Handbook of psychology volume 7 educational psychology

Theoretical Advances

613

The increased integration of cognitive, self-regulatory, and

motivational research has led to ecologically valid interpreta-

tions of academic and classroom learning. The conclusion to

be drawn from this body of work is that it is not enough to be

behaviorally engaged in learning; students also must be cogni-

tively and motivationally engaged for deeper understanding

and learning to occur. We agree with both Pintrich and

McCormick (both in this volume), who suggest that future

researchers will increasingly identify key self-regulatory and

personal motivational constructs related to academic achieve-

ment and competencies. Future work will focus on how

metacognition, self-regulation, and motivation differ across

individuals, across tasks, and with the type of skill assessed.

Continued efforts will strive to clarify the domain specificity or

generality of such skills. Furthermore, because we know little

about how such processes change over the lifetime, there will

be an emphasis on developmental shifts in metacognition, self-

regulation, and motivation and how these processes emerge

in young children (see chapter by Schunk & Zimmerman in

this volume; Schunk & Zimmerman, 1997; and Zimmerman,

2000, for more specifics on such developmental progressions).

Studies also will be designed to assess how such processes are

exemplified in practical life tasks over time—for example,

how adults make choices to balance personal and professional

goals. Finally, continuing efforts to clarify the interrelation-

ships between these constructs and cognitive outcomes will

help determine the reciprocal contributions of academic suc-

cess, metacognitive awareness and regulation, motivational

intent, and personal goal setting.

Focus on Relational and Motivational

Processes in Schooling

Contemporary research on classroom learning has established

the importance of relational processes between children and

adults in predicting success and risk in school settings. In the

quest for understanding student learning and adjustment, so-

cially mediated goal structures and relationships that students

have while in school with other students and adults have taken

on new prominence. The inclusion of two chapters on these

issues (see chapters by Pianta, Hamre, & Stuhlman and by

Wentzel in this volume) is a sign of the vast literature that has

accumulated on these topics over the last decade.

Educational psychologists have demonstrated that child-

teacher relationships have a positive and reciprocal effect on

students’ learning, achievement, enjoyment, involvement,

and school engagement and on teachers’ sense of well-being,

efficacy, job satisfaction, and retention (Pianta, 1999). Work

on classroom relationships and teaching processes has been

strongly influenced by developmental systems theory

(Lerner, 1998). In this framework, student-adult and student-

student relationships are viewed as interrelated units func-

tioning reciprocally to motivate successful adaptation and

development (see chapter by Pianta, Hamre, & Stuhlman in

this volume). Students’ beliefs about relationships in school

are strongly associated with general feelings about the school

climate, which in turn contributes to greater trust in and use

of teachers and peers as sources of support. Teachers rated by

students as demonstrating greater care are more effective in

structuring and managing classroom processes and tend to set

higher goals for student performance (see chapter by Wentzel

in this volume). The implication of these findings is that pos-

itive student-teacher relations reciprocally influence class-

room expectations and behaviors. Exposure to positive adult

and peer interpersonal relationships also can motivate

achievement and coping in behaviorally at-risk students (see

chapter by Walker & Gresham in this volume). That such re-

lationships play a central role in overall school climate has

led some to suggest that teaching may require interpersonal

involvement at a level higher than that of most other profes-

sions (Calderhead, 1996).

Educational psychologists also have been at the forefront

in identifying what motivates and mediates individuals’ goals

for leaning and the classroom or school factors that support

and promote the expression of these personal attributes (see

chapter by Wentzel in this volume). Critical student attitudes

and beliefs and the fit between a student’s social goals and

those of teachers and peers are strongly related to social and

school adjustment. In the case of students who evidence se-

vere behavioral problems, it is now known that impaired

relations between students’ social goals and academic ac-

complishments may contribute to escalation of violence (see

chapter by Walker & Gresham in this volume). Moreover,

studies of socially adjusted versus less adjusted individuals

point to differences in their ability to set and achieve goals

that are sanctioned by the larger community as valuable

and desirable. Successful students have been described as

having socially integrative (helpfulness, sharing), learning

(persistence, intrinsic motivation, interest), and performance

(completing assignments, organization) characteristics (see

chapter by Wentzel in this volume). Students identified as

gifted are more likely to express these behaviors and also are

more likely to set goals that correspond to teacher objectives

(see chapter by Olszewski-Kubilius in this volume).

In the future, researchers will examine comprehensive the-

oretical models of school- and home-based relations to better

understand the links between social motivation, prosocial be-

havior, and academic performance. A broader array of social

goals related to school adjustment will be investigated be-

yond those associated with academic achievement. Individual

614

Future Perspectives in Educational Psychology

and contextual factors that affect students’ goal selection and

pursuit will be identified. Continued work will focus on how

multiple personal goals are negotiated and coordinated to

guide social as well as intellectual development (Wentzel,

1998). Although available data support the developmental

systems perspective of teacher-child relations, the means by

which such information is transmitted in schools must be

more clearly elaborated. Pianta, Hamre, and Stuhlman (this

volume) predict that such evaluations will require compre-

hensive means of assessing quality and types of relationships.

This process would involve in-depth analyses of mechanisms

that affect relational exchanges and relationships, with the

use of multiple methods, across multiple occasions and con-

texts, and over extended periods of time. Comprehensive

evaluations would allow researchers to map out under what

conditions certain motivational goals will become adaptive or

maladaptive (see chapter by Wentzel in this volume).

Finally, greater knowledge of the interdependence of

interpersonal relations, motivational systems, and personal

goals will be used to improve our ability to serve different

populations of students. Studies involving students with se-

vere learning and behavior difficulties will be designed to

determine whether family and community influences on

motivation and learning can be enhanced or positively modi-

fied by schooling experiences. Prevention efforts and inter-

ventions with at-risk students will be enhanced through a

greater understanding of how such constructs relate to in-

creased social competence and self-determination and con-

tribute to improved group approval and peer acceptance (see

chapters by Siegel and by Walker & Gresham in this volume).

Reschly (this volume) similarly predicts that the field of

school psychology will place more emphasis on early identi-

fication, which in turn will lead to mutually supportive home,

school and community interventions to enhance academic

achievement, prosocial behavior, and emotional regulation.

Attention to Gender

Educational psychologists interested in studying classroom

and instructional processes increasingly have stressed the im-

pact of gender in understanding motivation, cognition, and

interpersonal classroom processes. A growing number of

studies have identified specific curriculum content, class-

room interactions, and school climates that promote gender

equity (see chapter by Koch in this volume). Gender equity

in education refers to educational practices that are fair and

just toward both females and males. This work has led to

teacher training efforts designed to promote more equitable

classroom learning environments. Such training specifically

targets attitudinal changes through increased awareness and

knowledge of hidden curriculum and gender-differentiated

instruction.

Current researchers view uniform or one-size-fits-all re-

sponses to create equitable classroom climates as oversimpli-

fications. Instead, recent attempts to develop more equitable

environments are designed to uncover the needs and social is-

sues behind gendered behavior rather than simply to ensure

equal treatment. These approaches seek to level the playing

field by encouraging all children to be contributors to class

environments, which can lead to different (vs. similar) expe-

riential offerings for girls and boys. Future researchers will

continue to focus on what it means and how to best achieve

gender equity in daily classroom interactions and curriculum

choice considerations and how to best prepare teachers in

this area.

Significance of Early Childhood and

Developmental Research

Although much of the work in educational psychology has

focused on kindergarten through Grade 12, educational

psychologists have begun to play a larger role in studying

preschool learning and early childhood settings. This litera-

ture has helped to further illuminate the significance of the

birth-to-five period and the role of play in early literacy, mu-

sical, artistic, and mathematical skills and in affective and

social development (see chapter by Goelman et al. in this

volume). The increasing contributions of educational psy-

chology researchers in this area reinforced the decision to

include a chapter focused exclusively on early childhood in

this volume.

Educational researchers have increasingly sought to ex-

amine developmental progressions in many of the domains

reviewed here. For example, motivational researchers are

seeking to isolate the complex influence of the task, current

situational characteristics, past relational experiences, prior

beliefs, and ongoing beliefs that develop during a task (see

chapters by Pintrich; by Pianta, Hamre, & Stuhlman; and by

Wentzel in this volume). One general observation is that

there may not be a single developmental trajectory to explain

how certain abilities unfold. Different trajectories of devel-

opment may arise depending on individual and contextual

influences. These ideas were expressed by Goelman and his

colleagues (this volume), who distinguished between newer

map versus stage theories of development. In the former, in-

teractive developmental processes are studied by examining

a repertoire of skills over time to determine how a wide range

of expressions and representations develop depending on

Theoretical Advances

615

reciprocal individual and environmental factors. Examina-

tions of such developmental progressions also are prevalent

in the literature on early literacy and mathematics learning

(see chapters by Pressley and by Lehrer & Lesh, respectively,

in this volume).

Most authors, however, point to the clear need for more

extensive examinations of how key constructs develop over

time and are influenced by contextual factors. As McCombs

(this volume) points out, much more work is needed to inte-

grate concepts of learning and development with evolving

processes and theories of education and teaching. Instead of

proposing tight developmental sequences and stages, future

educational psychology researchers will need to examine a

range of different acquisition repertoires; this will entail work

directed beyond individual or group progressions to instead

look for continuums of diverse abilities and differential con-

texts that promote development. It also will require an even

greater emphasis on early childhood populations and a

commitment to studying key constructs across a wider range

of ages.

Advances in Neurobiology 

Contemporary neurobiological theories are poised to have a

substantial influence on theories of learning and cognition in

the future. Early studies that related basic laboratory proce-

dures (i.e., measures of glucose metabolism, speed of nerve

conduction) with formal psychometric tests or learning tasks

have been replaced with more sophisticated assessments of

brain functioning and neural processing and with complex

testing of cognitive and learning abilities (see chapter by

Sternberg in this volume). It may be that analogous research

with more sophisticated laboratory tools—like the early stud-

ies of brain-behavior relationships undertaken in the 1940s,

1950s, and 1960s to provide researchers with an understand-

ing of brain functioning and psychopathology—can provide

insights into learning and cognitive skills.

There also has been a strong emphasis on understanding

early neurobiological influences on development. Examina-

tions of such interactions were found in many educational ap-

plications reviewed here but most specifically in studies of

language and literacy development (Shaywitz, 1996). The

role of phonological awareness (i.e., the ability to segment

the speech stream into its constituent parts) in early literacy

acquisition is a good example of research that jointly empha-

sizes developmental and neurological processes (see chapters

by Goelman et al. and by Pressley in this volume). Motiva-

tional researchers have increasingly bridged biological, cog-

nitive, and affective constructs (see chapter by Pintrich in this

volume). We will continue to see even stronger ties between

ongoing theory building within a domain and the growing

knowledge base in genetics and neurobiology. Such integra-

tion will reduce competing notions of underlying biological,

cognitive, and emotional psychological processes and will

help to more precisely determine how these interact to affect

learning.

Impact of Technology

Educational psychologists increasingly have been involved in

investigations of learning and instruction within emerging

media and technology environments (see chapter by Goldman-

Segall & Maxwell in this volume). Contemporary research

has focused less on how individual cognition is affected by

technology and more on examining effects with technology.

New models of computer instruction view computers as flexi-

ble and student-directed versus static and expert-driven learn-

ing approaches. Prior advances in software technology that

originally stressed constructivist processes to make learning

and thinking processes more concrete have been broadened to

allow children to add animation to pictures, rotate graphics,

and link hypertext to audio and video information. Technolog-

ical and software advances now allow learning to occur on de-

mand with simulations, visualizations, and concept mapping.

Students can manipulate variables and instantly see results,

can participate in setting up dynamic interactive systems, and

can apply sophisticated data analysis tools. Each of these ad-

vances provides new avenues for researchers to investigate

how students design, construct, and understand complex sys-

tems and representations in mathematics and science.

Although investigations of individual learning benefits

with educational technology will continue, there are likely to

be fewer investigations of simple outcomes or isolated per-

son effects. Recent studies of computer learning are focused

on how students make sense of complex systems, how learn-

ing occurs during jointly constructed computer interactions,

and how teachers can mediate and expand the effects of

technology—especially regarding mathematical learning

(also see chapter by Lehrer & Lesh in this volume). New soft-

ware programs allow learners to explore problems in cooper-

ation with others and not just to concretize and experience

problems. It now is possible for users to engage in sophisti-

cated real-time data sharing processes whereby a variety of

learners contribute to and compare points of view and collab-

orate on gathering and constructing knowledge. Goldman-

Segall and Maxwell (this volume) review several ongoing

investigations in which learners across the nation and world

concurrently collect, communicate, and analyze data from

616

Future Perspectives in Educational Psychology

large-scale environmental projects. These programs are capa-

ble of tracking how communities of students make decisions

and open up a new methodology for exploring formative

learning.

