Online Issues

Journal Vol 48 (2)

Training in the Laboratory Animal Science Community: Strategies to Support Adult Learning

Jackie Dobrovolny, James Stevens, and Leticia V. Medina

Jackie Dobrovolny, Ph.D., is a lecturer at the University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center (UCDHSC), and an independent consultant. James Stevens, D.V.M., Ph.D., is an Institutional Veterinarian, Associate Director for Veterinary Programs Office of Laboratory Animal Resources, and Professor, Department of Pathology at UCDHSC. Leticia V. Medina, D.V.M., DACLAM, is Manager, Animal Welfare and Compliance, Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, IL.

Address correspondence to Dr. Jackie Dobrovolny, 12281 E. Villanova Drive, Aurora, CO 80014, or email Jdoffice1@comcast.net.

Abstract

The essence of learning is change; learning is the process by which learners customize new information to make it personally meaningful and relevant. Training is the process of helping students make those changes. Research indicates that adults learn differently than children or adolescents and that adults consistently use the following six learning strategies: prior experiences; conversations; metacognition; reflection; authentic experiences; and images, pictures, or other types of visuals. Each of these learning strategies can be combined with the other strategies and often build upon each other. A recent study on how health care professionals learn indicated that the learning strategy they used most often was reflection, which supports learning before, during, and after training. Numerous examples are provided in this article describing how to integrate each of the six adult learning strategies into laboratory animal science training. While lectures and other types of direct instruction are appropriate, they are inadequate and ineffective unless they are integrated with and support adult learning strategies. Both the US Department of Agriculture regulations and the Public Health Service Policy mandate that research institutions must ensure that all personnel involved in animal care, treatment, or use are qualified to perform their duties. Applying adult learning strategies to training for the laboratory animal science community will enhance learning and improve both the science and the humane care of the animals, which is a goal our community must continuously strive to achieve.

Key Words: adult; animal; laboratory; learning; science; teaching; training

Introduction

What is "learning?" Is it a noun or is it a verb? Is it a state or a process? The essence of learning is change. Learning is the ability to adapt to new information (Stolovitch and Keeps 2002, p. 173), and this process of adaptation is a process of customizing or personalizing new information; it is the process of making new information relevant and/or meaningful (Anderson and Thomas 1992; Fosnot 1996; Roth 1997).

Learning is not acquiring knowledge (Duffy and Cunningham 1996; Winn et al. 1996), and the role of trainers and instructors is not merely to transmit information. "Information is inert" (Stolovitch and Keeps 2002, p. 173). It is valuable only when learners personalize it to their unique prior experiences, current needs, and future use. Thus, the role of trainers and instructors is to help learners change—to help learners personalize new information.

Is adult learning any different than how children or adolescents learn? How has your learning changed since you were in high school?

Serious investigations into the uniqueness of how adults learn began in 1926 with the founding of the American Association for Adult Education and the publication of The Meaning of Adult Education (Lindeman 1926). A major focus of both the organization and the book was identifying the differences between how children and adults learn (Knowles et al. 1998).

Adults are "more self-directed, self-reflective, and able to change perspectives than children or adolescents" (Pascual-Leone and Irwin 1998, p. 36). Adults typically perceive learning as a goal, whereas children typically perceive learning as an activity (Bereiter and Scardamalia 1989). Additionally, the development process of becoming an adult is the process of accumulating experiences and increasing our skills, knowledge, and abilities, all of which have an impact on our learning.

"The accumulation of experience, the nature of that experience, the developmental issues adults address, how the notions of development and experience relate to learning, and how aging affects our memory and the more general neurological basis for learning—all of these differentiate adult learners from children" (Merriam and Caffarella 1999, p. 392).

Adult Learning Strategies

Given that learning is the process of personalizing new information and given that adults learn differently than children, what are the main learning strategies adults use to make new information personally meaningful? Research indicates (see specific references below) that adults consistently use the following six learning strategies: (1) prior experiences; (2) conversations; (3) metacognition; (4) reflection; (5) authentic experiences; and (6) images, pictures, or other types of visuals. It is important to note that these six learning strategies are typically combined by adult learners and that the strategies build upon each other. In other words, these six learning strategies are interrelated and integrated into the learning process by individual learners. It is also important to note that adults use these six learning strategies in a variety of instructional contexts (e.g., lectures, hands-on training, self-directed reading, professional development, personal development, or online instruction). Finally, learners, not trainers, implement these six learning strategies. Learning is the process of personalizing new information. Training is the process of helping students make those connections (Morrison et al. 2001; Stolovitch and Keeps 2002) and while training may include lectures or other types of direct instruction, to be effective and truly help students personalize new information, training must also include support for the six learning strategies adults consistently use.

