Centre stage papers – Days 3, 4 & 5: Extending the vision

Can we support deep learning?

Abstract

The purpose of the paper is to suggest strategies for supporting deep learning. It then describes the concepts that are central to understanding deep learning in terms of a study on deep and surface learning approaches. It then shows that experiential learning is a form of deep learning. It then articulate some principles underpinning experiential learning and shows that critical thinking is central to deep learning. It also attempts to justify the appropriateness for the deep learning, strategic learning, and surface learning occasionally, discusses strategies for supporting deep learning, and finally discusses support for deep learning from a point of view of three dominant approaches to learning, namely behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism.

The purpose of the paper is to suggest strategies for supporting deep learning.

Data collection

The paper is based on data gathered from a variety of sources, including:

• discussion groups held once a month at the Faculty of Education, University of Pretoria, during the period March to October 2006, on the Teaching and Learning Series
• literature that contains the body of knowledge on deep and surface learning, Marton and Säljö (1976);  Ramsden (1992); Biggs (1987, 1993) and Entwistle (1981); and studies on critical thinking (Richard, 2001)
• personal observations in and outside the classroom as a learner during the formative years in undergraduate studies (1984-1988)
• observations in professional development as an educator during the latter years to date (at the time the paper is being written
• conversations with undergraduate students.

Background context

Firstly, the paper describes the concepts that are central to understanding deep learning (i) in terms of a study on deep and surface learning approaches; (ii) illustrate the fact that experiential learning is a form of deep learning; (iii) articulate some principles underpinning experiential learning; and (iv) shows that critical thinking is central to deep learning.

Secondly, based on the definitions for deep learning, strategic learning and surface learning, the paper attempts to justify the appropriateness for the three approaches occasionally, strategies for supporting deep learning, and finally discusses the role of the three dominant approaches to learning; namely behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism, The outline of the paper is described below

1. What is deep learning?
2. What is experiential learning?
3. Principles underpinning experiential learning
4. Is critical thinking relevant?
5. When is surface learning appropriate?
6. When is strategic learning appropriate?
7. When is deep learning apparent?
8. Strategies for supporting deep learning
9. The role of learning theories and philosophy

What is deep learning?

The definition of deep learning and surface learning is based on the original empirical research by Marton and Säljö (1976) and further elaborated by Ramsden (1992), Biggs (1987, 1993) and Entwistle (1981). Deep learning and surface learning are best understood when described in terms of a deep to surface learning learning continuum). In this continuum, deep learning is, on the one extreme, and correlates with intrinsic motivation. Surface learning, on the other hand, is on the other extreme and is associated with extrinsic motivation. The study goes further to mention strategic learning, which lies somewhere between deep learning and surface learning in the deep to surface learning continuum. The study describes strategic learning as follows:
‘… Achieving or strategic approach, which can be summarised as a very well-organised form of surface approach, and in which the motivation is to get good marks. The exercise of learning is construed as a game, so that acquisition of technique improves performance. It works as well as the analogy: insofar as learning is not a game, it breaks down’.

In addition, deep learning can be described in terms of the dictionary meaning of the concept ‘deep’:

The word ‘deep’ from the Oxford Dictionary and Thesaurus means:

• ‘extending far down from the top’
• ‘extending far in from the surface’.

Alternative meanings of ‘deep’ in the context of deep learning include the following:

• ‘manifestation of profound, thoughtful, insightful and reflective learning’
• ‘learning that is intense and focused on the implicit goal’
• ‘learning with a sincere desire to understand out of necessity, beyond the short-term need to make the grades or pass exams’
• ‘deep-seated learning’
• ‘earnest desire to master a principle and related concepts’
• ‘poignant, deeply moving, and emotional response to learning’
• ‘serious motivation to genuinely understand’
• ‘unfathomable intensity for understanding for lifelong application’
• ‘incomprehensible desire to learn’
• ‘discerning, judicious, sharp demonstration of keenness to know’
• ‘penetrating pursuit for specific knowledge’
• ‘knowledgeable and well-informed’ ‘learned, academic and scholarly tendency toward learning’.

What is experiential learning?

Carl Rogers mentions two kinds of learning: ‘cognitive’ (meaningless) and ‘experiential’ (significant). The former corresponds to academic knowledge, such as learning vocabulary or multiplication tables and the latter refers to applied knowledge, such as learning about engines in order to repair a car.

He goes further to say that ‘experiential learning addresses the needs and wants of the learner’ and lists the characteristics of experiential learning: ‘personal involvement, self-initiated, evaluated by learner, and pervasive effects on learner’. The study on experiential learning subsequently result in the following principles:

The principles underpinning experiential learning are listed below.

