Advertisement

Educational Psychology Review

, Volume 21, Issue 2, pp 181–192 | Cite as

Situated Learning: What Ever Happened To Educational Psychology?

  • Philip Langer
Reflections on the Field

Abstract

This paper attempts to explore the diminishing contributions of psychology in teacher preparation programs. Using situated learning as a basis for discussion, I have argued that a student may take a course in educational psychology and then subsequently discover that subsequent preparation may ignore those psychological caveats regarding the efficacy of proposed instructional methodology such as situated learning. These include cognition, group processes, and transfer of training. However, the presence of such concerns is not confined to situated learning specifically. It may be time for educators to reconsider psychological findings as necessary contributions to the efficacy of their proposals.

Keywords

Educational psychology Situated learning 

References

  1. Allport, G. W. (1954). The historical background of modern social psychology. In G. Lindzey (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 3–56). Cambridge: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, R., Reder, L. M., & Simon, H. A. (1996). Situated learning and education. Educational Researcher, 25(4), 5–11.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, R., Reder, L. M., & Simon, H. A. (1997). Situative versus cognitive perspectives: Form versus substance. Educational Researcher, 26(1), 18–21.Google Scholar
  4. Brown, A. (1994). The advancement of learning. Educational Researcher, 23(8), 4–12.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.Google Scholar
  6. Cialdinin, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clements, D., & Sarama, J. (2008). Experimental evaluation of the effects of a research-based preschool mathematics curriculum. American Educational Research Journal, 45(2), 443–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gentile, J. R. (1996). Response: Setbacks in “The Advancement of Learning”. Educational Researcher, 25(7), 37–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gersten, R., Baker, B., & Pugach, M. (2001). Contemporary research on special education teaching. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 695–748). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  10. Gokhale, A. A. (1995). Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 7(1), 22–30.Google Scholar
  11. Greeno, J. G. (1997). Response: On claims that answer the wrong questions. Educational Researcher, 26(1), 5–17.Google Scholar
  12. Greeno, J. G. (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning and research. American Psychologist, 53(1), 5–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Greeno, J. G. (2006). Learning as activity. In R. Keith Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 79–86). New York: The Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Healy, A. F. (2007). Transfer: Specificity and generality. In H. L. Roediger III, Y. Dudai & S. M. Fitzpatrick (Eds.), Science of memory: Concepts (pp. 271–275). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Healy, A. F., & McNamara, D. S. (1996). Verbal learning and memory: Does the modal model still work? Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 143–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jenkins, J. J. (1979). Four points to remember: A tetrahedral model of memory experiments. In L. S. Cermak & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), Levels of processing in human memory (pp. 429–446). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  17. Kassin, S., Fein, S., & Markus, H. R. (2008). Social psychology (7th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  18. Kerr, N. L., & Tindale, R. S. (2004). Group performance and decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 623–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kellogg, R. T. (2007). Fundamentals of cognitive psychology. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  20. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Mayer, R. E. (2004). Teaching of subject matter. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 215–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McDaniel, M. A. (1988). Transfer: Rediscovering a central concept. In H. L. Roediger III, Y. Dudai & S. M. Fitzpatrick (Eds.), Science of memory: Concepts (pp. 267–270). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Morris, C. D., Bransford, J. D., & Franks, J. J. (1977). Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 519–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84, 231–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Palinscar, A. S. (1989). Less charted waters: A response to Seely-Brown, Collins, & Duguid’s “Situated cognition and the culture of learning”. Educational Researcher, 18(4), 5–7.Google Scholar
  26. Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension fostering and comprehension monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 2, 117–175.Google Scholar
  27. Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1989). Are cognitive skills context bound? Educational Researcher, 18(1), 16–25.Google Scholar
  28. Roediger, H. L., III. (2008). Relativity of remembering: Why the laws of memory vanished. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 225–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rothkopf, E. Z. (2008). Reflections on the field: Aspirations of learning science and the practical logic of instructional enterprises. Educational Psychological Review, 20, 351–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rothlisberger, F. J., & Dickson, W. J. (1950). Management and the worker. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Santrock, J. (2008). Educational psychology (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  32. Seifert, C. M. (1999). Situated learning and cognition. In R. A. Wilson & F. C. Keil (Eds.), The MIT encyclopedia of the cognitive sciences (pp. 767–768). Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  33. Schimmel, J., & Langer, P. (2001). Raising the graduation bar for the schools: Expectations versus outcomes. Psychological Reports, 89, 317–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sidman, M. (1960). Tactics of scientific research. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  35. Slavin, R. E. (2009). Educational psychology: Theory and practice (9th ed.). Boston: Merrill.Google Scholar
  36. Smith, B. L., & MacGregor, J. T. (1992). What is collaborative learning. In A. Goodesell, M. Maher, V. Tinto, B. L. Smith & J. Macgregor (Eds.), Collaborative learning: A sourcebook for higher education (pp. 10–30). University Park: National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment Pennsylvania State University.Google Scholar
  37. Vroom, V. H. (1969). Industrial social psychology. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 5, pp. 196–268). Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  38. Woolfolk, A. (2007). Educational psychology (10th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationUniversity of ColoradoBoulderUSA

Personalised recommendations