1. Working with Conceptual Frameworks “We aren’t just making this all up.”

2. Why use conceptual frameworks? Algorithmic problem solving Vs Conceptual problem solving Eg. What do you do if the car won’t start?

3. Which comes first? Framework? Going from framework to research question to research study –Eg. The experiential learning cycle

4. Or Observation? Going from observation to framework to research question to research study and back to observation –Classroom community

5. Most common frameworks in educational research Theories of learning Theories of motivation Theories of development Theories of contextual effects

6. Learning frameworks Behavior theory Observational learning Cognitive: Information processing Cognitive: Constructivist Socio-constructivist

7. A learning example Framework: Different theories place an emphasis on different instructional conditions as a key to learning. Behavior – practice and feedback Observational – nature of the model Information processing – organization of the display Constructivist – active student involvement Socio-constructivist – interacting with others Therefore if the key component is omitted, learning should be degraded. Design: We can systematically vary the instruction to manipulate the contribution of each of these components and see which has the greatest effect on performance.

8. Motivation frameworks Behavior theory Cognitive: Self-efficacy Cognitive: Task value Cognitive: Self-determination Cognitive: Goal orientation Cognitive: Attribution

9. A motivation example Framework: Self-determination framework says - students’ motivation for a task is affected by the degree of control they have over it. Therefore: if we manipulate the degree of student control, we should see variations in motivation levels. Design: Different groups are given different degrees of control over the topic and process of their project and their motivation for the project is measured at various times throughout the semester.

10. Developmental frameworks Piagetian cognitive development Perry’s intellectual development Baxter-Magolda’s gender-related ways of knowing King and Kitchener’s Reflective judgment model Chickering college level coping model

11. A development example Framework Perry’s intellectual development model says – Students’ ability to reason is affected by the level of intellectual development they have achieved. Students move “up” the hierarchy of development by experiencing cognitive conflict and observing others deal with it. Therefore: If we expose students to conflicting claims that should produce cognitive conflict and have them generate ways of explaining the conflict either to themselves or with others, there should be a differential impact on their intellectual development. Design: Some students are required to resolve the conflict individually. Others do it as part of a group. Those working in a group should be more successful at advancing up the levels of intellectual development.

12. Contextual frameworks Situated Learning and Transfer Disciplinary differences in learning Desirable difficulties and learning Distributed cognition and the value of negotiating meaning during learning

13. Examples of questions that need to consult various frameworks Learning framework –Which types of prior knowledge have the biggest influence on student retention? Motivation framework –Are there changes in goal orientations that are characteristic of those who stay and those who leave? Developmental framework –What role does the congruence of level of cognitive development with the field play in retention? Contextual framework –What are the characteristics of a learning community that have the biggest influence on retention?

14. A contextual example Framework: Theories of classroom community assert that a student’s perceptions of community in a class are a function of his or her own active participation and the degree of student to student and student to teacher interactions in the class as a whole. It has been asserted that this is even truer for computer mediated communication and the development of online community. Therefore: There should be a strong correlation between a given student’s participation in class discussions, whether face to face or online, the overall amount of interactions in the class and the student’s perception of community. This relationship should be greater for online communities. Design: We could count the number of interactions by each student with other students and with the professor in face to face and online classes and administer a survey of classroom community at the end of the semester.

15. Reasoning the other way Observation: Some students in a class participate more than others. Possible Frameworks: Learning theory: Prior knowledge differences Motivation theory: Goal orientations, task value, self-efficacy Developmental theory: Match to level of cognitive complexity Contextual variables: Course contingencies; classroom climate Design possibilities: Measure and regress level of participation on potential variables. Manipulate course contingencies or course practices.