Advances in software and technology will continue to

broaden our ability to investigate how students think and con-

struct knowledge individually and in collaboration with others

(Brown & Duguid, 2000). In the twenty-first century, these

advances are likely to enhance our ability to study distributed

and situated learning and subsequently our understanding of

learning with technology. Goldman-Segall and Maxwell (this

volume) have proposed a new perspectivity theory for study-

ing learning processes that occur when a community of minds

is engaged in real-life inquiry using computers. Within this

framework, computers are viewed as a partner in the learning

process and as a tool that encourages thinking in relationship

with others. In effect, synchronous telecommunication capa-

bilities that allow groups of learners to be networked for

collaborative inquiry may improve our knowledge of cooper-

ative partnerships in ways that were never before possible. By

stressing interpersonal relationships, these programs suggest a

move to blend studies of cognitive components with affective

components of online learning.

Individuals learning through new media contexts and en-

gaging in collective learning discussions will provide exciting

new means to study learning and cognition, self-regulation,

motivation, affect, and relationships across time, place, and

culture. Technology and media advances have the potential of

creating unique and previously unfathomable research oppor-

tunities in educational psychology as future researchers inves-

tigate new approaches, configurations, and environments for

studying learners and learning. Expanding on Papert’s (1980)

ideas, Goldman-Segall and Maxwell (this volume) suggest

that in the future we must develop learning environments that

encourage diverse styles of studying and understanding.

Value of Continuing Debates

Notwithstanding the remarkable advances observed across

the many domains reviewed here, clashes in theoretical para-

digms and differences in what constitutes evidence will con-

tinue to influence future research within the field. Several

examples clarify how such ongoing controversies are posi-

tive influences that have helped to broaden our knowledge

base and have led to new insights regarding relevant contexts

for learning and teaching.

Debates about the relative importance of mastery over per-

formance goals and other self-regulatory constructs have led

to the identification of alternative performance goals that dif-

ferentially affect student achievement. One such externalized

goal that focuses on a student’s desire to outperform others to

get higher grades has been found to contribute to higher lev-

els of academic performance. Researchers also have sought to

clarify debates concerning the domain or situational speci-

ficity of motivational constructs such as self-efficacy or con-

trol beliefs. Research motivated by such debates has led to

greater specificity of key motivational constructs and con-

structs of self related not only to generalized achievement but

also to motivation and self-regulatory activities, such as

choice, judgments of value, cognitive engagement, and task

persistence (see chapters by Pintrich and by Schunk & Zim-

merman in this volume). This work has important implica-

tions concerning qualifications for how to help students set

personal goals and for how to provide specific motivational

feedback that will promote both short- and long-term acade-

mic and social competencies. That individual beliefs, ex-

pectancies, and attributions can be changed through teacher

feedback is an especially exciting area of future research for

students exhibiting learning and behavioral dis-abilities (see

chapters by Siegel and by Walker & Gresham in this volume).

The controversy over the domain specificity or generaliz-

ability of cognitive abilities has led to studies that move be-

yond this simple dichotomy. Researchers have sought to

determine how learning and metacognitive processes emerge

initially within specific domains of knowledge and then ad-

vance to broader general abilities across domains (see chapter

by McCormick in this volume for further elaboration of these

issues). In the cooperative learning literature, there are contin-

uing debates as to what affects motivation for learning and how

incentives are employed to structure or influence learning (see

chapter by Slavin et al. in this volume). These debates have

contributed to studies that move beyond whether greater learn-

ing occurs with individual as well as collective learning goals.

Slavin et al. have called for more focused studies to determine

situations in which group goals and individual accountability

may not both be necessary. Such hypothesized occasions

might be when students are working collaboratively on higher

level cognitive tasks that lack a single right answer, those in

which students voluntarily join groups and are already strongly

motivated to perform, or in highly structured situations in

which learning is likely a result of simply participating. An-

other context in which individual accountability may not be as

essential is during communal learning groups composed of

homogeneous ethnic minority members who already demon-

strate high levels of interdependence functioning (Hurley,

1997).

There is a trend to move beyond proving simple di-

chotomies; research now seeks to examine multiple paths

between personal goal structures and various cognitive, self-

regulatory, and achievement outcomes (see chapters by