Summary: On Implementing Epistemology Variation and Cognitive Enhancement for Improved Learning in Higher Education 

by Jenny Friedl and Lars Eriksson, Dept. of Social and Psychological Studies, Karlstad University, Sweden

With the objective to ascertain conceivable and practical ways of achieving improved learning in higher education, we briefly describe the resulting general framework and illustrate it in a schematic model of implementation. 

The interest in the relationship between learning and analysis of the nature of knowledge (i.e., epistemology) has been renewed in recent years (e.g., Bråten, 2010; Buehl & Alexander, 2005; Muis, 2007; Murphy, Alexander, & Muis, 2012). Alexander (2007) proposed a theoretical epistemic vector space to position theories of learning based on their standpoint in how knowledge is acquired (i.e., individually formed vs. socially derived) and where it is located (i.e., in the mind vs. in the environment). For example, information processing theory claims that knowledge is internalized representations of the external world as result of an individual’s cognitive activity, and learning is a change in behavior as result of the knowledge acquisition (Murphy et al., 2012). The implications for teaching, curriculum, and assessment depend on the learning theory’s position in the vector space, and in the case of information processing theory these implications have to relate to the what and how of the individual learner’s behavior and cognitive processing of information. Boud (2000) argues it is the teachers’ understanding of what knowledge is and how it is acquired, together with the “ability to discern variation in knowledge” (p. 154), that determine whether students become effective learners. In particular, students with more sophisticated epistemological beliefs show higher levels of motivation and performance, as well as more effective cognitive and meta-cognitive learning strategies (Bråten, 2010; Buehl & Alexander, 2005; Muis, 2007). 

Cognitive psychology provides several practices that enhance learning (e.g., Karpicke, 2012; Roediger, Finn, & Weinstein, 2012), which mainly are: (1) retrieval practice through testing; (2) spaced periods of study of the same topic or knowledge blocks; (3) interleaving of topics or knowledge blocks; and (4) meta-cognitive monitoring. The first three practices establish or improve memory consolidation of key concepts and topics (Roediger et al., 2012). The teaching of meta-cognitive monitoring can improve learning by the focus on the student’s own ability to control study effort, and select and modify effective learning strategies. Still another main theme is formative assessment, which guides the student in how to learn what is to be learned and informs about the student’s performance in this process (Boud, 2000; Hattie & Timperley, 2007). 

Presented in Figure 1 is a schematic model or example of teaching and learning as based on several theories of epistemology and psychological concepts of learning, which is framed by a five-week university course divided into three different time phases (PHASE I – III). Selected keys or key concepts provide the basics for understanding the cores of the course. Phase I actually starts with a test (T1) about five keys, which opens up a following sequence of tests (T2-T4) aimed for retrieval practice. After each test, the correct answers of the test are presented so that each student gets immediate feedback on performance. The lectures that follow cover the five keys in more extended form and context, and an additional five keys are introduced and followed up in the same manner. Short sessions at lectures are used for Repetition (R) of important topics of previous lecture(s) and this repetition is interleaved and spaced during the course. Assignments (A1-A2) outside class help the student develop further knowledge on the course topics, with Feedback (F1-F2) given to help the student alter the gap between what is understood and what should be understood. The deliberate varying of the attributed source of knowledge is applied by the teaching practices that involve both individually forming testing and assignments, and socially derived knowledge such as with workshops and seminars. This variation leads to differentiation of tasks and task goals for the student as individual and the students as group. The course ends with a summative examination.