Social Cognition and Social Learning Theories of

Education and Technology

By Cassie Koch

Abstract

The social cognitive theory is derived from constructing meaning and knowledge from social i
cognitive theory, conducted an experiment to prove how social influences including the media
continually learning and constructing meaning throughout their whole life from communicatio
article provides an understanding of how the mind is influenced by social interactions and how

keywords: social learning, social cognition, social cognitive theory, Albert Bandura, sociocultural t

Social Cognition and Social Learning Theories of Edu

The mind is a mysterious science. Theorists are continually studying how the mind und
cognitive components of learning while others focus on behavioural influences. Theories are c
theory that draws on both cognitive and behaviour influences and benefits from technology is

The social cognitive theory thrives on the advancement of new technologies. “Social an
life events that become customary in the society. Indeed, many of the major changes in socia
. . . (Elder, 1981)” (Bandura, 1989, p. 5-6). Technology provides new and innovative method
technology is the ability to interact and observe others. “Human expectations, beliefs, emotio
modified by social influences that convey information and activate emotional reactions throug
p. 3). Students are constantly surrounded by social influences whether it’s a community influ
influence is still there. “Humans have evolved an advanced capacity for observational learning
rapidly through information conveyed by the rich variety of models” (Bandura, 2008, p. 96).
socially influence people’s learning or cognition.

Modeling is a major component of the social learning theory.

In social cognitive theory, learning from the effects of actions is a special case of obser
construct conceptions of behavior from observing the effects of their actions; in learnin
structure of the behavior being modeled. (Bandura, 1989, p. 46)

Learning from the effects of actions of others can directly influence ones choices.
 Any factor that influences choice behavior can profoundly affect the direction of person
in selected environments continue to promote certain competencies, values, and intere
inaugurating effect. (Bandura, 2001, p. 10-11)

Observing behaviors or the effects of one’s own actions are types of social learning. Social ps
influenced. “Social cognition has its roots in social psychology which attempts ‘to understand
individuals are influenced by the actual, imagined, or implied presence of others’ (Allport, 198
great push in how people act, but in order to understand how great the social influence is, we

Social psychologists confirm that learning is not obtained through independent factors; th
disembodied, immaterial entities that exist apart from neural events. Cognitive processes are
(Bandura, 2001, p. 4). This determinative influence is reciprocating, in that it is a bit of give a
determinism, where “a person’s behavior is both influenced by and is influencing a person’s p
Multiple factors are taken into account when studying social learning. One key component of
occurring around them. “People are self-developing, proactive, self-regulating, and self-reflec
environmental events or inner forces” (Bandura, 2008, p. 95). These inner thoughts are all sh
human.

People don’t model or copy every social influence they encounter; they determine which c
are key aspects of learning and socializing; they are what make people human. “The core fea
be human” (Bandura, 2001, p. 6). A major personal agency of the social cognitive theory is f
peoplemotivate themselves and guide their actions in anticipation of future events. When pro
forethoughtful perspective provides direction, coherence, and meaning to one's life” (Bandura
of action.

People anticipate the likely consequences of their prospective actions, they set goals fo
likely to produce desired outcomes. Through exercise of forethought, people motivate
1989, p. 39)

Forethought allows people to examine their actions and choose to act in favor of one course o

The other key personal agencies of the social cognitive theory are self-efficiency and self-r
student learning involve the processed of self-efficiency (can this be done; can I do it [. . .])
para. 5). The conative process accounts for these two principles, in which “[c]onation refers t
associated with the issue of ‘why’” (Huitt, 2006, para. 5). These two principles are choices stu
these influences are ever-changing with technology. “The rapid pace of informational, social,
efficacy for self-development and self-renewal throughout the life course” (Bandura, 2001, p.
provide incentives and drive the desire to learn in people. “Efficacy beliefs are the foundation
desired results and forestall detrimental ones by their actions, they have little incentive to ac
10). Social influences motivate people to meet standards set by society and achieve success.
hierarchy; that is, without belief in one’s ability to succeed, there will be little chance for learn
belief in success, people can strive to reach their goals. Bowers-Campbell quotes, Weiner (19
goal-directed, self-control of behavior, motivation, and cognition for academic tasks by an ind
efficiency are key components of the social cognitive theory. The components are formed from
driving students to be motivated to learn.

Albert Bandura created an experiment to show just how much children are influenced by s
of aggression is Albert Bandura’s bobo-doll experiment” (Boeree, 1999). To conduct the expe
children. “Nursery school boys and girls saw a film in which an adult male or female model as
‘play’ with the bobo doll without adult supervision” (Griffin, n.d., p. 372). The experimental d
violently influenced by a TV clip. “Since children in the control group didn’t normally say and
youngsters had acquired the new, aggressive behavior by watching the film” (Griffin, n.d., p.
already presumed. “Bandura concludes that reinforcement doesn’t affect the learning of nove
observationally acquired competencies will be put into use’” (Griffin, n.d., p. 373). Children w
through the media, which proves the effects of the media and social influences.

Social influences can create positive learning environments. One of the greatest social infl
practice,’ a term coined by Lave and Wenger, “is based on the premises that humans are soc
engagement in valued undertakings throughout their lives” (Kop & Hill, 2008, p. 6). From day
(1934/1986) described learning as being embedded within social events and occurring as a c
environment’ (p. 287)” (Scherba de Valenzuela, 2002, para. 1). These interactions are increa
the theories of Jean Piaget,

[K]nowledge is not simply transmitted from teacher to student, but actively constructed by th
make new ideas when they are actively engaged in making some type of external artifact [. .
Resnick, 1996 , p. 1)

Technology is a good medium for actively engaging students. Through technology, reflecting
have learned. “Constructing meaning comes from interacting with others to explain, defend, d
comprehend the ideas of others” (Sherman & Kurshan, 2005, p. 12). Social interactions creat
thoroughly comprehend.

Social learning has multiple benefits other then being able to construct meaning. Through
interaction. Vygotsky argues that a child’s development cannot be understood by a study of t
in which that individual life has developed” (Scherba de Valenzuela, 2002, para. 1). Using soc
and Schiefele (1998) found that academic peer-support was a crucial part of the learning pro
learning strategies” (Bowers-Campbell, 2008, p. 81). Modeling, along with other social activit
“Social activities allow students to express and develop their understandings with peers as th
examining and expanding their understandings” (Sherman & Kurshan, 2005, p. 12). Peer-sup
Cooperative learning groups have multiple benefits such as:

Achievement increases for all ability levels (high, medium, low); higher-level thinking process
critical thinking is promoted; more positive peer relationships result; students exhibit better s
a higher level of self-esteem can result (Brandt, 1987: 17). (Alansari, 2006, p. 267)

Social learning is key to creating higher-order thinking and with continual enhancement of te

Technology provides multiple windows for social interactions. “One increasingly common t
students and adults who collaborate on specific problems” (Sherman & Kurshan, 2005, p. 12)
occurs with students-to-students or even with students-to-professionals. “[One] can also faci
the fabric of teaching as intellectual tools that students use to study, learn, and communicate
locations” (Sherman & Kurshan, 2005, p. 12). The benefits of social interactions seem endles
complexity of information available on the Internet, new possibilities for people to communica
information streams” (Kop & Hill, 2008, p. 7). The improvement in communications increases
communications.

Communications through the use of technology create student centered, social learning en
may occur initially only whenever technology is used” (Matzen & Edmunds, 2007, p. 418). Th
adolescents of the Net Generation are ‘beyond basic communication, many students engage i
sizeable proportion of them are adventurous nonconformists who set the pace for their peers
communicating with peers online, especially through social networking sites. “Social networki
connect to other users, already engage incredible numbers of adolescents” (Bowers-Campbel
sites already, so to motivate students to learn, one could create a safe learning environment
confidence when they care about them as individuals; thus, a teacher’s Facebook profile may
concern in student learning in an arena where students are the ‘experts’” (Bowers-Campbell,
help with school assignments, so to create a group for them to exchange knowledge would in
group feature of Facebook renders it especially helpful in empowering students to take respon
p. 82). Facebook is only one site for social networking. With the continual advancement of th
networking is just one benefit of technology; another is video games.

Technologies have created many educational social games. “[Video games] are a central p
video games, children mobilize energies that many educators, parents, and researchers wish
4). To harness these energies, one could implement video games into the classroom or have
1996, p. 4). Games could be created, tested and discussed in a group setting or even online.
able to discuss and solve adventures together. “In a prototype Fifth Dimension system, a doz
of off-the-shelf computer games and game-like educational activities” (Brown & Cole, 2000, p
and collaborate to solve educational games.

A Cognitive Evaluation team comprised of both implementers and external evaluators docume
mathematical, and technical ability as well as gains in their abilities to follow written instructi
Cole, 2000,p. 208)

Social influences enhanced the learning of the children in this setting, and they enhance the l
settings.

One theory that draws on both cognitive and behavior influences and benefits from techno
Learning continually occurs through social interactions and influences from the community, m
will affect them based on their inner thoughts. Through social interactions learning will occur
opportunities for people to enhance their learning through social interactions online. Global n
group are a few resources to enhance social learning. Social learning is ever increasing with t
communications.

References

Alansari, E. M. (2006). Implementation of cooperative learning in the center for commu

University. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 46(2), 265-282.

Brown, K. & Cole, M. (2000). Socially shared cognitions: System design and the organ
(Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. 197-214). Mahwah, NJ: L
Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory. Annuals of child development. 6, 1-60.

Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of

Bandura, A. (2009). Social cognitive theory of mass communication. In J. Bryant & M.

Routledge.

Boeree, G. (1999). Social learning. Shippensburg, PA: Shippensburg University. Retrie

http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/socpsy.html

Bowers-Campbell, J. (2008). Cyber "Pokes": Motivational antidote for developmental c

74-87.

Griffin, E. Social learning theory of Albert Bandura. Chapter 31: A first look at commun

Huitt, W. (2006). Social cognition. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: V

http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/soccog/soccog.html.

Kafai, Y. B., & Resnick, M. (1996). Constructionism in practice: Designing, thinking, an

Associates.

Kop, R. & Hill, A. (2008). Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the
Learning, 9(3), 1-13.

Matzen, N. J. & Edmunds, J. A. (2007). Technology as a catalyst for change: The role o
in Education, 39(4), 417-430.

Scherba de Valenzuela, J. (2002). Sociocultural Theory. Albuquerque, NM: University o

http://www.unm.edu/%7Edevalenz/handouts/sociocult.html

Sherman, T. M. & Kurshan, B. L. (2005). Constructing learning: Using technology to su

Technology, 32(5), 10-39.