Abstract
Scholars in educational technology, along with scholars of pedagogy overall, have labored under the handicap of lacking a common conceptual framework of the whole process of instruction, a framework that should include the major factors that influence successful academic achievement. After a review of the literature on conceptual frameworks, the authors propose a framework for instructed learning that is based on an eclectic view of learning theories and evidence derived from meta-analyses of factors associated with academic achievement. The framework proposes that three factors—Aptitude, Effort, and Instruction—are proximal causes of instructed learning; that three factors—Learner’s Psychological Traits, Learner’s Psychological State, and Facilitator—are first-level distal influences; and that four other factors—Peer Influences, Home and Family Influences, Social Media, and Mass Media—are more remotely influential. All these factors operate within environments—Classroom, School, and Sociocultural—that affect all the factors.
This chapter is based on Chapter 2 in: Michael H. Molenda and Deepak Prem Subramony, The Elements of Instruction: A Framework for the Age of Emerging Technologies, published by Routledge (2021).
The author acknowledges the exceptionally valuable contributions of Victoria L. Lowell and Marisa Exter of Learning Design and Technology, Purdue University, for their insightful and constructive critiques.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall.
Cole, M. W., Laurent, P., & Stocco, A. (2013). Rapid instructed task learning: A new window into the human brain’s unique capacity for flexible cognitive control. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 13(1), 1–22.
Coleman, J. S. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Office of Education/U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare/U.S. Government Printing Office.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & McCormack, J. (1986, February). The influence of teachers. Phi Delta Kappan, 67(6), 415–419.
Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Pearson Allyn and Bacon.
Ellis, R. (1990). Instructed second language acquisition: Learning in the classroom. Basil Blackwell.
Fraser, B. J., Walberg, H. J., Welch, W. W., & Hattie, J. A. (1987). Syntheses of educational productivity research. International Journal of Educational Research, 11(2), 145–252.
Frick, T. W. (2019). Importance of educology for improving educational systems. In J. M. Spector, B. B. Lockee, & M. D. Childress (Eds.), Learning, design, and technology: An international compendium of theory, research, practice and policy: Systems thinking and change. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17727-4
Geake, J. G. (2009). The brain at school: Educational neuroscience in the classroom. Open University Press/McGraw-Hill.
Geary, D. C. (2008). An evolutionarily informed education science. Educational Psychologist, 43(4), 179–195.
Honebein, P. C., & Sink, D. L. (2012, November/December). The practice of eclectic instructional design. Performance Improvement, 51(10), 26-31.
Huitt, W. G., Huitt, M. A., Monetti, D. M., & Hummel, J. H. (2009, October 16–19). A systems-based synthesis of research related to improving students’ academic performance. Retrieved October 8, 2019, from Educational Psychology Interactive. http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/papers/improving-school-achievement.pdf
Kandel, E. R. (2006). In search of memory. W. W. Norton.
McIlrath, D. A., & Huitt, W. G. (1995, December). The teaching-learning process: A discussion of models. Retrieved October 3, 2019, from Educational Psychology Interactivehttp://edpsycinteractive.org/papers/modeltch.html
Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43–59.
Merrill, M. D. (2013). First principles of instruction. Pfeiffer.
Merton, R. K. (1957). Social theory and social structure. Free Press.
Molenda, M. H., & Subramony, D. P. (2021). The elements of instruction: A framework for an era of emerging technologies. Routledge/Taylor & Francis.
Monk, D. H., Walberg, H. J., & Wang, M. C. (Eds.). (2001). Improving educational productivity. Information Age.
National Academies of Sciences. (2018). How people learn II: Learners, contexts, and cultures. The National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (Expanded ed.). The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/9853
Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive psychology. Prentice-Hall.
Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2014). Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 27–42). Cambridge University Press.
Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and verbal processes. Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Phelps, E. A. (2006). Emotion and cognition: Insights from studies of the human amygdala. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 27–53.
Ravitch, S. M., & Riggan, M. (2017). Reason & rigor: How conceptual frameworks guide research (2nd ed.). SAGE.
Reigeluth, C. M., & Carr-Chellman, A. A. (Eds.). (2009). Instructional-design theories and models: Building a common knowledge base (Vol. III). Routledge.
Rizzolatti, G., & Sinigaglia, C. (2008). Mirrors in the brain: How our minds share actions, emotions, and experience. Oxford University Press.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1980). Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 33–58). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Shriver, T. P., & Weissberg, R. P. (2020, April). A response to constructive criticism of social and emotional learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 101(7), 52–57.
Skinner, B. (1953). Science and human behavior. The Free Press.
Thompson, S., & Thompson, N. (2008). The critically reflective practitioner. Palgrave Macmillan.
Walberg, H. J. (1984, May). Improving the productivity of America’s schools. Educational Leadership, 41(8), 19–27.
Walberg, H. J. (2006). Improving educational productivity: An assessment of extant research. In R. F. Subotnik & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), The scientific basis of educational productivity (pp. 103–159). Information Age Publishing.
Zetterberg, H. L. (1962). On theory and verification in sociology. Bedminster Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Molenda, M.H. (2021). A Framework for Scholarship on Instructed Learning. In: Hokanson, B., Exter, M., Grincewicz, A., Schmidt, M., Tawfik, A.A. (eds) Learning: Design, Engagement and Definition. Educational Communications and Technology: Issues and Innovations. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85078-4_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85078-4_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-85077-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-85078-4
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)