory of human learning”
(Jarvis 2006), which describes learning as the change of the “person in the world” (Jarvis
2006: 6). On the one hand this definition is aware that learning takes place in the world (i.e. in
cultural, social, material contexts), on the other it is open for different such contexts. Still, it is
to prove that this rather general description of learning can be used as a basis for scientific
discussion and research. Fortunately it shows that there are several pedagogical approaches
towards learning theory and research, which can be linked to this starting point.
4. Contributions
From a variety of such concepts I want to pick up for examples to show that the different
aspects of learning can be addressed theoretically and also be shaped in a way opening them
for empirical research. The approaches are phenomenology (and phenomenography as a
particular branch of it), subject science and the concept of punctuations.
The phenomenological approach is quite prominently stated in Jarvis work itself. But there
are also other researchers who use it as a background for educational theories, in Germany
e.g. Käthe Mayer-Drawe (2005,). What all those approaches have in common is, that they are
helpful in concretising the term “in-the-world” (which, itself, is originated in the
phenomenological tradition). Furthermore, the phenomenographic approach by Ference
1 Unfortunately this is often taken as an example of non-learning or even learning resistance, e.g. in the context
of organisational development. Still, even in those contexts it may require a lot of learning to keep up certain
habits in the changing surrounding. It may hold even more if we for example look at people with serious
diseases, who keep their habits as good as possible, while physical or mental conditions change.
Marton, Roger Saljö and others provides a highly elaborated methodology to investigate the
situation of the person-in-the-world with respect to learning.
The psychological position of the subject science delivers the next contribution to a learning
theory. Subject science takes over a particular psychological point of view, from which the
subjective situation of the individual is in focus – in a way it tries to look through the persons
eyes instead of describing just the relationship between the person and the environment. Klaus
Holzkamp’s theory lead to the notion of “subjective learning reasons”2 (Ludwig 2001) to
overcome the restriction of the concept of learning motivation, which is something rather
attributed to the individual by others. Instead, individual learning reasons may clarify not only
why one takes over the task of learning something, but also explain why somebody may not
learn (or may refuse change in the way described above). Furthermore Holzkamps
distinguishes between expansive and defensive learning (which is a concept much more
applicable than that of intrinsic or extrinsic motivation) and by that offers a kind of link to
humanistic psychology and pedagogy (though Holzkamp himself is not to be counted for that
direction of thinking). While the phenomenological approach explains the aspect of being inthe-world, one can say that the subject scientific psychology delivers important contributions
to an according concept of the person.
The third concept in the above mentioned definition of learning is that of change. Change
happens in the dimension of time and by that requires a state of “before” and a state of
“afterwards”. Though we are familiar in talking of “learning processes” it turns out that it is
quite difficult to give a particular starting of ending point of learning. When, for example, one
attends a course on playing the guitar, the starting point of the learning process may have been
much earlier (e.g. the person might have started to listen to guitar music, started to watch
guitar players, collect information about the instrument and its use etc.). Beyond others the
phenomenological approach again spent attention to this point, but we may also apply
Gregory Batesons concept of punctuation (1985: 223ff) to deal with the issue. Primarily it
demonstrates that the definition of the “beginnings of learning” (Meyer-Drawe 2005) is rather
a matter of observation (though one should not oversee that this observation can be done by
others as well as by the learner himself).
5. Empirical approaches
Generally, concepts of broad meaning – particularly those being rooted in
Geisteswissenschaft or philosophy – tend to be not an excellent basis to start empirical
research. Though they may be valuable in giving structure to a complex matter, they seem to
broad and sometimes to blurred to be operationalised to concrete questions, figures and other
empirical approaches. This suspicion might also be hold against the concept of learning as the
change of a person in the world. On the other hand it has been shown – e.g. by the
phenomenographic school – that empirical research can be conducted on this basis.
Furthermore there is a variety of empirical studies which offer fruitful opportunities to be
interpreted from a phenomoenological basis, e.g. the studies on elder persons learning
business, undertaken by Gerald Straka (Straka, Macke 2003). Also some prominent concepts
of educational psychology – like the famous self-determination theory of Deci and Ryan ()
may be reinterpreted from this perspective.
Still, to conclude this view on learning, I would like to present three preliminary results of a
study on prior learning experience of university students, I made in summer 2008. In this
study 98 students where asked about learning processes, which usually have happened years
ago (like learning swimming, logical thinking etc.). The study aimed on estimating the
importance of the person as a whole within learning processes. E.g. the students where asked
2
“subjektive Lernbegründungen”
about different aspects of the importance of their body within the learning process they chose
to give information about.
Asked, if the learning process had an emotional effect (“Der Lernprozess hat mich
gefühlsmäßig berührt”), the students answered an average of 3 on a scale from 1 to 5.
More detailed, 33% answered that they where only little affected emotionally or not at
all. 25% gave a mediocre answer and 39% answered that they where more or less
strongly affected emotionally by the learning process3.
