Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers. This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist. [[Education#Development|the given subjects and topics of school curricula via classroom blackboard-transcription handwriting]] Anchor Education#Development links to a specific web page: Human development (economics). The anchor (#Development) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before. Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

This  level-3 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Education High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Psychology High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Animals High‑importance Learning is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to animals and zoology. For more information, visit the project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Animals To-do: edit history watch purge Here are some Open Tasks : Copyedit: Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species. Improve: Photoperiodism, Tool use by non-human animals, Omnivore, Animal suicide, Sphaerium beckmani (a species in family Sphaeriidae), Requests: Mammals: Invertebrates: Campocraspedon Fishes: Zaniolepis frenata Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species. Expand: Junqueira cow, Atka mackerel Nominate and vote: Science collaboration of the month, Article Improvement Drive, WikiProject Animals Collaboration

• Shouldn't we link the pages on Formal Learning and Formal Education and Non-formal learning and Non-formal Education ? -- SvenAERTS (talk) 07:32, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Shouldn't the intro mention the link to education and learning? -- SvenAERTS (talk) 07:32, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Shouldn't "Education" mention next to "Formal Education" a paragraph on "Non-formal Education? --SvenAERTS (talk) 07:32, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• How to link Formal learning and Formal Education and Non-formal learning and Non-formal Education? --SvenAERTS (talk) 07:32, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Shouldn't it be mentioned that in Agenda 21, education is defined as a major topic to help humanity make it beyond the year 2100? --SvenAERTS (talk) 07:32, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Shouldn't it be mentioned that Millennium Development Goal nr. 2 is Universal Primary Education by 2015? --SvenAERTS (talk) 07:32, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Where to mention the link to the OLPC or One-Laptop-Per-Child Universal Education Initiative by the Open Community? And shouldn't there be any links back? Who's the best team to look at that? --SvenAERTS (talk) 07:32, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Where to mention the links on Agenda 21 /Section IV: Means of Implementation / Education / Bringing money from the Low Carbon Economy transition to the Education Sector? Agenda 21 and shouldn't there be any links back? Who's the best team to look at that? --SvenAERTS (talk) 07:58, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Where to mention the links on Agenda 21 /Section IV: Means of Implementation / linking the Plan of Actions of Education, International Institutions and Mechanisms and Financial Mechanisms / Bringing money from the Low Carbon Economy transition to the Education Sector? and shouldn't there be any links back? Who's the best team to look at that? --SvenAERTS (talk) 07:58, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• The Wikipedia motto is be bold - if you think things should be mentioned, mention them yourself. The best "team" to create back links is you. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:17, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The first sentence seems very long, I am removing "either individually or collaboratively" which doesn't seem to add anything. Also, the statement "Whatever you learn should be commited to memory" appears pretty random and doesn't really fit in, so I'm taking that out too for the time being.

Go right ahead, this article still needs a lot of work. I'll look into it, but help me out. This seems a failed CotW in any case, but we can improve it all the same. -- Cugel 20:40, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

To limit learning to a measurable change in behaviour is highly problematic and rooted in the very dated behaviourist perspective. Behaviourism is useful when physical behaviour is the focus such as learning to cook and learning to control a class, but when abstract knowledge and understanding is sought, theories of Piaget (constructivism) and Vygotsky (sociocultural theory) are essential, as well as situated learning theory and others. If this sort of stuff included on this site, then i withdraw the complaint, but the definition of learning itself must certainly be changed.

I don't understand this sentence: "Learning is sense making that enables manifestation of purpose". Since an encyclopaedia should be intelligible to the 'intelligent layman', I would hope that some elucidation of the sentence might be added to the article.

I don't understand that sentence either, and learning is my area of study. I'm going to delete it. Furthermore, is this paragraph neccessary or useful?

Harnessing learning as process is becoming very important to large scale innovation management. An individual's personal purpose is key to that person applying learning to new behavior in their work or their life. As they are exposed to new information, their willingness to apply their newfound knowledge is key to creating sustained value. Organizational change results from behavior potential being realized.

