Learning Styles theories are interesting to read and understand such as Kolb,s Honey and Mumford, VAK and especially Fleming's VARK. VARK is based on neuro linguistic programming (cognitive), logistic, simple and easy to apply too, however all theories have their own strength and weakness on learning styles. 

If you interested and finding it difficult to access or more information needed, Just ask.

Students learn by making the topic interesting and relating it with real life situations.

Thanks Harshvardhan Singh for the useful links. Immanual Victor George thanks could you please share a few resources on VAK and VARK.

Students learn when they realize what use they can give to their new knowledge.

There are many theories about learning, some differentiating learning at different life stages (e.g. adult learning, child learning). My experience as an educator, beginning with teaching 5 year olds and now teaching adults, suggests that age differentiation is not useful. To those theorists already mentioned I'd add Lev Vygotsky's work on the Zone of Proximal Development, David Boud's work on assessment for learning, John Biggs' work on developing deep understanding, and Michael Healey's work on students as partners and co-creators in learning.

But when you look to them all together there are some themes that emerge. Each individual will engage with learning differently depending on motivation, past experiences, preferences for processing inputs, time, place and circumstances. What is being learnt may also influence how (e.g. the way I learnt to add, subtract, multiply and divide is different to the way I learn about philosophy.  It is uncommon for deep learning to occur where the learner is only engaging with inputs from someone else (teacher, book, lecture, YouTube clip). Some form of active participation in activities that allow learners to practice, experiment, and make and learn from mistakes is essential. It is also uncommon for deep learning to occur when the learner is working alone. Engagement with, sharing ideas, questions, knowledge, capabilities, and experiences with others is integral to both individual and collective/collaborative learning.

I deliberately used the term "uncommon" as there are individuals for whom, individual private study of inputs works. I suspect there is a lot of internal processing - critical reflection, analysis, mental experimentation - that goes on, which may or may not be conscious.

The role of the teacher then is as guide, supporter, facilitator, critical friend, as well as organiser of the learning space (creating/taking advantage of opportunities for the learner to learn). Learners also need to be guided and supported to become reflective and self-evaluating, seeking out, receiving and using constructive feedback to continually improve performance. Questions are a critical part of the learning process - posing questions then setting up the circumstances where learners can discover answers.

The main message - no one theory has all the answers. Read widely and after deep reflection and critical analysis determine what is most likely to work for you, your students and your circumstances, bearing in mind that this may not work for another group of students or a different set of circumstances.  

You have gotten plenty of useful views. I will just add that to harness a large number of learning strategies and views, we can use 'fit for purpose' approach. This helps to put best practices and benchmarks in a form of a system (framework) based upon their learning needs and levels. This exercise assists in sustaining implementation. You may like to see my postings and do refer to Holt (1967, 1983) How Children Learn. I hope it helps!

All learning is the coordination of the activation of multiple regions of the brain.  This happens when multiple representational systems are employed in the modeling of something.  Moreover, one must have epistemological change along the dimensions of rational, empirical, and metaphorical, because each epistemology has its relative, but limited, merits.  Productive epistemological change is a tour rather than a destination that is promoted by the reflective use of multiple representational systems.  One MUST provide conceptual and representational tools within a learning habitat that is conducive to the affective motivation for epistemological change.  Furthermore, the construction of knowledge is the construction of concepts and conceptual change borne out of thinking and reasoning in particular ways.  

But I oversimplify my own dissertation.

While it is still being contested, digital natives appear to learn by connecting to the information digitally when they need it. The challenge with Connectivism as a learning theory is that students need to know where to find the information and synthesize it according to the needs of the task at hand.

Best regards,

Debra

A lot of very excellent comments have already been provided. However, I suggest it might be helpful for you to consider the summary of 50 years of educational research in "How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching". (Citation at end of post). I am a great fan of learning theory, brain-based learning research, and more. But, the work of Ambrose, et al synthesizes the literature and identifies 7 principles that I use every day.

I've attached a couple of documents that provide a very good overview of the principles in the book. Please NOTE: the book contains a wealth of practical examples and ideas for implementing or supporting each of the principles in a teaching/learning context. 

Attachment "How Learning Works handout.pdf": This handout summarizes each of the 7 principles and provides a bibliography of related sources.

Attachment "MSU_HLW_Keynote.pdf": This handout contains the slides from our annual conference keynote. The keynote speaker, Dr. Michele DiPietro, is one of the authors of the book. His slides contain not only the 7 principles, but suggestions for addressing each principle in our teaching praxis.

I am not suggesting these ideas should replace all previous comments. Rather, I simply hope to provide research-based principles that can be applied in any teaching/learning context regardless of the academic discipline.

I hope this is helpful.

In His Grip,

Randy

Students learn by engaging in the construction of knowledge and taking ownership of it by using it.  It's that simple!  Dave

Students learn in different ways.  And teaching adults (andragogy) is different from teaching 4th graders.

Students learn by interaction and comfortable environment.

Very interesting and useful ideas are there. You may like to look at a comprehensive work of Farnham-Diggory 1972. I hope it helps!

students learn only if they want to. so activation of desire process, motivation for learning, creation of sense of responsibility and self requirement for learning, and most important understanding of purpose of learning of a particular topic. this is tailored by the teacher by using multiple teaching techniques for the class and specific  methodology for specific case.

I personally think, how students learn? is geared towards cognitive process (s). For example, searching knowledge/information, processing and creating. All these happen in the brain. We need to elaborate it more. I hope it sets the scene? 

Hello 

Please take a look in my profile and you may see some interesting papers for you.

Kind regards

NP

 Thank you everyone. Special thanks to Stephanie Eglinton-Warner, Randy Meredith,Clark Vangilder, Arif Jawaid, Immanuel Victor George, Harshvardhan Singh and Debra Sharon Ferdinand  for their insightful answers. Dr Arif you are right, I am interested in cognitive knowledge processing as Dr Clark Vangilder talked about coordination of the activation of multiple regions of the brain but it cannot be separated form psycho-social aspects of learning as Harshvardhan Singh talked about Situated Aptitude theory and Stephanie Eglinton-Warner about motivation, past experiences, preferences for processing inputs, time, place and circumstances and interaction. A lot more can be said and I would be thankful for more answers. But a lot has been said already and I'd read all the suggested sources and get back. Clark Vangilder could you please share your thesis if it is published? Randy Meredith, thanks for sharing the valuable resources. 

I actually that everyone is right in the above statements, suggestions and answers. I have been teaching for over 20 years and hold more than 13 speciality teaching certificates. During this time i have been shown and taught honey and Mumford, the mastery learning concepts, TAP and all that falls in between. However i am not saying i know it all, because id have to be genius and walking lexicon of knowledge. However over the years i have found that what ever it is your trying to teach, and which ever teaching methods you apply will work as long as you include a few simple ingredients into the recipe.

Lets call this the learning cake just for fun:

Give them an overview of what is coming so they can prepare.

Tell them about what it is they can expect to learn - pre-cognitive preparation instils the willingness to be interested and want to learn. Why are we doing this?

Tell how they are going to learn it. - How will it be done?

Tell them how they will prove competency of learning. Can it be done?

Now tell them a story that relates the education or skills you are teaching to real life and gives the learning meaning for them. If learning and education is meaningful they will learn more because it relates to them and is interesting.

During the entire educational sets keep enforcing the reality and meanings - for example, making simple statements like "This is important because" pre-programs attention to the subject.

Then reinforce the key points by stating things like, now you know, or now you can - instils achievement. I can do this!

Bake for the period of learning and take out when done.

This might be completely off the reservation with regards to what you are looking for, but i hope it helps a little or at least inspires.

You might also find a ted talk by Tesia Marsik: http://bigthink.com/neurobonkers/why-the-widespread-belief-in-learning-styles-is-not-just-wrong-its-also-dangerous 

best wishes Paul

 Hi Ayesha

For me, the key word is experience, in the notion of John Dewey. The fundamental mechanism behind little children's learning is their natural curiosity and eager to explore the world. And another important aspect is someone's readiness to learn or achieve something ("ready brain"). Experiences wire the brain’s cells and regions together, forming new networks. I believe that neuroscientists, in collaboration with teachers and educational researches, will provide more evidence that will help us to solve the mystery of learning.

Much more in my upcoming book (15 year study, 7 students from childhood to early adulthood, learning trajectories).

Best

May

According to Jerome Bruner’s construction theory, learning is a process in which learners construct their knowledge from new information and their current and past knowledge (Bruner, 1986, 1990).

A basic understanding is that reality is constructed through human activity. Hence, knowledge is a human product and is socially and culturally constructed (Ernest, 1998; Gredler, 1997; Prawat & Floden, 1994).

In 1971, David A. Kolb presented a working paper that argued for the existence of different individual learning styles. (Kolb’s experiential learning cycle), is described by Kolb as ‘…the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience. Knowledge results from the combination of grasping experience and transforming it’ (Kolb, 1984, p. 41). The experiential learning theory and its application have been very important in adult education and have also gained ground, to a lesser extent, in engineering and higher education. In adult education, a number of researchers have developed similar theories.

More about what I think that could be an answer to your question: How do students learn? Can be found in My thesis Educational Software in Engineering Education.

Bruner, J. (1986). Actual Minds, Possible Worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Ernest, P. (1998, 2014-04-09). Social constructivism as a philosophy of mathematics: Radical constructivism rehabilitated. Philosophy of Mathematics Education Journal.  Retrieved, from http://people.exeter.ac.uk/PErnest/soccon.htm

Gredler, M. E. (1997). Learning and instruction: Theory into practice (3rd ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Kolb, D. A. (1971). Individual learning styles and the learning process. Working Paper  #535-71, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall

Prawat, R. S., & Floden, R. E. (1994). Philosophical Perspectives on Constructivist Views of Learning. Educational Psychologist, 29(1), 37-48.

Kind regards

Ramón Garrote

 Thanks Paul Withers,  May Kokkidou and Ramón Garrote Jurado for you insightful answers. also the references are really helpful. Yes Dr May Kokkidou

"neuroscientists, in collaboration with teachers and educational researches, will provide more evidence that will help us to solve the mystery of learning" The interesting aspect is that after all these researches and theories, it still remains a mystery which perhaps humans would keep exploring further. Also interestingly enough learning process varies in case of each individual, even if s/he belongs to the same social class, gender and culture. So this area of research blends many aspects.

You might be interested in the following papers.

Hi Ayesha 

Find the quick info and resource about VARK, personally i prefer VARK its covers all styles i guess and its proved effective when i used in my teaching and learning session. I used 1 minute paper to assess and the result was amazing, 

Resources

http://vark-learn.com/

I have attached few others too 

Hope I didn't go over board.

I agree the neurolingusitic programming will be useful which is also the base for VARK style

Students learn by making the topic interesting and relating to enjoy  real life ,solve theire problem ,  when you used active learning you can discover the strenght and weakness of your students . diffrent thinkining  and learning skills, then they can learn  them for better future, 

Students learn by listening, asking questions, observation of demonstrations, and by return demo.

Simulation is a wonderful modality to teach. Standard patients are great too.

Students need to be actively engaged and participate in learning. The traditional instructor-focused learning style is not applicable today. Student-focused learning is most valuable, I think.

Best,

Megan

By having a go at tasks that are a bit too difficult, accepting initial failure as normal and embracing success when it finally happens. Paul

Esa pregunta es una cuestión filosófica. Qué se considera aprendizaje (acumulación, uso...) y cómo se produce es una decisión previa a cualquier investigación.

See the book, Delta Theory by the late Roland Tharp, PhD.

After more than 40 years of experience and 42 of reading interesting and spectacular learning theories, I have arrived to next conclusions, even if I recognize that some aspects are not included -mainly collaborative work and network learning.

1) We learn only in two ways:

• Imitating models
• Discovering by exploration of different options

But we learn in “both” ways. We not only “construct” the knowledge. We also reproduce the knowledge. 

2) We consolidate the learnt by practice and repetition

But, how many times? It depends of every one. Some individuals do not practically need any time, others several times.

3)And, yes, at this moment we discover that the key is the motivation. We can learn thanks to:

• External motivation: badges, gamification, awards, punishment…
• But the really good is when we learn because we have Internal motivation: some kind of personal interest in learning, some times because the content, sometimes because the activity, sometimes because long term objectives.

4) Even so, learning is not automatic. To learn we need:

• Feed-back
• Reinforcement

I know, it sounds very behaviourist. But without this, the practice has not sense, not fruits.

5) We have to consider individual differences. Yes, learning styles, personal motivation, family, social class, cultural environment, … so many things that teachers use to forget when they suggest the same readings, the same activities, the same assessment to groups of so different people.

 Because so, it is usually a good idea preparing the learning: to learn before to learn.

6) Well, it is demonstrated that there two things that help to learn:

• To have very clarified objectives
• To find structured contents.

7) And, at this moment, we arrive to the last, but not the less relevant element: while we learn we feel emotions. The result of our learning depends of how we deal with these and how our environment answers to them.

I began to consider these ideas several years ago from:

Kemp, Jerrold E. y Smellie, Don C. (1989). Planning, Producing and Using Instructional Media. New York: Harper & Row.

There is a critique of learning styles where more that 71 models were proposed and the empirical studies have not provided a conclusive evidence to support this theory. Furthermore, presenting learning materials according to student learning preferences is not necessarily the best instructional choice, for instance, only written or audio materials for verbal learners have a reduced effectiveness for content that requires a visual representation due to the relationship between the type of materials and a subject nature. See the links below:

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED535732.pdf

https://www.psychologicalscience.org/journals/pspi/PSPI_9_3.pdf?utm_source=hootsuite

http://josotl.indiana.edu/article/view/19295/28114

Article Evaluating the Effect of Arabic Engineering Students’ Learni...

That question is a philosophical question. What is considered learning (accumulation, use ...) and how it is produced is a decision prior to any investigation.

According to my experience and observation of classes; students learn if the teacher has the ability to attract attention and motivation so they will teach.

Subject knowledge and skill that want to work are linked to the objective of the work session to be achieved.

Then the resources are used and the variety of activities covering different learning style along with the development of orality. With this I want to say that children or young people should share with others orally (speaking) what they have done or will do in regard to the subject being treated because it is the way to set the content or strategy  could be get in brain.

The arrange of  furniture of the room is also important.During the work session the teacher can use several ways.

Also ask questions of application and reflection on the issue of content.

Finally, make a process of metacognition of the work session. This  allow students to identify what they did and how they did it.

There is not a  best  method because each class is different to other however when student make by themselves they learn quick and eassily.

Is necceary have a plan before to teach.

And the end the teacher attitude and the feedback to them in different ways ( oral/touch/smile/sticker) are very emotional aspect that influencing learning.

Students learn most efficiently and effectively by doing. Instructors can facilitate student learning by:

• providing them with clear concise descriptions of what is to be learned.

• modeling the desired behavior.

• providing opportunities to practice working with novel challenges.

• Informing them of how their proficiency will be assessed.

The devil is in the details, especially with large classes.  But that is for another day.

Hello Ayesha,

I'm not sure if your question is oriented to how to teach so kids can achieve (which seems to be the orientation in the answers here) or if your question is fundamentally about learning, so I'll focus on that aspect.

We've developed and conduct research oriented phenomenologically to learning as experience at the University of Innsbruck in Austria, with the goal of accessing students' experiences of learning and being taught in schools. Rather than asking the question of how people learn through experience (systematic process) or what they learn out of an experience (outcome or lesson in hindsight), a phenomenologically oriented notion of learning (and teaching) conceives of learning (and teaching) as experience and is particularly interested in how that experience is initiated and culminates rather than how the process “works”.

We currently have a corpus of over 70 vignettes (poignant narratives of experiential moments captured in school) and nearly as many anecdotes (recalled experiences, which serve as data for us to explore the structure of the very complex human experience of learning. The research was conducted in Austrian middle schools.

This is foundational research rather than applied, but we have also discussed implications for teaching and learning practices. In a nutshell: Learning is beyond the reach of teaching. At first, this might rip the carpet out from under practitioners' feet (I'm a teacher myself and it did for me), but it opens up a new perspective oriented to the experiential stream in the classroom. And it is empowering, in that it acknowledges just how complex working in a classroom is, especially when you are trying to initiate and support learning in others.