Learning Strategy #1: Prior Experiences

Research indicates that there is a strong relationship between prior experience and performance (Clark and Lyons 2004; Dewey 1938; Jonassen and Grabowski 1993; Knowles et al. 1998; Kolb 1984; Merriam and Caffarella 1999; Mezirow 1995). Prior experiences are the foundation on which adult learners construct new information (Bereiter and Scardamalia 1989; Merriam and Caffarella 1999; Mezirow 1995; Pillay 1998) and the baseline against which learners compare and contrast new information.

Drawing on the "rich emotional associations" of the prior experiences of adult learners is a powerful instructional strategy (Sutherland 1997). In other words, effective adult instruction takes advantage of the relevant prior experience and knowledge brought to the learning activity by the learners. The word "relevant" is important in this discussion because if the learner's prior experience and knowledge are consistent with the new information, then learning is supported. However, if the learner's prior experience and knowledge are inconsistent with the new information, then learning is inhibited (Merriam and Caffarella 1999). "If the (new) information is incongruous with preexisting knowledge, then one's perception takes precedence and actually interferes with the acquisition of accurate information" (Jonassen and Grabowski 1993, p. 421). This phenomenon has been demonstrated across both cognitive and affective domains and across age, content, and instructional media (Jonassen and Grabowski 1993). Sometimes, this phenomenon is manifested as one or more misconceptions, based on prior experience, which students fiercely hold onto while simultaneously recognizing that their beliefs are incongruent with the data, evidence, or scientific research (Evans and Feeney 2003; Evans et al. 2005).

Two major differences between experts and novices are the amount of prior experience and knowledge they possess and how they package that information. Experts not only have significantly more prior experiences and knowledge than novices, but they also chunk and link that information more efficiently than novices (Clark 1998). Trainers are often subject matter experts and while their wealth of prior experiences is valuable, they can also be a handicap because experts often deliver large amounts of information quickly, which overloads novices (Clark 1998). Additionally, expertise usually develops through "procedural knowledge" (i.e., practice and authentic experiences). When experts deliver training, however, they often focus on their "declarative knowledge," which is naming, explaining, and discussing information. In other words, experts become experts through procedural knowledge but often train using their declarative knowledge (Stolovitch and Keeps 2002).

The novice-expert research indicates that expertise is domain specific (Clark 1998), that is, "being an expert in one area does not necessarily translate into being an expert in another . . . " (Merriam and Caffarella 1999, p. 207). Research also indicates that "experts had better memories for items in their area of expertise but not for items in general" (Bruer 1993, p. 15). Thus, "in helping adults connect their current experience to their prior knowledge and experience, we need to be knowledgeable about the amount of prior knowledge they possess in a particular area and design our learning activities accordingly" (Merriam and Caffarella 1999, p. 207).

That is not to say that instructors and trainers must completely understand all of the prior experiences of their learners. Rather, instructors and trainers should help learners make connections between new information and prior experiences but ultimately "learners must make those connections actively themselves in order for them to be learned" (Grabowski 1996, p. 914).

Examples: How to Use the Prior Experiences of Students to Enhance Laboratory Animal Science Training

Trainer queries. We believe that one effective strategy for a laboratory animal science trainer is to start a course by asking students to discuss any prior experiences they might have had with the topic of the course. This discussion allows the trainer to customize examples or cases to the prior experiences of the students in the class, and this "customization" of the training helps learners personalize the information, which in turn helps them to learn the information. These prior experience discussions can be in small groups, which then report out to the whole group, or for smaller classes, the discussion can be conducted with the whole group. For large classes, even a show of hands can help both the trainer and the students make connections between the content of the course and the prior experiences of the students in the course. For example, if the course focuses on cancer research, the trainer may ask for a show of hands. "Have any of you had a pet with cancer?" "Have any of you known a person with cancer?" "Does anyone want to volunteer to tell us about their experience?" The answers to these questions help establish the widespread nature of cancer within the pet and human populations. Additionally, students who have prior experiences (i.e., personal experiences, with the often-devastating effects of cancer) typically appreciate the importance of cancer research and can communicate this importance to students who have not had a personal experience with this disease.

Another strategy is to query students in a course each time a trainer introduces a new topic. For example, a trainer might start a course with a short discussion about students' prior experiences with the general topic of the course. As the trainer introduces each specific topic in the course, he or she might ask for a show of hands and perhaps lead a brief discussion about relevant prior experiences.

Comparisons and contrasts. Relevant prior experiences may or may not translate into educational degrees. A student with a 2-year degree in veterinary technology may have more prior experience handling a variety of animal species than a student with a Ph.D. in animal behavior. The important objective for the trainer is to determine what experiences students have had in the past that give them a base from which to compare and contrast (i.e., personalize) the new information.

