Gestalt theorists challenged behaviorists in the 1930s by proposing to look at the human as a synergistic organism that is more than just a sum of observable parts and behaviors and recognizing patterns rather than isolated events [23]. A critical differentiation between gestalt and behaviorist perspectives on learning is in the locus of control. Behaviorists argue that learning is in the environment, while gestalt theorists argue that learning is in the individual. Gestalt theory influenced the cognitive [2] and humanistic [6] theories that rivaled behaviorism in the mid-twentieth century.

Cognitive learning theory focuses on the internal workings of the brain to explain learning. While the behaviorist asserts that environmental stimuli produce behavior change in the individual, the cognitive theorist sees learning as an internal process for developing capacity and skills for growth [5]. People are not passive organisms programmed by external stimuli; they are rational beings who actively participate in learning, problem-solving and acting. Observable behaviors in the human organism are consequences of conscious thought and deliberate action, not passive programming.

Major cognitive learning theories include Piaget’s cognitive development theory and Bandura’s social-cognitive theory.

Assumptions

The key assumptions of cognitive learning theory are that

• the memory system actively organizes and processes information, and
• prior knowledge plays a key role in learning.

The instructor’s job applying a cognitive methodology is to structure the content of learning activities for teaching individuals how to learn, acquire social skills, and build individual intelligence, learning, and memory [4].

In child learning environments, the cognitive theory explores how to adapt teaching practices to meet the child’s development stage [2]. In adult learning environments, the cognitive theory explores how age affects adult cognition and how learning strategies can be adapted for developing individual needs [4].

Input-process-output

With the growing popularity of the computer in the 1960s, cognitive theorists adopted the input-process-output computer metaphor to explain how the mind creates meaning by gathering stimuli, processing memories, and retrieving information [5, 24]. However, from a cognitive psychology perspective, Hunt and Ellis [5] argued that relying entirely on a “thoroughly mechanistic” [5, p. 12] computer metaphor inhibits understanding of learning and humanity. Computers cannot feel, do not understand, and lack consciousness. “Since the computer is not a biological entity and humans are, many important issues about the human mind may resist computer modeling,” Hunt and Ellis say [5, p. 34].

Piaget’s cognitive-developmental theory

Jean Piaget’s ideas influenced a cognitive revolution in psychology by shifting the theoretical focus from programming behavior to studying how children come to know what they know.

Developmental stages

Influenced by both behaviorist and gestalt theory [4], Piaget [25, 26] proposed that children move through stages of distinctly different thinking patterns as their brains develop and their experience expands. Each developmental stage represents progressive and qualitative shifts in thinking, reorganization of understanding, and new mental tools for solving problems. Equilibrium is a crucial mechanism for developing through the stages by helping the child resolve cognitive conflicts by accommodating and assimilating to reality.

The child as a lone scientist

As an organismic thinker [14], Piaget [25] sees the child as an organism that acts on the world, not as a passive entity controlled by its environment. Children think differently from adults and develop best when they develop on their own at their own pace. The child is a lone scientist, discovering the world and applying developing reason to solving problems. Teaching nothing to a child is better than imposing learning before a child is ready [13].

Piaget’s proposal represented a dramatic shift from behaviorist theory, which attempted to accelerate child development with conditioning techniques. Piaget scoffed at Americans who frequently asked how to expedite a child’s development. Arguing that qualitative changes occur only when the child is ready, Piaget proposed a cognitive-developmental theory that “children actively construct knowledge as they manipulate and explore their world” [27].

Piaget’s cognitive-developmental theory showed that children actively learn and have minds with rich structures of knowledge. Not only had Piaget explored how children understand the physical world, but he had also investigated how children reason about their world. His stages influenced research on how children picture themselves, others, and relationships. Piaget’s theory acted as a catalyst for education programs that use discovery learning and active engagement with the environment [27].

Criticisms

Criticisms of Piaget’s theory include the following:

• Underestimates the abilities of learners [27].
• Misstates the effectiveness of adult involvement in child teaching [27].
• Fails to make room for social influences on learning [13].
• Misjudges the ages for his proposed developmental stages
• Does not consider the possibility of development after adulthood

Resurgence

Despite the criticisms, his theory of cognitive development is praised as “the most all-encompassing and systematic theory of human development to emerge” [13, p. 60]. Piaget’s theory dealt with how children change cognitive skills over time and develop intelligent thought processes. Piaget’s quest for how people actively construct knowledge laid the foundation for his big idea about how new cognitive abilities build from old cognitive abilities. Piaget leaves a legacy that children are active participants in learning, acting as solitary scientists exploring the world and using their developing cognitive skills to figure things out.

Bandura’s social cognitive theory

Albert Bandura [22] rejected mechanistic input-output models because he thought they limited development to external factors shaping and controlling a mindless human organism. He noted that the computer metaphor started to recognize the human as a cognitive organism. However, Bandura felt the computer metaphor “was still devoid of consciousness and agentic capabilities” [22, p. 2]. He asserted that “consciousness is the very substance of mental life that not only makes life personally manageable but worth living” [22, p. 3].

Cognition predicts behavior

Bandura theorized that cognitive factors accurately predict human behavior. Navigating the challenges of life requires that people “make good judgments about their capabilities, anticipate the probable effects of different events and courses of action, size up socio-structural opportunities and constraints, and regulate their behavior accordingly” [22, p. 3].

Bandura’s belief system serves as a model of the world that helps the individual work towards desired outcomes while avoiding punishing consequences. Human survival and progress depend on “forethoughtful, generative, and reflective capabilities” [22, p. 3]. Bandura’s observations are important because they lead to social cognitive theory. This well-supported theory focuses on the social context of behavior and learning [14]. Social learning theory states that people learn by watching others in a social setting. People will follow the behaviors they think will lead to favorable outcomes. At the same time, they avoid behaviors they think may lead to punishing consequences [14].

Recriprocal determinism

Bandura [28] represents behavior as a function of the person and the environment. Called “reciprocal determinism,” this interaction among person, behavior, and environment demonstrates how the world and the person cause each other.

In contrast, the behaviorist perspective asserts that the environment causes the person’s behavior. Bandura focused on the cognitive processes involved in observing, saying the conditions necessary for learning include the processes of attention, retention, motor production, and motivation [22, 14, 4].

Applications of cognitive learning theory

Contrary to the behaviorist assumption that learning is a response to external factors, cognitive theorists argue that learning is an internal process for developing capacity and skills for growth. The instructor applying cognitive methods structures the content of learning activities to teach individuals how to learn, acquire social skills, and build individual intelligence, learning, and memory (Merriam, Caffarella, & Baumgartner, 2007). Instructional practice under the cognitive framework focuses on the following [2]

• Influencing instructional variables on learner cognition.
• How learners construct knowledge.
• How individual differences influence learning.
• How motivational variables influence performance.

Applications of cognitive learning theory include discovery learning, mastery learning, inquiry teaching, and Instructional Quality Profile [2], summarized below.

• Discovery learning. In discovery learning, the teacher creates an environment and provides a process through which the students can use inductive reasoning to solve problems.
• Mastery learning. In mastery learning, the teacher creates an environment through which students can demonstrate high achievement by defining mastery, planning for mastery, teaching for mastery, and grading for mastery. The most visible element of mastery learning is the A-B-C-D-F grading system commonly used in elementary, secondary, and higher education. Inquiry teaching uses the Socratic teaching method to have students reason, discover principles, and apply learning to new situations.
• Inquiry teaching. Inquiry teaching proves useful for intelligent computer-assisted instruction (CAI) systems that use rule-generated questions to help students develop principles and apply learning to solve problems.
• Instructional Quality Profile. The Instructional Quality Profile (IQP) is a model that measures instruction against instructional objectives and tests to determine the effectiveness and efficiency of teaching methods for promoting student performance. 

Research shows that teachers can positively influence student learning by using cognitive planning in instructional design [2]. Effective instructional models that use cognitive theory focus on the following practices:

• Establish learning goals.
• Explain and demonstrate concepts.
• Monitor student-guided practice.
• Have students practice independently.
• Evaluate materials.
• Providing feedback.