Theories are powerful as they enable us to focus attention on one aspect of teaching and learning, they are not immutable truths about teaching but lens through which to view teaching. A traditional place to start is to set out three types of learning theory, all of which are well covered in the literature:

• behaviourism (a belief that learning is the outcome of positive reinforcement)
• cognitivism (key ideas are learning as individual sense making requiring accommodation and assimilation by the learner)
• social constructivism (again such theories focus on meaning making but involve a wider frame of reference. For example an instructional theory may consider the use of tools (including language) to cross a zone of proximal development. This will look at the interaction of learner and more knowledgeable other. However the more social perspective on learning may invovle, say, communities of practice and distributed learning.

Learning theory (which of course is much more complex than the very brief summary here) provides a lens through which we might understand what happens in the classroom.

More recently there has been a revisiting of learning theory in particular the 'upgrading' of social learning. For some (eg Sfard 1998) the key distinction is between those who view learning as essentially individual and those who see it as a social undertaking. In the context of e-learning Mayes and De Freitas offered a break down between:

• The associative perspective which emphasises task analysis, defining sequences of skills. It provides a highly focused set of objectives, described as learning competencies. It emphasises routines of organised activity; giving learners clear goals and feedback, individualised pathways and routines – matched to the individual’s prior performance
• The cognitive perspective which emphasises conceptual development, stressing the importance of achieving understanding of the broad unifying principles of a domain. This view also encourages us to frame learning outcomes in meta-cognitive terms, with the educational aim of achieving learning how to learn, and encouraging the development of autonomous learners. The cognitive view emphasises interactive environments for construction of understanding; activities which encourage experimentation and support for reflection

• The situative perspective which encourages the definition of learning objectives in terms of the development of disciplinary practices of discourse and representation. It also focuses on learning outcomes that are dependent upon the establishment of collaborative learning outcomes, and on learning relationships with peers. This perspective also encourages us to formulate learning outcomes in terms of authentic practices of formulating and solving realistic problems. It emphasises participation of learners in enquiry and learning, relationships between learners and collaborative activity.

Practitioners do not tend to describe what they know and believe about teaching (these are not of course the same thing) in terms of 'scientific' theory. Very often they will have a mix of approaches and will describe their ideas about learning in informal ways. Some of the key distinctions are covered in the idea of 'folk pedagogy'. When it comes to teaching and learning Bruner suggested that there are four dominant folk pedagogies (Bruner 1996, see also Fox 1983). The first views children as 'imitative' and the job of the teacher is to pass on skills and "know-how" through practical demonstration. The second sees children as needing explanations as well as demonstrations, there are concepts or rules which children need to learn, remember, and apply. The third takes much greater account of children as creative thinkers. The teacher will want to understand how the child makes sense of his or her world and encourage the child to understand, and reach consensus, on other views of the world. Such a teacher will value discussion and collaboration. The fourth views children as already knowing a great deal about the world but needing to access knowledge which society has accumulated over a great deal of time. The teacher will again value creativity and collaboration but will want to show pupils what society views as important knowledge. The first two of these approaches to teaching and learning have a stronger focus on the teacher the second on the creativity of the pupils. The distinctions between these folk pedagogies are quite subtle but you might consider where you fit, if at all, within this picture by way of simple analogy. If teaching is a journey would you be:

• a demonstrator: for example would you show pupils how to read a map and then set off with them following you?
• a teller: for example would you sit pupils down and explain to them the principles of map making and map reading, provide them with various examples to practise and then take them out on a trip?
• an explorer: for example would you set off on the journey, talk with pupils about what they see and encourage them to draw, share and refine their own maps of the journey?
• a guide: for example would you set off on the journey, swap notes on what you all see but point out the various building and features which cartographers have considered important enough to mark out for them.

However this again encourages to think about teaching in terms of exclusive categories in practice most of us are eclectic and have different frames of reference for different contexts.

For you to read further

There are many guides to the principles of cognitivism, behaviourism and social constructivism.

You can access here Mayes, T. And De Freitas, S. (2004) Review of e-learning Theories, Frameworks and Models: Commissioned review report as part of the JISC-funded e-pedagogy desk study on e-learning models, Bristol: JISC .

See also Sfard, A. (1998) On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27, 1, 4 – 13.

Fox, D. (1983) Personal theories of teaching, Studies in Higher Education, Volume 8, Number 2, 1983 , pp. 151-163(13)