Cognitive theory attempts to explain human behavior by understanding the thought processes comparing mind like a computer.

A detailed study can be seen here.

http://peoplelearn.homestead.com/BEduc/Chapter_5.pdf

Dear @Ziad, There are many ways to stimulate learning; however, a human learns the unforgotten lessons from his/her failures and experience.

Here is an interesting reference:

Bransford JD, Brown AL, Cocking RR (Editors). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington, DC, USA: National Academy Press, 374 pp., 2000.

Here is an interesting reference:

Hammond LD, Austin K, Orcutt S, and Rosso J. How People Learn: Introduction to Learning Theories. In: The Learning Classroom: Theory into Practice - A Telecourse for Teacher Education and Professional Development. Stanford University School of Education. 2001.

Thanks Nageswara, Abdellah, and Kamal for your valuable comments and for the shared references.

Scientists often focus on general processes shared by as many people as possible, for instance to have more impact when they make propositions for advice how to educate people in general.

From a fundamental science point of view, I think it might also be interesting to accept that each individual is unique in how information is stored and processed during the learning phase. Why do people differ in what and how they learn? Can different techniques of learning produce the same end product, like a skill.

learning is commonly defined as a process that brings together cognitive, emotional, and environmental influences and experiences for acquiring, enhancing, or making changes in one's knowledge, skills, values, and world views (Illeris, 2000; Ormorod, 1995). In fact, learning as a process fconcentrates on all what happens when the learning is received.

An interesting question with an answer that can be quite complex.

I would sum up my feelings on the matter saying that I believe that learning is a natural ability for humans if circumstances permit or require.

Dear @Ziad, Thank you for the references. I agree with @Alexandre that "learning is a natural ability for humans".

Yes indeed dear @Kamal, knowledge accumulates to build a natural experience.

Thanks Marcel, Mahfuz, Alexandre, Abedallah, Kamal, Shafig, et al. for enriching this discussion with your valuable thoughts.

I would like to share with you this simplified figure about learning (Source: Not Available):

OK. I am attaching my previous answer to your earlier question again. Actually I had sent this the same day within a few hours.

I will also try answering the reformulated question.

Thanks for the question Ziad. As mentioned by my colleagues here, learning is an intertwined process where several scientific fields mold together to create a unique customized understanding of learning. Therefore, if we need to address the scientific process, we need to look at the individual's psychology, sociological forces contributing to his/her mode of operand, anthropological factors which contributed to the individual's hereditary functions boosting his/her comprehension and assimilation of facts and figures, and the pedagogy of education that suits the individual as well.

Thank you dear @Ziad for sharing the figure. It is interesting to know that if you participate in the activity then you learn 100% and if you teach the activity you learn 70%; I did not expect that I expected it the other way.

@Ziad,

it´s a really interesting graphic. Do you have some scientific basics for your figure?

Scientific bases of Learning related to the search of "faith", which for most people never means "knowledge of the truth", and refers to only as "what is the basis of life" from a philosophical point of view.

I feel the graphic is an over simplification. The per cent figures quoted therein may not apply to every individual on account of the natural differences in their personal traits with reference to a particular event. For instance, similar to the diversity of individual performances witnessed in a batch of students of a class, all the members of a cricket team are subjected to the same course of coaching as well as practicing, however, the extent of learning among them is quite varied. Going by the Graphic, since every member of the team has participated in the event, each one should learn (and perform) 100%.

Indeed @Shanker and colleagues, the figure is an oversimplification of the intricate process of learning.

@Hanno, I found this figure on the Internet as I was browsing the literature - no reference attached to it. I thought that it is quite interesting and good to share, but certainly the subject of verification and validation.

Still, one of the important work that I have found on the subject matter is that of Bransford et al. The reference is cited above.

Dear my friends

I have astrocytic view point about learning!

I think the scientific bases are different in various fields of learning. For example:

Learning activate maybe relate to storage of specific patterns for stimulation the related muscles which are participate on that activates (muscle memory).

Or in spatial memory maybe training the neuron-astrocyte network for doing pattern separation and pattern competition according the input signal which related to environment of us.

But the connecting point of all of them is definition of astrocyte properties. (Of course I think so and this is just my hypothesis)

Thank you Hossein for your comment.

Scientific bases of learning is process of knowledge and experience from what we see, what we hear and what we feel from given, remember,logical reasoning and practical thing happen in our life.

Nature of learning happens on experience process(practical/try on error), when we fall down we learn no to goes to the same area.

Nature of learning happens on knowledge process(observation or given tutorial), as farmer learn when is time to crop or when time to spread the seed.

The quest for knowledge is achieved through learning.