Another question aimed directly upon the potential of learning to change a person. It
has to be kept in mind that the notion person is object of a broad variety of
interpretation. Still the answers to the question “the knowledge I gathered in the
learning process has changed me as a person”4 are interesting. Along the way it turned
out that from the students perspective the rating for the change of the person due to
new knowledge nearly equals that of change due to the acquired skills.
A third aspect addressed the importance of the body as part of being “in the world”.
As expected, the students rate the importance of the learning issue for the body higher
if it is related to sports etc., than if it is maths or logical thinking. Still it may surprise,
that even subjects like fractions or logical thinking where regarded as related to the
body at least to a small extent by 30% of the respondents. Also, the students where
asked if the learning of the subject was influenced by peculiarities related to the body.
It turned out that those who where relating to a “bodyless” subject like fractions or
logical thinking estimated those influences even higher than those who answered with
respect to learning swimming or bicycle riding.5
Those three examples are meant not only to underline the importance of the whole person in
learning processes, as it is experienced by the learners themselves. They may also show that
students are well aware about the complex influences between their whole person being
affected by the learning process and affecting it vice versa – even if the learning issue is
assumed as not very close to the person.
6. Outlook
The aim of this paper was to show that there are opportunities to develop a pedagogical view
on the notion of learning. To do so, learning in the first place was related to the whole
“person-in-the-world”, i.e. it was conceptualised as a process in a field of social subjectivity.
J. F. Herbart, a German pedagogue of the romantic aera demanded “native terms”6 for
education and my proposal is to develop such a native concept of learning from the subject
and the demands of educational science. Fortunately this task has not to started with empty
hands, because it has been shown that a variety of educational studies and theories contribute
to such a theory. Furthermore it is possible to explore such a concept of learning with
methods of empirical research.
In my opinion developing such a concept would be of high theoretical value for educational
sciences. Still, it may also be fruitful to analyse didactical situations in practise. For example,
it of course makes a difference if a learning process tries to reflect on the involvement of the
whole person or if one tries to reduce learning to a particular detail of it, lets say cognitive
functions. And, furthermore, the person in the world is not only a fact to be respected when
3 This result is derived from all participants, so it is not related to one particular topic of learning. The
differences between the different subjects are object of further examination of the data.
4 In German: „Das Wissen, dass ich mir im Lernprozess erworben habe, hat mich als Person verändert“
5
A possible explanation could be that in learning sports there are usually particular strategies to cope with bodily
peculiarities, while in learning subjects like mathematics there are no accordant procedures. One student for
example mentioned migraine as such a disturbance.
6
„einheimische Begriffe“
facilitating learning, it may also be seen as an important resource. The person as a whole,
involved in the learning process, may regard tasks as subjective learning problems in the
sense of Holzkamp, and, furthermore, activate him- or herself as a whole person to deal with
the task. Finally, learning as a pedagogical notion might overcome one-sided interpretations
of learning processes as well as being to tightly bound to individuality or to sociality.
7. Ressources
Bateson, G. (1985): Ökologie des Geistes [Ecology of mind]. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp.
Beck, U. (1986): Risikogesellschaft. Auf dem Weg in eine andere Moderne. [Risk Society.
Towards a Different Modernity]. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Bower G. H. & Hilgard E. R. (1981): Theories of learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall.
Deci, E. L.; Ryan, R. M. (1993): Die Selbstbestimmungstheorie der Motivation und ihre
Bedeutung für die Pädagogik. [The self-determination theory of motivation and its importance
for pedagogy]. In: Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, Vol. 39, Nr. 2, pp. 223-238.
Eagleton, T. (2001): The idea of culture. Blackwell Publishing.
Holzkamp, K. (1996): Lernen. Subjektwissenschaftliche Grundlegung. [Learning. Subjectscientific Foundation]. Frankfurt/Main: Campus.
Jarvis, P. (2006): Towards a Comprehensive Theory Of Human Learning. London:
Routledge.
Meyer-Drawe, K. (2005): Anfänge des Lernens. [Beginnings of learning] In: Beiheft zur
Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, Nr. 49, S. 24-37.
Meyer-Drawe, K. (1996): Vom anderen Lernen. Phänomenologische Betrachtungen in der
Pädagogik. [Learning from the other. Phenomenological perspectives in pedagogy. In: Berelli,
M.; Ruhloff, J. (Hrsg.). Deutsche Gegenwartspädagogik II [Contemporary German
Pedagogy]. SchneiderVerlag Hohengehren, Baltmannsweiler, S. 85-98, 1996,
Seitter, W. (2007): Geschichte der Erwachsenenbildung. [History of Adult Education]
Bielefeld: Bertelsmann.
Straka, G. A.; Macke, G. (2003): Lern-Lehr-Theoretische Didaktik. [Didactics Derived From
the Theories Of Learning And Teaching] Münster et al.: Waxmann.
Van der Loo, H.; van Reijen, W. (1992): Modernisierung. Projekt und Paradox.
[Modernisation. Project And Paradox]. München: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag.