Winn, W. (2003). Learning in artificial environments: Embodiment, embeddedness, and dynamic adaptation. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 1(1), 87-114.
Winn (2003) explains computational cognitive learning theory should not be dismissed over constructivism. Computational cognitive learning theory has continued to focus on cognition and learning. Current research links neural networks to mental representations, the computational analogy is useful to describe system behaviour, and the theory does not neglect biological adaptation. Winn proposes a framework for learning in e-environments; it emphasizes that our bodies externalize our brain activity by connecting cognition to the environment, we use our bodies to solve problems, and there is an interdependence between cognition and the environment. Importantly, Winn (2003) emphasizes that:
- our cognition works within our physiological constraints: although technology can be helpful in expanding our perception, incomplete understandings or the medium used can introduce misconceptions. The symbolic system or distortion/simplification of a concept can lead to different understandings
- embedded learning involves interaction with the learning landscape (umwelt): when students are learning, they are exploring what they already understand and discovering how these understandings connect/do not connect with new “views”. Challenge, curiousity, and fantasy are strategies to facilitate learning.
- learning involves physical, cognitive, and social development; at least conceptual change at the short term level
Niebert, K., Marsch, S., & Treagust, D. F. (2012). Understanding needs embodiment: A theory‐guided reanalysis of the role of metaphors and analogies in understanding science. Science Education, 96(5), 849-877. doi: 10.1002/sce.21026
Niebert et al (2012) comment on the role and quality of metaphors and analogies. Metaphors and analogies can help map a source schema to a target concept. Ideally, students should be able to develop embodiment with metaphors and analogies by experience. However, with abstract concepts, students must develop their imagination. Embodied metaphors are better than constructed metaphors because the latter requires students to re-construct their teacher’s metaphor. The differences here can lead to alternate conceptions and poor understanding. The students may completely reject the metaphor. In the examples given, metaphors can fail when the source schema is not embodied. Uncommon experiences, artificial experiences, lack of experience, and the differences between academic and colloquial language are all potential reasons why a metaphor may fail. In contrast, a good metaphor enables experience in the target domain, refers and reflects the embodied source.
I particularly liked the breaking a chocolate bar and cell division task. It was helpful in addressing the misconception that organisms grow through cell division only. After breaking the bar, students would realize that the bar isn’t any bigger and division makes smaller pieces. From this apparent discrepancy, students reach the conclusion that cell division also requires cell growth.
Adamo-Villani, N. & Wilbur, R. (2007). An immersive game for k-5 math and science. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference Information Visualization, 921-924. doi: 10.1109/IV.2007.23
The VR game in this article highlights how this medium supports embodied learning. Given the use of a headset that forces uses to see only what’s in the game and tools to pick up hand movements, user experience is set within the game. SMILE also included commercial game elements which helps with motivation and engagement. In the game, the learning that users experience is self paced, allows repetition, and helps players see and feel in concrete terms.
Questions for Further Discussion
- Have you used embodied learning in your class before? If yes, what did it look like? If no, do you see yourself using it in the future?
- Do you have any specific go-to metaphors when you’re teaching? If you could not use this metaphor, how would you teach the same concept?
- How do you envision VR being used in the future of the subject you teach? What are the challenges and opportunities with this?