In addition to the growing corpus of vignettes and anecdotes, we have a growing "register" of learning experiences. Teachers and researchers read a vignette, respond to it and then analyze the contours of the (learning) experience by completing the sentence, "Learning reveals itself as ..." with a verb. I'll insert a sample vignette, a first "reading" of it, and the first 100 verbs in the register at the end of this posting.

Vignettes, Readings and Registers belong to the phenomenological methodology we have developed. I've uploaded a few articles in English based on this research; here are two that might be helpful and relevant to your question:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292981597_Learning_Beyond_the_Reach_of_Teaching_A_Radical_Alternative_or_a_Radically_Determinate_Factor

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/293581761_Planning_for_the_unplannable_Responding_to_Unarticulated_Calls_in_the_Classroom

You can also find some of our publications on this work in English under Michael Schratz' name here on ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Michael_Schratz/contributions

Also attached is an article we wrote first in German for the translation of the OECD's "Nature of Learning".

Best regards from Austria,

Tanja

Vignette

Today there is a new activity in math, similar to the running dictation already familiar from language arts. Lenny has unwittingly started with one of the more difficult tasks and has already run back and forth to the task sheet several times. He is tense and says desperately to no one in particular that he can’t do the task. His frustration crescendos, his body is taut, on the verge of splitting its seams. A teacher talks with him, tries to calm and encourage him. “But I can’t!” he says. She gives him a tip and tells him to try again. The teacher sends him off to the task and moves on to another student. He marches unwillingly to the task sheet, all the while chanting, It won’t work, it won’t work, it won’t work. Back at his desk he feverishly erases what he had written in his notebook. You can’t do it, you can’t do it, you can’t do it. He reprimands himself for not being able to remember anything, calls himself names, and stomps back to the task sheet. "You can’t do it, you can’t do it, you can’t do it. You’re too dumb, you’re too dumb. Shit. It’s all shit." (Schratz, Schwarz & Westfall-Greiter 2012)

Reading

Lenny is in a math lesson doing a “running dictation.” There is a task sheet somewhere in the classroom. He goes back and forth between the task sheet and his desk, trying to hold the task information in his head long enough to get it down on paper. His short-term memory seems to be failing him. He runs back and forth several times. He is tense. Speaking to no one in particular he says he can’t do it. What can’t he do? Is it the math problem itself or is it the remembering? The situation is tense, there is frenetic activity and his frustration crescendos. It seems like a battle, but between what or whom? Is Lenny battling with the math problem, the task form, himself? Does the tension come from competition? Is he competing with others, defining success in terms of speed? Speed does seem to be a factor, but not the only one. Lenny is not satisfied with what he is transcribing from the task sheet. He goes back to it again and again, apparently knowing something is wrong and wanting to get it down right.

A teacher notices Lenny’s stress. She tries to calm him, speaks encouragement. What does she say? Whatever it is, it does not seem to help him. Lenny is still discouraged. “But I can’t!” he says. What can’t he do? The teacher does not accept this answer. She gives him a tip. What kind of tip? Is it what he needs at this moment? Then she tells him to try again. How many times should he try again? She sends him off to the task and moves on. Lenny marches unwillingly to the task sheet yet again, chanting “It won’t work.” What won’t work? What is “it”? The tip she has given him, the task itself? He cooperates and follows the teacher’s instructions, but he is not convinced.

Back at his desk he feverishly erases what he had written in his notebook. What is he erasing? Has he checked it and found it to be wrong, or is he just trying to erase what he has done until now? He chants again, you can’t do it, you can’t do it, you can’t do it. There is a shift from “it” to “you” in his self-talk. He is focused on himself, reprimands himself for not being able to remember anything. So is it his memory that is the problem? Lenny seems to not question the task design, to assume that it is an activity that should be good for him and his math skills. He degrades himself, calls himself names. This time he stomps back to the task sheet. He is becoming angry. The chant continues: You can’t do it, you can’t do it, you can’t do it. Then it switches from a lack of ability to a lack of intelligence. You’re too dumb, you’re too dumb. Then another turn. Lenny switches from degrading himself to degrading “it.”  Shit. It’s all shit. What is “it”? Is it the task, the math, the lesson, school?

Register of Learning as Experience

Conference Paper Learning Beyond the Reach of Teaching: A Radical Alternative...

Article Planning for the unplannable: Responding to (Un)articulated ...