1. Significant learning takes place when the subject matter is relevant to the personal interests of the student.
2. Learning that is threatening to the self (for example, new attitudes or perspectives) are more easily assimilated when external threats are at a minimum.
3. Learning proceeds faster when the threat to the self is low.
4. Self-initiated learning is the most lasting and pervasive.

When is surface learning appropriate?

Is surface learning appropriate sometimes? From the definition, surface learning takes place when the motivation to learn is external, such as studying a particular subject because it is a curriculum requirement. Mostly, in cases where the need to study the subject that is not relevant to their immediate needs, learners allow themselves to engage in the learning area anyway. They engage in the learning area, as it is part of curriculum requirement. However, they will not commit sufficient time, and resources to master the learning area in question. From the author’s point of view, there is no justification for the learners to engage in surface learning. However, many adult learners in all social strata do recall cases where they had to study certain content or engage in some learning areas they did not really like. Under those circumstances, learners do the minimum work it takes to pass the subject, in order to focus on what they really want to do.

When is strategic learning appropriate?

Is it appropriate to encourage learners to adopt a strategic learning approach? Strategic learning from the definition is associated with doing the minimum required to achieve. Educators and learning facilitators are usually under pressure to ensure learners achieve. They want to meet targets, meet deadlines and satisfy the expectations of some senior officer’s in the bureaucratic structures of education. For example, educators in schools are answerable to the learning area or subject coordinators. Coordinators in turn are answerable to heads of departments (HODs). HODs are answerable to school headmaster, or faculty deans in undergraduate studies. Headmasters are, in turn, answerable to quality assurance bodies, which in turn report to the National Education Ministry. The hierarchy puts so much pressure to be seen to improving in terms of performance outputs.

For example, if, in the previous year, a high school produced 70% matric exemptions, it is logical to expect the school to produce a minimum of 70% matric exemptions in the current year. On the other hand, there is a multitude of factors that hinder the possibilities of achieving the same standard in terms of performance outputs. Subsequently, the school management raises the selection criteria for the learners who will advance to matriculation, ensuring that only those learners that are really good will pass the exams at this level.

The evidence for the above claim can be found on the internet, and cannot be associated with a specific school or faculty on ethical grounds of keeping the tone of the paper anonymous. Although there is no explicit policy to encourage learners to adopt a strategic learning approach, by implication, the logic of education colleges requires learners to do the minimum work required to make the grades. They pressurise learners to perform, in order to meet quotas.

When is deep learning apparent?

Marton and Säljö (1976), Ramsden (1992), Biggs (1987, 1993) and Entwistle (1981) associate deep learning with intrinsic motivation.
Carl Rogers say that ‘experiential learning addresses the needs and wants of the learner … and involves personal involvement, self-initiated, evaluated by learner, and pervasive effects on learner’.

On the basis of the definitions of deep learning and experiential learning, it follows that deep learning is:

• intrinsically motivated
• relevant to the learner’s interests
• experiential
• self-initiated
• less threatening to self.

How, then, can we support deep learning? We can encourage it by:

• encouraging learning activities that are relevant to the learner’s interests
• encouraging learning activities that enhance. or draw on. the learner’s experience
• encouraging activities that are self-initiated
• keeping the learner motivated
• providing learning that is non-threatening to the learners.

Therefore, the strategy for supporting deep learning begins by defining the context for creating environments that support deep learning. In such contexts, the key role players amongst many stakeholders in the learning process are the learners, the earning facilitators and the organisational systems.

A checklist for strategies that support deep learning

Some of the questions to ask when promoting deep learning environments include the following, particularly in the context of action learning or action research.

1. Is the subject matter to be learned relevant to the learner’s personal interests? It is also important to recognise that, even though the problem under investigation is relevant to the personal interests of the investigator, there must be a reasonable balance between serving personal interests and supporting organisational aims and goals, as reflected in the mission statements, organisational policies, and departmental focuses. From personal experience, one powerful way of ensuring that learners take their learning seriously is to ask them, in the first contact session, to write an email, introducing themselves. The instruction goes further to ask them include a one-page document in the email attachment, in which they provide reasons why the learning programme is relevant to their personal and professional development. Such an exercise immediately forces the learners to reflect on their prior learning, and to project themselves into the future.

2. Is the learning self-initiated from the learner’s point of view? Providing learners with an opportunity to initiate their own learning experience ensures that they are intrinsically motivated to sustain their own learning, to approach their learning with passion, and to commit more time to their learning in comparison to scheduled one or two-hour sessions, and to study outside the normal school hours.