In the neuroscience section, while it is true that an intense experience may prevail over a less intense experience, in terms of learning, it is also true that we are pre-disposed to make certain associations over others. So, saying that a stronger experience will always prevail is not altogether true.

Public education is currently nominated to be improved on WP:IDRIVE. You can support the article by voting for it there.--Fenice 20:47, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please indicate which sections need work. Simply to add the tag is not as helpful as giving some indication where to start. This article was a wiki-wide collaboration so good faith was clearly involved in its production. I will leave this note for 1 week before rm'g the tag if no response is had. --Ancheta Wis 09:53, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The section on non-formal learning definitely needs a cleanup the links should have been placed in the external pages section and the writing was not in the proper style Mytchill 23:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Most people will smile back at babies who gaze at them and smile."

this caption made me grin - I like to scowl at babies to test their reaction :p

--Froth 20:53, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article seems to be very human orientated and focuses a lot on using examples of schooling as in teacher in a class teaching students. Would it be possible to user broader examples, such as how animals learn to hunt, and their techniques, including how some other animals are using tools (eg Ravens, Apes, Dolphins, etc) and how that could have possibly come to be and the processes they would have likely learnt by? The article I find starts off using a lot of complex terminology and its hard to follow, possibly tone it down a bit so its bit more lamen in the first paragraph explaining the very basics of learning and what the article is likely to outline? Feel free to delete this bit from the discussion in the future. (currently march 2007) --Docjp 15:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)--Docjp 15:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)--Docjp 15:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)--Docjp 15:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC) I know that those individuals who operate primarily or perhaps even exclusively fromt he Left-Hemisphere of their brains [hereafter referred to by the symbol "[L-H]"] are quite serious when they suggest that animal learning has some relevance to the learning of human beings. I also know they are not capable of cognizing the difference between animals and human beings relative to the evolutionary status of the two.... simply because this difference cannot be comprehended by using the [L-H] alone because the difference is Esoteric, and the [L-H] is physically limited to the physical plane of reality.[reply]

That there is a growing number of us capable of operating within the Esotericv realms of Man, and thus capable of perceiving both the MIND and Spiritual realms of Man, the topic of "learning" must be expanded to include the acquisition of Knowledge as DEc, or Direct Esoteric communication [which means use of the faculty of "intuition"]. This is a new concept for many individuals, and one that is beyond the grasp of a substantial number of individuals. It is not something that one can, by reading more, studying more, or expanding ones vocabulary and thinking capacity do anything about. The degree to which one can or cannot perceive the sublte concepts relative to the Esoteric dimensions of the human being has to do with ones level of Apapsyche [a new and more viable substitute for the old term "consiciousness" which is no longer useful].

I would like to offer the following for consideration:

--Docjp 15:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)--Docjp 15:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)--Docjp 15:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)--Docjp 15:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC) There is another form of acquiring Knowledge [capital "K" indicates this type of Knowledge is of an absolute nature] which comes through "intuition", which is possible when the Attn Aspect of your Apapsyche [new term to replace that of "consciousness" because "consciousness" no longer refers to the Esoteric and non-physical planes exclusively, whereas Apapsyche does refer to (and with one exception only), operates within the Spiritual realm exclusively].[reply]

That one exception is the Attn Aspect of your Apapsyche. Apapsyche is defined as: The Operational Energy of your Soul. It operates using two Aspects: The Attn Aspect, which has the ability (since it consists of Neutral Spiritual Energy -same Energy as your Soul) to instantly enter any of the three realms which make-up the whole of Man by simply adopting the vibrational energy of the realm it is entering. The Awar Aspect has the ability to "experience", and the Awar Aspect always follows the Attn Aspect, and what the Attn Aspect is focused upon is what the Awar Aspect is experiencing.