Thank you all for the wonderful reflections. 

What is important to debate in this discussion and elsewhere is what we mean by 'learning,'  Research studies, books and articles abound about getting students to learn yet the very essence of what it means to learn is often assumed. I would debate this topic with my pre-service teachers who believed that testing was a way to determine learning.

Many years ago, linguist James Gee came to the university I was then at to do a workshop with the Literacy educators. His visit had a profound and lasting effect on all of us. Gee gave us the answers to 3 multiple choice questions in turn ( in an area unfamiliar to us) but he did not provide us with the questions. All those present got the correct answers to all 3.  We had learned how to take multiple choice tests. We had not learned any of the content in the questions asked. We didn't need to. 

I agree with Gloria that learning in schools is VERY DIFFERENT from learning in life.  When we can manage to understand these differences, we will understand what it means to motivate learners of all ages and stages of development.  I know my answer earlier was not among the most popular but i would urge readers to look at research to practice studies conducted by the American Psychological Association's Center for Psychology in Schools and Education.  You will see lots of current research on this topic, video modules for teacher certification that help them understand what we know from a developmentally individual perspective and lots more.  Teachers are learners too and the same basic principles and practices apply to them across content areas.

Dear Tanja Westfall-Greiter

Thanks for a comprehensive answer. I loved the sentence

"Learning is beyond the reach of teaching". This can be debated further in answers by others.

 Dear Gloria Latham 

Testing and assessment is done to know whether students have learnt what was intended to make them learn. But 'how students learn' comes before the lesson plan  'what they should learn'. That's why any curriculum as well as instructional design should be designed by keeping in mind how students learn. Without this foundation any next step like testing may not provide fruitful results. James Gee example is really interesting.

 Dear Barbara L. Mccombs

Of course the question 'how anyone learns throughout life?' is like opening up a pandora's box. It would bring in socio-cultural-historical and many other aspects along with cognitive and psychological ones. That's why the question is about 'how students learn?' implying mostly the formal learning of students in a f2f or online class yet not ignoring PLEs and self directed learning.

 Dear Rebeca Serrano

Thanks for mentioning 'different learning styles' and the significance of different subjects to be treated differently.

Dear Ahmed Al-Azawei ·

Thanks for sharing resources about learning styles which questiont their validity. Also thank you for bringing in UDL. I was waiting for someone to talk about it. It has not been discussed in the body of the answer. Could you please throw a little more light on it with reference to UDL.

Dear colleagues,

I'd like to pick up briefly on Gloria Latham's and Barbara McComb's comments in regard to teacher ed and share some thoughts on curriculum/knowledge base as well as my ethical position as a researcher (which, Ayesha, will inevitably bring me to "beyond the reach of teaching"):

At the Univ of Innsbruck (pre-service teachers) and Center for Learning Schools (in-service teachers/teacher leaders) we try to first broaden the horizon by presenting learning theories of various disciplines. Hlusebosch's graphic is a helpful overview and is similar to what we do:

http://joitskehulsebosch.blogspot.co.at/2015/01/how-our-learning-theories-shape-how-we.html

but we also bring in philosophy and the Continental European discipline of Pädagogik (not the same as "pedagogy" in English!), which is hardly available in English and the Anglo-American world. Students and colleagues familiarize themselves with the various concepts and frameworks and try to identify what they have in common. At the end of this process, they are asked to take a position:

What learning theory from which discipline(s) makes most sense for you right now in your own learning? In your practice?

I think taking a conscious position and articulating that position in relation to other options is extremely important both for teacher educators and teachers.Too often in teacher education one view is presented from one disciplinary perspective. I have the impression that we have yet to learn to work in an interdiscplinary manner to explore learning. I also have the impression that we jump far too quickly to teaching/testing and forget that these are different fields of action that take us away from learning and ourselves as learners.

We also try to impart a good dose of humility: Despite popular messages (neuroscientific theories are is being popularized in a horrible manner by some in Europe, who have lost the respect of their colleagues in neuroscience in the process!), I know of no research into learning where definitive, comprehensive answers are available - not in neuroscience, not in psychology, not in sociology, not in philosophy and related disciplines like Pädagogik. We know very little about what is going on in the human being when he or she is learning, and the term learning is also ambiguous. Do I mean adding to my knowledge base, developing a skill, remembering information or changing my disposition to the world? (To name just a few - another question we ask teachers in our work.)