Learning is multi-factorial process where we get the information’s from all of our senses and their interaction with space, time and nature and stored them in our brain. Hippocampus is the main area of human brain where the memories are being created by learning over time and stored mainly in neurons of this area. The longevity of the learning steps and memories probably is decided by the set of neurons, which might be based on the type of information, its intensity at the time of first learning experience and importance in future. Some time we just got exposed to some incidents or came across to some equation only at once and remember it for the rest of our life, there might be two possible reasons for this type of memories, first, it may be because of the set of neurons encoded that information at the time of first learning experience last forever, second reason may be if these neurons have limited life then probably these are passing this information to the new set of similar neurons to keeps that information forever. There might be neural circuit network involving in the learning process and keep this information intact in neurons as long as circuit remains active in the brain.

Thanks Sunil for your valuable contribution to this question..

Hearing, seeing, speaking, rehearsal, retrieval, redesigns figures, experience, training, brain storming, and all kind of acquisition processing information.

There is no single answer to this question. It very much depends on who you are and what you are trying to learn and what you are going to do with your learning. Increasingly I am drawn to the constructivist theory of learning. So that the learner "constructs" their own knowledge and learning.

What is the Scientific basis of Learning?

Learning is a never ending process. One keeps learning all through the life and can never quantify it in terms of learning percentages as the process is open ended and their always remains a new Δx to be learnt in any domain of learning. Just like we can't say we have travelled 7.2389.......% of the distance to SKY.

An expert involved in teaching 'LEARNING', in fact keeps learning (HIMSELF) as to what is 'LEARNING' and how to keep improvising 'TEACHING THE LEARNING'.

The first tutor, in one's life, is one's own brain. A newborn baby starts learning right from the birth or perhaps even before that (inside mother's womb) like the Indian mythological character 'ABHIMANYU' (ARJUN'S son) who had learnt (halfway) the technique of entering a 'CHAKRAVYUHA' (a strategic fielding of warriors to trap and kill the opponent). [Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhimanyu].

Talking about a newborn baby, he/she has needs (like hunger, thirst etc.) but cannot fulfill those by himself/herself and needs assistance from those surrounding him/her. But, yet to have learnt 'TALKING'! Cannot postpone the hunger for long (till he/she learns talking). HELPLESS! Hunger is becoming unbearable... what to do.... accidentally [or perhaps Programmedly… Programmed by??? …. GOD?] starts crying... the lone tool available at his/her command (at that moment)… not even realizing that this is the most wonderful tool the GOD has gifted him/her… wonders…. the mother (also at her debut) immediately gets attracted and helplessly tries to identify the problem with the child… but how??? Guesses the child is hungry… starts feeding him/her [GOD knew this and has already made a provision --- That’s why the saying ‘GOD KNOWS’]… Wow… the problem is solved… so simple…

this is THE FIRST LESSON the child learns… RAISE AN ALARM…. whenever needed… stores in brain-chip… for future references… and the LEARNING PROCESS BEGINS… [scientific or otherwis]… storing every new lesson onto the brain-chip.

TUTORED BY WHOM??? !!!

Uses THE FIRST LESSON perhaps the most frequently… just as the learned Prof Ziad… an exponent in tutoring the learning [as evident from his profile]… has mastered the subject …. Still trying to enrich his brain-store… RAISED THIS ALARM… [REF: THE FIRST LESSON]… gathering additional information from whosoever… appreciating a trivial input even from a layman like me… LAYMAN…. Yes… in context of the present topic… and, for that matter… for most other contexts…..

This was how a layman [a non-systematic intruder into the subject] could visualize the basis of learning.

The following link may contribute a systematic Δx to the topic:

http://home.uchicago.edu/weyl/Third_Draft_Simple_Theory.pdf

Interesting questions.

Learning forms rational mind (conscious level). In process of decision-making we rely on the rational mind. From an evolutionary perspective we have a mechanism for persevering/responding to stimuli in our environment unconsciously. It means we need to be able act quickly in a lot situations especially when we are in danger. It seems safe to say that at least some gut feelings are reliable and we ought to listen to those. Are they connect to the learning process? Things look a little different when we focus on the gut feelings of experts in different fields. For example a chicken sexer. His job is to sort newborn male from female chikens. He is able to tell male from female at a quick glance. He can’t explain how he know the difference – he simply know. In my opinion we have created a society that honours the rational mind and most of us lost the ability to rely on the intuitive mind.

Dear Shankar, thanks for putting up very nice discussion about the science behind learning with some examples of very historical facts about when the learning actually start, which start before the birth. I think human being are having very special abilities (known or unknown) about learning which might be very helpful for them to survive, adapt and evolve overtime. When it come to teaching and learning I think in the way of subjective learning its something like "Learn How to Teach and Teach How to learn"