When you are "thinking" the Atten Aspect is fixed within the Left-Hemisphere of your brain. What the Awar Aspect of your Apapsyche is experiencing while your Attn Aspect is in the [L-H] of your brain is physical phenomena. In order for you to "intuit", the Attn Aspect of your Apapsyche must shift into your Apapsyche KE [the Knowledge/Empathy aspect of your Apapsyche] and while focused within your Apapsyche KE, one or more "bits" of Knowledge may be Known... but as soon as your Attn Aspect of Apapsyche shifts into the [L-H] of your brain [which is our "habit"] what you were experiencing as "Knowledge" is gone.

What one intuits is not accidential, nor capricious, but is intended to "guide" one and enhance ones understanding by applying ones own stored Knowledge to some aspect of ones present life to which such Knowledge is pertinent.

Everything within the physical plane of existence is linear, accumulative, and builds... one item upon another. Within the Astral plane [the immediate inner plane within oneself], within the Causal plane [the second inner plane within oneself], and within ones Spiritual realm [at ones Core], all communication is of direct perception and in the form of a whole concept. That is, everything one needs to fully comprehend something is contained in the concept of which one becomes aware. Unfortunately, when one intuits such a "concept" and then instantly ones Attn Aspect shifts into the [L-H] of ones brain...[the reason for this is fear of the "unknown"] the only parts of the concept one can comprehend are those for which some physical plane terms may "sort of" apply. For this reason, and other reasons, it would be both evolutionarily beneficial and life altering for us as a species to encourage and focus children upon the development of their Apapsyches relative to the faculty of intuition.

Of course to do this, we must first encourage adults to commense dealing with their little known fear of the "unknown" within themselves... because it is this fear that prevents them from allowing children to naturally develop this ability to access and utilize intuition.... via the [R-H] of their brains. That this little known fear of the unknown has been permanently incorporated into mental health as denial of the Esoteric within Man largely prevents the West from evolving naturally. --Docjp 15:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)--Docjp 15:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)--Docjp 15:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)--Docjp 15:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC) --Docjp 15:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC) More on this can be found at[[ < http://www.geocieits.com/minderid>]] which is my website, and anyone may quote from or copy any part thereof.≤± --Docjp 15:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)--Docjp 15:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)--Docjp 15:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)--Docjp 15:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Go easy on the signatures my friend, you only get so many. Richard001 09:06, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Learning (animals) should be a topic in of itself, and this article should include a notice it's human-specific. J. Hall • ^(Talk) 05:11, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a bit of both at the moment. Shouldn't the animals banner be kept until it is changed from that? Richard001 06:48, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your right it is... and since this really falls under the purview of animal behavior (and there seems to be a lot of interest in the topic) I'll leave it at your discretion. J. Hall • ^(Talk) 15:27, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I found this piece from the article that I think should belong in the play section rather than the Observation section, as it talks about how children can play to learn:

The sandbox (sandpit) in a playground is an example of a location where children can learn by experience. It is instructive to watch smaller children on a merry-go-round, for example, who naturally push it more slowly than the larger, older, more experienced ones. In order for a little one to get on the merry-go-round, they might simply grab a bar and drag their feet in the sand, while holding on. This slows down the rotation, which allows the little one to climb on, under the oversight of a supervisor, to ensure their physical safety.

Good job on the construction so far everyone, but the scope of what classifies as "learning" seems limited here. I think this page should stay limited to a general definition, and that more dense topics associated with learning should have their own pages. DrBrunson (talk) 01:20, 25 February 2008 (UTC) P.S. my HTML is rusty, so please edit my post for any errors and discrepancies; thank you.[reply]

>>I agree. The scope needs to be broadened, and the sub-topics need to be specified. The article focuses on different implications of the word, yet doesn't specify them as different areas. e.g. Learning as a cognitive/biological process requires a very different conception from the conventional sense of "acquiring knowledge/skill," and that is not conveyed at all here. - 99.231.5.33 (talk) 09:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The introductory section on physiology was unseemly - I've changed it but it is still wanting. It alluded to the current hypothesis about how learning is implemented in the nervous system. Although it has some support, it by no means should be stated as fact. The entire "pathway forming" spiel is just quasi-scientific prattle. The current dogma is that learning is effected mainly by tweaking the efficacy of synapses (such as in LTP and LTD). While there is some evidence of synapse formation (and elimination!!!) during learning (e.g. - Kandel's seminal work on the Aplysia) this has not been proven to be the case in mammals (and currently cutting edge research employing 2-photon imaging is conducted in hope of unravelling this mystery). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomerfekete (talk • contribs) 18:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted the article to the revision of 5 August 2008. The current one has a fraction of past content. After 5 August, an anon increased the size to 26,000 bytes, after which the article suffered. A person better acquainted with this article could find a different revision to be the best backup point. --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:43, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AFAICS, the scope of the article is human learning. Out of scope: animal learning (a redirect to ethology), machine learning. --Dan Polansky (talk) 13:04, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rereading the introductory sentence "In the fields of neuropsychology, personal development and education, Learning is one of the most important mental function of humans, animals and artificial cognitive systems", I may be wrong. It seems like someone has added "In the fields of neuropsychology, personal development and education" to the sentence later. From what I can see, the article has mainly been devoted to human learning, with the exception of one section on machine learning, but what do I know. In any case, the scope should better be clarified here at the talk page, I suppose. --Dan Polansky (talk) 14:06, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The eLearning wiki mentions Bologna as the world's oldest unversity. In India, Takshila and one other were existing long before Bologna.Nnandish (talk) 15:52, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I made the following file. Use if you feel appropriate.

--Nevit (talk) 16:01, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Given the central importance of learning, the coverage of both the relevent neuroscience and formal models (eg neural networks and machine learning) seems very inadequate. At the very least there should be links to the relevent Wikipedia articles. Formal learning models play a huge role in theoretical neuroscience, neural networks, cognitive science and machine learning, and much of the present article seems to focus instead on minor and controversial issues.Paulhummerman (talk) 18:57, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Learning has different types. There are simple forms of learning which included, Habituation and Sensitisation and also more complex forms such as Classical and Operant conditioning.

Habituation & Sensitisation Habituation is a simple for of learning. In This form of learning the stimulus has to always cause a response and the response has to be a reflex. After a few times of repeated stimulus the subject learns that the stimulus is harmless therefore s/he shows less (or no) response to the stimulus anymore. During Habituation what happens is that the amount of Calcium ions decreases therefore less calcium will travel to the presynaptic membrane. Consequently the reflex response reduces.

In Sensitisation very similar situation happens. Stimulus causes the response and the response is always a reflex. However after repeated presentation of the stimulus the subject learns that the stimulus might be harmful therefore the response increases and that's the difference between these two simple types of learning. In fact in Habituation there is a reduction of Calcium whereas in Sensitisation there is a reduction in Potassium ions. With less Potassium there is more chance for the presynaptic terminal to be depolarised therefore there is a strong depolarisation to cause action potential which increases the response.

In classical conditioning which also called Pavlovian Conditioning, the stimulus elicit a response however the response is not a reflex this time. In fact an unconditioned stimulus which will naturally produce a response is used in order to get the same response when using another stimulus. The other stimulus is called a Conditioned Stimulus because we have conditioned a stimulus to get a response. Therefore the response if a conditioned response. There are different ways to use this type of learning. Some of these ways don't require any memory involved therefore we can use those type to teach new tasks to people with Amnesia (memory problems). Delayed conditioning is one of these type in which the we present the conditioned stimulus (CS) and while it is presented the unconditioned stimulus is to be presented. Therefore there is need of a high level of cortical control.

Operant Conditioning however is all about the consequences of the behaviour. In other words rewards will increase the behaviour whereas punishment will suppress the behaviour. Rosa Rahin 02:19, 3 October 2011 (UTC)Rosa Rahin 3 Oct 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosa Rahin (talk • contribs)

Clearly, people do learn things. The article presents many classifications about learning. Jim learns the taste of food by sensitisation, but if Bob who has done criminal things and goes to jail, then Bob's learning is classified as operant conditioning. Jim learned something, Bob (in theory) learned something, but these classifications do not measure how well either learned. The article is so much about classifications of learning that little useful information regarding effective learning gets to the page. Today, there are a number of international studies done mostly with students in schools. And done because education is proving to be a competitive advantage for countries who do it better than other countries. Rather than disperse our reader's attention by classifying various learning situations into 100 fractions, would it not be more useful to point to countries with successful education, whose students learn well, apply well, and whose economies are therefore doing better? Jim Bough (talk) 18:24, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, the issues you raise are about formal education, not learning. Note that your assertion that "effective learning" (whatever that is) provides a "competitive advantage" (whatever that is) is about education, not learning. Yes, the educators do confuse the terms often. Robotczar (talk) 17:55, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Continued updates to ToL. Lots of work to do, as the original section was essentially unsubstantiated and backed by weak referencing. Fascinating history that dates back to the early 20thC. Research since has sought to clarify, but has not actually identified, what ToL is. Will continue to expand. Can I remove the 'Buzzwords' box? Buzzword box removed. Daveplml (talk) 14:35, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great job! I did some minor copyediting, but I was impressed. Lova Falk talk 07:03, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

...and this part of the lede...

While this article describes the different environments in which learning happens, there seems as yet to be no description of how a collection of neurons learns nor where, exactly, in this collection of neurons "memory" is located.

does not seem to encapsulate anything in the article, but instead to mention what is not in the article. therefore a new section needs to be created in the article to address this subject, or the sentence simply removed without relocating it to the article proper, and not the lede.

makeswell (talk) 05:38, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've simply removed the blockquoted sentence. If you're interested in replacing or relocating the sentence then please contact me at my Talk page rather than this page, which I will likely not check up on in the future. makeswell (talk) 05:41, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

After two years, I think the lede is still lengthy and not straightforward. I just deleted this sentence Learning is based on experience. And there are many points we can improve.

New worl (talk) 09:40, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the "expert needed in neuroscience" is POV. After all, there is a video clip on robots learning as the lede illustration. --Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 22:02, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Having stumbled upon this article (while playing a Wiki game involving clicking your way to Philosophy from Special:Random -- try it!) I noticed the lede reads very much like an essay as oppposed to an encyclopedic article. The structure is incredibly different compared to the ledes of the vast majority of articles on Wikipedia. I propose it should be rewritten to better reflect the structure of encyclopedic articles as opposed to the structure of a first-year college essay. --Kazinsal (talk) 01:06, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've expanded the reading list on this article. It is much more likely that people will search for the key word 'Learning' than 'Epistemology.' Stmullin (talk) 23:11, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This section has grown out of control, so I have moved it out of the article into this talk page. Please see Wikipedia:Further reading and put only entries that are topical, reliable and balanced, and please, keep the section limited in size. "Wikipedia is not a catalogue of all existing works." Please, if you add an entry back into the article, motivate why. Thank you! Lova Falk talk 14:10, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bruner, J.S. (1960). The process of education,. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bruner, J. S. (1961). "The act of discovery". Harvard Educational Review 31 (1): 21–32.

Bruner, J.S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Belkapp Press.

Bruner, J.S. (1971). The relevance of education. New York, NY: Norton.

Bruner, J.S. (1986). A study of thinking. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Press.

Bransford, J., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School (expanded edition), Washington: National Academies Press.

Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1992). "The split-attention effect as a factor in the design of instruction". British Journal of Educational Psychology 62: 233–246. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1992.tb01017.x.

Clark, R. C. and Zuckerman, P. (1999). Multimedia Learning Systems: Design Principles. In Stolovitch, H. D. and Keeps, E. J. (Eds) Handbook of Human Performance Technology. . (p.564-588). San Francisco: Pfeiffer. ISBN 0-7879-1108-9.

Clark, R.C., Nguyen, F., and Sweller, J. (2006). Efficiency in Learning: Evidence-Based Guidelines to Manage Cognitive Load. San Francisco: Pfeiffer. ISBN 0-7879-7728-4.

Condillac, E. B. (1746/1970, 2001). Essai sur l'origine des connaissances [Essay on the origin of human knowledge] in Oeuvres Completes Tome 1. Genève: Slatkine reprints. Retrieved from http://www.slatkine.com/. In addition, translated from the French of the Abbé de Condillac by Hans Aarsleff, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Condillac, E. B. (1749/1970, 1982). Traité des systèmes [Treatise on the systems] in Oeuvres Completes Tome 2. Genève: Slatkine reprints. Retrieved from http://www.slatkine.com/. In addition, translated from the French of the Abbé de Condillac by Franklin Philip, Philosophical Writings of Etienne Bonnot, Abbé de Condillac (Vol. I), Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Condillac, E. B. (1754/1982). Traité des sensations [Treatise on the sensations]. Genève: Slatkine reprints. Retrieved from http://www.slatkine.com/. In addition, translated from the French of the Abbé de Condillac by Franklin Philip, Philosophical Writings of Etienne Bonnot, Abbé de Condillac, (Vol. I), Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Condillac, E. B. (1756). An essay on the origin of human knowledge. In Locke’s Essay on the Human Understanding. Translated from the French of the Abbé de Condillac by Thomas Nugent. London, England: J. Nourse. Retrieved 23 September 2008 from http://books.google.com/books?id=rp_go5DhQqQC .

Cooper, G., & Sweller, J. (1987). "Effects of schema acquisition and rule automation on mathematical problem-solving transfer". Journal of Educational Psychology 79 (4): 347–362. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.79.4.347.

de Jong, T. (2005). The guided discovery principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 215-229). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-54751-2.

de Jong, T. & van Joolingen, W. R. (1998). "Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual Domains". Review of Educational Research 68 (2): 179–201.

Dalgarno, B. (1996) Constructivist computer assisted learning: theory and technique, ASCILITE Conference, 2–1996, retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/adelaide96/papers/21.html

DeVries et al. (2002) Developing constructivist early childhood curriculum: practical principles and activities. Teachers College Press: New York. ISBN 0-8077-4121-3, ISBN 0-8077-4120-5.

Duckworth, E. R. (2006). "The having of wonderful ideas" and other essays on teaching and learning. Third edition. New York: Teachers College Press.

Duffy, T.M. & Jonassen, D. (Eds.), (1992). Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Gamoran, A, Secada, W.G., Marrett, C.A (1998) The organizational context of teaching and learning: changing theoretical perspectives, in Hallinan, M.T (Eds), Handbook of Sociology of Education.

Gerjets, P. Scheiter, K. and Catrambone, R. (2004).Designing instructional examples to reduce intrinsic cognitive load: molar versus modular presentation of solution procedures. Instructional Science. 32(1) 33–58

Glasersfeld, E. (1989). Cognition, construction of knowledge, and teaching. Synthese, 80(1), 121-140.

Hilbert, T. S., & Renkl, A. (2007). Learning how to Learn by Concept Mapping: A Worked-Example Effect. Oral presentation at theEARLI 2007 in Budapest, Hungary.

Holt, D. G.; Willard-Holt, C. (2000). "Lets get real – students solving authentic corporate problems". Phi Delta Kappan 82 (3).

Itard, J. M. G. (1962). The wild boy of Aveyron. (G. Humphrey & M. Humphrey, Trans.). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. (Original works published 1801 and 1806).

Jeffery, G. (ed) (2005) The creative college: building a successful learning culture in the arts, Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham Books.

Jonassen, D. H. (1997). "Instructional Design Models for Well-Structured and Ill-Structured Problem-Solving Learning Outcomes". Educational Technology Research and Development 45 (1): 65–94. doi:10.1007/BF02299613.

Jonassen, D., Mayes, T., & McAleese, R. (1993). A manifesto for a constructivist approach to uses of technology in higher education. In T.M. Duffy, J. Lowyck, & D.H. Jonassen (Eds.), Designing environments for constructive learning (pp. 231–247). Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.