I know many solid theories, i.e. conceptual frameworks for explaining the observable and measurable, but the degree to which these theories are proven in real life and real classrooms is the question. And often teachers' subjective-professional theories are better than the ones we (researchers and theorists) develop. The problem is they are usually unarticulated and practitioners rarely have a voice in the work of researchers and theorists.

As a teacher, I understand practitioners when they become frustrated with theories that seem to have little relevance to their actual work. As a researcher, I see this dilemma of practice-theory / abstract-actual as an ethical issue. I believe researchers and theorists are answerable to practitioners (and by extension to the students they work with), but how? Mikhail Bakhtin's philosophy has helped me to articulate this for myself and for teachers when I am working with them. My position here tends to have an empowering effect (which is for me a good sign) because it acknowledges and esteems the knowledge they have gained through living the practice. Below is an excerpt from a personal tribute I wrote for a volume honoring Michael Schratz' theory "Lernseitigkeit" (hard to translate!) on Bakhtin's relevance here.

Best regards from Austria,

Tanja

Excerpt from "Contemplating One’s Way beyond Teaching: 'Lernseits' as Personal Imperative: A perspective on Michael Schratz’ scholarly paths to grasping teaching and learning on the occasion of his 60th birthday". in: Christof, E. & Schwarz, J.F. (2013). Lernseits des Geschehens: Über das Verhältnis von Lernen, Lehren und Leiten. Innsbruck: Studienverlag.

For Bakhtin a person’s responsibility for his or her own actions could not be established through detached intellectual cognizing. Objectifying subtracts the subject from the equation and in so doing strips lived experience of the unique emotional-volitional tone that essentially constitutes it. Knowledge remains abstract, limited to “infinite and self-sufficient” knowing of. He raises significant questions regarding the educative impact of all levels of education[1], when he observes that by

“cognizing it, I universalize it: everyone occupies a unique and never-repeatable place, any being is once-occurrent [einmalig]. What we have here is a theoretical positing which tends toward the ultimate limit of becoming completely free of any emotional-volitional tone. There is nothing I can do with this theoretical proposition: it does not obligate me in any way.” (pp. 40-41)

The emotional-volitional tone of an act is for Bakhtin an essential structure of answerability. Abstract knowledge fails to oblige the person living an actual life and can therefore not be the ground in which answerability is rooted: “[I]ts being valid in itself makes me myself useless, and my acts or deeds are fortuitous from its standpoint” (p. 43). The subject here is superfluous. Incapable of accessing lived experience through “theoreticism,” Bakthin saw no other option than to pursue “a first philosophy, which attempts to describe Being-as-event as it is known to the answerable act or deed” (p. 31). He notes that such a philosophy, which attempts to describe the world in which “that act becomes answerably aware of itself and is actually performed” rather than the world produced by that act, “can only be a description, a phenomenology of the world” (pp. 31-32).

[1] It appears that in the same decade on another continent, John Dewey was responding to this problem in education and calling for a theory of and approach to education that was coherent with democracy. For Dewey, what happens in the classroom must be oriented to “educative experience” so that students grow to be participants in a democratic society, an idea which he continued to articulate, clarify and defend over many years (cf. Dewey 1916, 1938).

Current cognitive paths of students in Learning is focused on Student Centered Learning Methodologies  like(Story Methods-Flip Learning-Blended Learning-Group Work-Learning Using Senses )..........It enhance the Cognitive Developments of The Children And Bloom Taxonomy is also best tool at current era..................... 

Dear Ayesha,

I have some references for you:

DE CORTE, Erik “New Perspectives of Learning and Teaching in Higher Education” In: BURGEN, Arnold (Ed.). Goals and purposes of higher education in the 21st century. London: Jessica Kingsley, 1996. cap. 10, p. 112-132.

In this article the author comments on how learning from experts learning systems helps finding categories that are basic to learning; he also proposes a broad definition of learning which helps us think more openly about it; another subject is the powerful learning enviroments. At he end, he provides very good references suggestions. It's an article for higher education, but the ideas can be used for any level.