3. Do the learning or research contexts encourage reflection? Studies on action learning or action research provide rich contexts and opportunity for reflection. The action research process is a cyclical process that includes planning, implementation, evaluation and reflection. Reflection enables the investigator to ask: ‘What am I learning from this experience?’ ‘What have I done right or wrong?’ ‘How can I improve on my mistakes?’ ‘What are the implications of my findings to my professional development?’ ‘What are the implications to my sponsor?’

The roles of learning facilitators in supporting deep learning contexts

In addition, the learning facilitators need to check their roles in the deep learning process against the following criteria:

1. Do the learning facilitators deliberately eliminate or minimise threats? Due to the competitive nature of the academic environment, it is common knowledge and customary for faculty, in certain cases, to intimidate the learners. For example, in one instance, a physics lecturer, on his very first contact session with 20 students, asked: ‘Is this a physics or a sociology class?’ Immediately after the first encounter with the lecturer, five students deregistered from the physics program. Such remarks are unnecessary, as they only chip away at students’ self-concepts, and would probably account for perpetually low student enrolments in mathematics, science and engineering classes.
2. Does the learning facilitator guide the student researcher to establish constraints or limits in the process of pursuing the research question? Due to lack of experience, the learner may attempt to solve the problems of the world, without considering the feasibility of such investigations. For instance, it is senseless to attempt to study proficiency of computer integration in all government departments. However, it is reasonable to investigate growth in the use of spreadsheet software in the human resource personnel in two government departments, since they acquired the ICDL (International Computer Driving Licence) during the first six months of 2006.

3. Does the learning facilitator provide the student researcher with the standards to assess their own learning? For example, when the learners are engaged in some learning activity, they would ask:

• is the work valid?
• are the contents credible?
• are the contents accurate?
• are the references in the text recent?

The role of organizational systems and processes

• Does the organisation provide the infrastructure?
• Do the organisational policies support deep learning?
• Does the organisation provide economic support or make it possible to receive support from sponsors?
• Does the organisation provide opportunities for capacity building?

The role of learning theories and philosophy in supporting deep learning

Strategies for supporting deep learning would be incomplete if they ignore the vital roles of the major educational philosophies, namely behaviourism, cognitivism, and constructivism. The Penguin Dictionary of Philosophy defines these three concepts as follows:

• ‘Behaviourism is a method of philosophical inquiry formulated by J. B. Watson in 1913. It is a theory according to which statements about mental phenomena can be analysed without residue statements about behaviour and behavioural dispositions.

• Cognitivism (in psychology and philosophy of mind) is the view that behaviour must be explained in terms of inner, physical, information processing states and episodes.

• Constructivism (in epistemology) is the theory that knowledge is not something we acquire but something we produce; that the objects in an area of inquiry are not there to be discovered, but are invented or constructed.’

The main challenge for attempting to support deep learning, or any learning for that matter, is that there have been so many varying positions on how human learning occurs over the years. Subsequently, many educators have adopted an eclectic approach to teaching and learning (Trollip & Allessi, 2001). For example, they go further to say that the debates on which learning approaches are most appropriate have been ongoing.

The claim can be tested by searching for the following keywords using popular search engines, including databases that house accredited journals on educational theories: ‘behaviorists versus cognitivists’, ‘cognitivists versus constructivists’,or ‘behaviourists versus constructivists’.

References

Alessi, SM & Trollip, SR. Multimedia for learning. Third Edition. 2001.Allyn and Bacon. Boston.
Biggs. 1987. (Accessed online at: www.learningandteaching.info on 1/11/06).
Biggs. 1993. (Accessed online at: www.learningandteaching.info on 1/11/06).
Entwistle. 1981. (Accessed online at: www.learningandteaching.info on 1/11/06)/.
Martin and Saljö. 1976 (Accessed online at: www.learningandteaching.info on 1/11/06).
Mautner T. The Penguin dictionary of philosophy. 1996. Penguin Books.
Paul, R & Elder, L. Critical thinking. 2001. Prentice Hall. New Jersey.
Ramsden. 1992. (Accessed online at www.learningandteaching.info on 1/11/06)
The Oxford dictionary and thesaurus. The Oxford University Press. 1995. Oxford. Melbourne.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Mr Ramphelane C. Raseale is a lecturer in the Department of Curriculum Studies, in the Faculty of Education, at the University of Pretoria, in Pretoria, South Africa.

 Go to top of page      Go to online discussion       Go to Extending the vision menu