Kalyuga,S., Ayres,P. Chandler,P and Sweller,J. (2003). "The Expertise Reversal Effect". Educational Psychologist 38 (1): 23–31. doi:10.1207/S3801_4.

Kolb, D. A. & Fry, R. (1975). Toward an applied theory of experiential learning. In C. Cooper (Ed.) Theories of Group Process, London: John Wiley.

Kolb, D. (1976). Learning style inventory technical manual. Boston, MA: McBer.

Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., and Clark, R. E. (2006) Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist 41 (2) 75-86.

Leutner, D. (1993). "Guided discovery learning with computer-based simulation games: effects of adaptive and non-adaptive instructional support". Learning and Instruction 3 (2): 113–132. doi:10.1016/0959-4752(93)90011-N.

Mayer, R. (2004). "Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction". American Psychologist 59 (1): 14–19. doi:10.1037/0003.59.1.14. PMID 14736316.

Meyer (2009). "The Poverty of Constructivism". Educational Philosophy and Theory 41 (3): 332–341. doi:10.1111/j.1469-5812.2008.00457.x. Unknown parameter |unused_data= ignored (help)

Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. (1999). "Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity". Journal of Educational Psychology 91 (2): 358–368. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.91.2.358.

Mousavi, S., Low, R., & Sweller, J. (1995). "Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes". Journal of Educational Psychology 87 (2): 319–334. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.87.2.319.

Paas, F. (1992). "Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive-load approach". Journal of Educational Psychology 84 (4): 429–434. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.429.

Piaget, J (1926). The language and thought of the child. London: Routledge & Kegan.

Piaget, Jean (1950). The Psychology of Intelligence. New York: Routledge.

Piaget, Jean (1967). Logique et Connaissance scientifique, Encyclopédie de la Pléiade.

Piaget, J (1975/1936). La naissance de l’intelligence chez l’enfant. [Emergence of intelligence in the child] in Three theories of cognitive representation and their evaluation standards of training effect. Neuchatel: Delachaux et Nieslé/Heerlson, The Netherlands: Heerlson.

Renkl, A., Atkinson, R., Maier, U., & Staley, R. (2002). "From example study to problem solving: Smooth transitions help learning". Journal of Experimental Education 70 (4): 293–315. doi:10.1080/00220970209599510.

Rivers, R. H. & Vockell, E. (1987). "Computer simulations to Simulate scientific problems solving. Journal of Research in Science Teaching". Journal of Research in Science Teaching 24 (5): 403–416.

Rogers, Carl. (1969). Freedom to Learn: A View of What Education Might Become. (1st ed.) Columbus, Ohio: Charles Merrill.

Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: The Macmillan Company.

Skinner, B. F. (1954). The science of learning and the art of teaching. Harvard Educational Review. 24(2).

Sweller, J. (1999). Instructional design in technical areas. Camberwell, Australia: ACER Press. isbn=978-0-86-431312-6.(see also J.E. & Sweller, J. (1999). A Comparison of Cognitive Load Associated With Discovery Learning and Worked Examples. Journal of Educational Psychology. 91(2) 334-341).

Sweller, J. (2003). Evolution of human cognitive architecture. In B. Ross (Ed.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation. San Diego: Academic Press. ISBN 0-12-543343-3.

Sweller, J., & Cooper, G. A. (1985). "The use of worked examples as a substitute for problem solving in learning algebra". Cognition and Instruction 2 (1): 59–89. doi:10.1207/s0201_3.

Scerri, E.R. (2003). Philosophical Confusion in Chemical Education, Journal of Chemical Education, 80, 468-474. (This article is a critique of the use of constructivism in chemical education.)

Sweller, J. (1988). "Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning". Cognitive Science 12 (1): 257–285. doi:10.1016/0364-0213(88)90023-7.

Tarmizi R.A., Sweller J. (1988). "Guidance during mathematical problem solving". Journal of Educational Psychology 80 (4): 424–436. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.80.4.424.

Tuovinen, J. E., & Sweller, J. (1999). "A comparison of cognitive load associated with discovery learning and worked examples". Journal of Educational Psychology 91 (2): 334–341. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.91.2.334.

