School Didactics And Learning: a school Didactic Model Framing An Analysis of Pedagogical Implication of Learning Theory

Psychological Theory and Values
. It appears at first sight as if there were a fundamental difference
between developing teaching methods on the basis of ethical values and on that of psychological theory;
advice developed on the basis of learning theory seems to be more value-neutral than that developed on the
basis of ethical norms. However, one should not forget that learning theories are also ideological in many
respects (Sampson, 1981). If we emphasize the values lying behind psychological theory, then the relation
between psychological theory and teaching methods is the same as between normative philosophy and
methods. The fundamental difference is, however, that psychological theory is developed as empirical
science, which gives it an additional dimension compared with pure normative, ethically based
propositions.
Pedagogical Decisions and Learning
From the perspective of practical pedagogical activity, the role of learning is that a teacher’s understanding
of learning and the results of learning may be seen as an aspect of their pedagogical reflection. This
understanding is assumed to be important to the teacher’s practical activity.
More specifically we can say that in planning the pedagogical process in advance, in carrying it out as well
as in reflecting on it afterwards, teachers make prescriptive and normative decisions. Some of these
decisions depend on the teacher’s understanding of learning. This means that conclusions based on
analytical reflection on the nature of human learning in some specific domain of knowledge may be used in
a prescriptive sense when teaching.
The impact of teachers’ knowledge of learning on their teaching is not, however, self-evident. Bannister
(1982) argues that it is difficult to see a difference in teaching methods used in an average psychology
department compared with other university departments (like those of history, geography, biology etc.).
This interpretation is widely supported (see Desforges, 1985, for an overview). Thus, simple knowledge
about human learning does not make an individual a good teacher. Nor is it likely that only conceptual
insights into pedagogically prescriptive principles worked out on the basis of learning theory will make
anybody an excellent teacher. How this kind of knowledge develops among student teachers during pre-
service teacher education as well as during a teacher’s professional career is a problem of its own. Similarly
88
SCHOOL DIDACTICS AND LEARNING

---

the question of how to arrange successful teacher education is a problem apart (i.e. the didactics of
didactics) and will not be dealt with in this study. 
A specific view of learning is always related to parallel decisions concerning other factors. In planning a
specific pedagogical operation, a teacher pays attention simultaneously to a large number of questions (the
curriculum, individuals, resources, personal competence, context etc.). A single instructional principle
developed on the basis of learning theory is much more limited; it constitutes only one of the many
questions a teacher must acknowledge in their planning. It should also be observed that each and every
learning theory admits of many different types of teacher activities and working methods. It may even be
the case that very few—or no—teaching activities are typical of some specific learning theory. Therefore it
is relevant to look at how the different pedagogical decisions a teacher must make are related to different
theories of learning. In other words we may ask: “How are pedagogical decisions concerning intentions,
contents, methods and media in the pedagogical process related to learning theory?”
Learning theory is not to the fore in the descriptive model developed. The reason for this “hidden” role of
learning theory is that teaching as a phenomenon is not logically dependent on learning; a learner does not
necessarily have to reach a certain insight in order to say that teaching has occurred. It was also concluded
in 
Chapter 2
that the individual learner’s study activity is not always successful in influencing the learning
process so that desired results will be reached.
Still, if there were not such a phenomenon as learning, both teaching and studying would be quite
meaningless. Only in this respect are teaching and studying dependent on learning; or rather, teaching and
studying are meaningful activities because of this human capacity to change.
The next question is how learning should be approached from a pedagogical perspective. The point of
departure is that as teaching is aiming at supporting the studying-learning process and since it is necessary
to evaluate the results of the TSL process, the process and the result of learning are identified as the two
fundamental aspects of learning. It is also hard to imagine a theory of learning that would not be explicit
with regard to these two questions.
The question is thus how the process and the result of learning are related to the pedagogical decisions a
teacher must make. The scheme presented below relates the process and the result of learning to pedagogical
questions requiring decisions by the teacher (i.e. concerning goals, theme, method, media) in planning,
carrying out and evaluating the teaching (
Fig. 4.1
).
In short, the scheme suggests the following. First, it indicates that the method of teaching is closely
connected with the learning process. The motive is that even though learning always has a content,
intentional teaching tries to govern the learner’s study process, through which an individual’s understanding
of the content changes. Teaching methods as such can never guarantee that a result will be reached, though
teaching intends to influence the studying-learning process.
Second, the results of learning are often evaluated by measuring students’ achievements (a) in learning in
some field of knowledge and (b) in relation to certain goals. In 
Fig. 4.1
this is indicated by placing
educational intention and theme (content) close to the result of learning (on the left side of the figure).
It must, however, be said clearly that questions concerning the process of learning may also be related to
the educational intentions and the theme. For example, ethical values may tell us not to use methods of
indoctrination in teaching. Second, the learning process may differ in learning different types of items.
Further, the result of learning may also be discussed in relation to the methods and media used (the
evaluative process may be seen as belonging to the methods of teaching).
Finally, the figure shows that the pedagogical intentions and content dealt with are primarily decided
upon a collective level. The methods and media of the teaching process, on the other hand, are traditionally
controlled by the individual teacher. But again, the teacher also makes continuous decisions concerning the
4. ANALYSING LEARNING THEORY
89

---

choice of content and goal. Perhaps one could say that while the collective level is ultimately responsible
for the