Besides, I think Vygotsky's work may bring some very good highlights (my references are in Portuguese; I write the title in English for you; Most of the works can be found on-line):

VYGOTSKY, L. S. A construção do pensamento e da linguagem. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2001.  --  The building of thought and language  --

Here, one of the most important ideas is the use of scientific concepts to reorganize the mental ability to understand. Some other concepts are: transference in learning; the role of awarness (metacognition, nowadays); learning coming before development; turning point in learning; mediation and debate in learning; role of strong and weak points in learning.

VYGOTSKY, Lev Semenovich. A Formação Social da Mente. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 1991.  --  Mind in society  --

In this book, Vygotsky defines the zone of proximal development, what makes us think of teacher intervention in this ZDP to help learning to take place; also talks of superior mental functions (that are necessary for learning - we, teachers, can use of it to make learning occur); interpersonal-intrapersonal movements in learning (since we are social beings, learning comes first from the outside); values; the role of playing and volitveness in learning... and so many more interesting topics!

VYGOTSKY, Lev Semenovich. Psicologia pedagógica. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2004.  --  Psichological Pedagogy  --

Here he brings the concepts of emotion, interest, attention, pre-disposition (habit forming), sistematization, previous knowledge, heuristics; he also brings up the seeds to the further well researched concepts of  emotional intelligence and multiple intelligence.

VYGOTSKY, LURIA & LEONTIEV. Linguagem, desenvolvimento e aprendizagem. São Paulo: Ícone. Editora da Universidade de São Paulo, 2001.  --  Language, development and learning  --

In this book, the three Russian thinkers discuss about memory, perception, attention problem solving, speech among other subjects related to learning. The researches they undertook are very revealing of their path to the concepts. Very good book.

Also, the work of Hayes and Flower are very good too. Other interesting reference for learning are the ones about literacy, identity and role playing, as well as some bakhtinian concepts as pointed out by Tanja Westfall-Greiter, above. 

My research group did some research concerning to academic reading and writing practices based on these authors' ideas. You can see some of my work here at RG. In one of them we mapped the metaffective and metacognitive path (it's a model) while students were learning to write academic summaries; I also have my PhD thesis on identity and one of the chapters in about how students see knowledge learning/construction (chapter 4, 4.3).

Hope I have helped you!

Best regards and good luck.

Eveline

 Thanks Eveline Mattos Tápias-Oliveira. Thanks for mentioning pertinent resources and briefing about them in your own words. I'll read the ones I have not gone through in detail. No wonder a linguist/educationist would talk about Vygotsky. :) 

 Thanks Allauddin Memon Kohistani . I am interested in cognitive paths per se. More of a cognitive psychology related question.

Dear Tanja Westfall-Greiter, " And often teachers' subjective-professional theories are better than the ones we (researchers and theorists) develop. " very true. Teachers should have metacognition of their practices. Knowledge like that of theories provides a base to be scaffolded by practice. My next project is going  to be an attempt at tracing teachers' cognitive paths. Well even students' cognitive paths need a lot more research whichever discipline may help in it. Thanks for bringing in Bakhtin in particular. Just as a teaching learning process should be dialogic, there are no facts only interpretations. We can never rely on one or even more thoeries. Lets keep adding. But all those teachers who develop their own theories either new or blending the existing should publish their research experiences for the benefit of all of us. 

Dan Willingham outlines some wonderful principles of the mind that help with learning in his book, 

Why Students Don't Like School

Here is a link to an article that sums up just a few elements from the book:

http://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/periodicals/WILLINGHAM%282%29.pdf 

Pupils learn with methods of their superiors while students learn with methods of their peers.

Unfortunately, all to often students are forced to learn through the mode of instruction favored by the instructor, more often than not, the standup lecture. Students learn best by doing rather than hearing someone talk about the subject. They need to be immersed rather than passive members of an audience.

Good Answer William Patrick Leonard

I think this work is very valuable:

Björn B. de Koning, Gertjan Rop, Fred Paas,

Learning from split-attention materials: Effects of teaching physical and mental learning strategies,

Contemporary Educational Psychology,

Volume 61,

2020,

101873,

ISSN 0361-476X,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101873.

(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361476X20300382)

I agree with William Patrick Leonard