Wood, D. (1976). "The role of tutoring in problem solving". Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 17: 89–100.

Wood, D. (1998) How Children Think and Learn.. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd. ISBN 0-631-20007-X.

Vygotsky, D. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

I'm adding some examples to the enculturation section of this article. I'd appreciate if someone would look over it.Mhirahara (talk) 08:25, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also like to add some more examples to the Informal Learning section of this article, but I'm unsure of whether or not it would fit better on the main page. Thoughts?Mhirahara (talk) 08:30, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The content on the other page is definitely just an expansion of the content on this one. Eventhorizon51 ^(talk) 05:37, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's been a while; I think I'm going to assume silent consensus on this one. Eventhorizon51 ^(talk) 05:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Learning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071011051238/http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Publications/ZooGoer/1996/1/junglegyms.cfm to http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Publications/ZooGoer/1996/1/junglegyms.cfm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131113233355/http://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/51978/1/DunlapLehtila_umn_0130E_10349.pdf to http://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/51978/1/DunlapLehtila_umn_0130E_10349.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:05, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Learning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140714130414/https://dspace.iup.edu/bitstream/handle/2069/477/George%20Konetes.pdf?sequence=1 to https://dspace.iup.edu/bitstream/handle/2069/477/George%20Konetes.pdf?sequence=1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:18, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I came here looking for information on natural learning, tangential learning, nonformal learning, or Incidental learning. I was surprised to find all of these sections in this article discuss events and activities intentionally organized by teachers. I would expect that to be in an article on pedagogy. People learn many things outside of constructed learning environments, but that isn't reflected in this article. Daask (talk) 14:27, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. This page mostly tells about "100 ways to teach oneself or someone else", not "what happens when someone learns". The 5 sentences starting with "The underlying molecular basis of learning appears to be [...]" which are somehow in the "Factors affecting learning" section are the interesting stub of this whole article. 37.175.65.222 (talk) 00:53, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The section on Meaningful learning using the deeper learning page [1] instead of the meaningful learning page [2]. The articles seem to be very similar so maybe worth looking at in more detail to either merge the articles or mention the meaningful article in that section.DannyHatcher (talk) 15:14, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

what does this sentence mean correctly-" Although it has been criticized by some educators, rote learning is a necessary precursor to meaningful learning." can you explain? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4063:4C9B:CA20:30E4:4EFF:F080:36BD (talk) 13:17, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 January 2023 and 15 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Fannav99 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Fannav99 (talk) 17:33, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm excited to be working with you all to edit Wikipedia to help the world have access to better information. With Wikipedia's moto being "be bold" I wanted to point something out that I noticed, and would love to receive feedback from you. As I was reviewing this page, I noticed that under the heading "Formal Learning", there was something that caught my attention that I would consider a read flag. The wording is almost identical to the source cited, (Informal Learning in the Workplace) but it has no quotation marks which is not giving credit to the person the information actually belongs. Here is the quote on the cited source's page, and if compared to the information under "Formal Learning" found on this Wikipedia page, you will find large parallels. "The terms formal and informal learning have nothing to do with the formality of the learning, but rather with the direction of who controls the learning objectives and goals. In a formal learning environment, the training or learning department sets the goal and objectives, while informal learning means the learner sets the goal and objectives (Cofer, 2000)". What do you think? ~~~~ Joshpalpsychology101 (talk) 02:38, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am wanting to improve the Formal, informal, non-formal learning sections as well as the operant conditioning section. If you happen to see edits under these topics, please know I am working hard to "be bold" but at the same time I am open for feedback and looking to be a team player. Let me know of any ideas or sources you might have that I can read to improve these sections. Thanks! Joshpalpsychology101 (talk) 23:56, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 April 2023 and 17 July 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Joshpalpsychology101 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Joshpalpsychology101 (talk) 20:36, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 August 2024 and 3 December 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Adortiz06 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Adortiz06 (talk) 15:50, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]