Similarly, if students have advanced degrees and/or relevant prior experiences, they may struggle if the new information conflicts with or is incongruent with their previous experiences. When students' prior experiences interfere with the learning of new information, the role of the trainer becomes helping students compare and contrast their prior experiences with the new information. In other words, the role of the trainer is to help students overtly contrast their conceptions with the new information (Jonassen and Grabowski 1993). For example, if a trainer conducts a prior experience discussion at the beginning of a course and finds that some students have prior experiences with laboratory animals that are inconsistent or conflict with the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (Guide¹) (NRC 1996), the trainer needs to ensure that these students have time to discuss the differences between their prior experiences and the new behaviors they are expected to adopt. It is important to note that neither listening to a lecture nor reading a text will change the conceptions, or misconceptions, of these students (Jonassen and Grabowski 1993). Rather, the trainer needs to conduct one or more discussions with these students, focusing on the specific differences between their prior experiences and, in this case, the Guide.

Levels of experience. Although it might be desirable to have separate classes for novices and experienced students, this arrangement is not always practical or necessary. For classes in which relevant prior experiences range from "very little" to "a lot," a trainer can group students, either teaming novices with experts or keeping the novices together and separate from the experts. For separate experience groups, a trainer might have different activities to perform or different cases to solve. For example, if a trainer is delivering a course to all of the different types of people who are going to work with laboratory rodents on a cancer research study, he or she may have two sets of case studies, one for novices and one for experts. These two different levels of case studies address the same topic, such as the institutional guidelines on humane endpoints for cancer studies, how to assess rodents for clinical signs of cancer progression, how to provide appropriate nursing care, how to promptly report health concerns to the veterinary staff, and procedures for humane euthanasia. The difference between the two levels of cases is the amount of complexity.

For classes in which novices and experienced students work together, the trainer can set up mentoring activities in which the experienced students help instruct the novices to learn a procedure or role play a discussion. In these mixed experience groups, it is important to acknowledge the diversity of the experience and, if nothing else, encourage the experienced students to talk about their prior experiences with the content. Their stories and cases can become valuable instruction for the novices.

Learning Strategy #2: Conversations

As adults, we learn not only by ourselves, as individuals, but also with others. We learn through discussions with colleagues, friends, and family (Boudourides 2003; Cobb and Bowers 1999; Grabinger 1996; John-Steiner and Mahn 1996; Salomon and Perkins 1996; Solomon 2000). We personalize new information by talking with others, analyzing problems together, identifying solutions together, and meeting goals together. We also learn by listening to and telling stories. Narration and story telling are "repositories of accumulated wisdom" (Brown and Duguid 1991, p. 45) that help us diagnose problems. Story telling also functions as a strategy for linking prior experiences to new information (Brown and Duguid 1991).

Conversations facilitate learning by helping novices enter an established community of practice and become experts themselves (Lave 1991; also see Learning Strategy #5: Authentic Experiences below for more information on communities of practice). In some corporate teams, learning is a participative process in which the team members learn a set of "collective skills . . . many of which cannot be reduced to the skills of any one individual but have to do with the way they work together" (Salomon and Perkins 1998, p. 18). These teams may use collaboration, narration, and improvisation to transform information into corporate knowledge (Brown and Duguid 1991, 2000).

Conversations also help learners personalize new information before, during, and after training. Before training, learners may discuss the training with colleagues who have previously attended the training or with their supervisor to determine how the training fits into their current responsibilities. "Research suggests that learners who are prepped by their supervisors on why they are attending a training session and what the expectations are for them upon their return are more likely to be motivated to learn from the training and to apply it afterward" (Stolovitch and Keeps 2002, p. 166). Some supervisors collaborate with their employees before the training event to create a contract, describing what each of them will do to maximize the results of training (Broad and Newstrom 1992; Wick et al. 2006).

Conversations during training may be discussions within a training activity, during breaks, or as part of other social conversations. Conversations after training may be discussions about the training with colleagues, supervisors, clients, or other students from the course. Whenever they occur, conversations help adult learners personalize new information.

Examples: How to Use Conversations to Enhance Laboratory Animal Science Training

Class discussions. There are numerous opportunities to use conversations as a mode of learning in laboratory animal science. The most common opportunity is to include discussions during training. Many of the examples in this article include different types of these in-class discussions.

Outside discussions. A great deal of instruction can, however, be provided through discussions outside the formal classroom, which is certainly not the only place where learning occurs. For example, learning through discussions can occur during journal clubs, laboratory meetings, "research in progress" discussion groups, and coffee and lunch breaks. Learning through discussions can occur by bringing together the "care" and "use" components of the animal care and use program and having research investigators discuss their animal-facilitated research with the animal caregivers during informal luncheon or "brown bag" meetings. To facilitate learning, these meetings should be informal conversations in small groups in which participants can exchange information, experiences, and stories and can work together to solve problems, answer questions, and improve the overall effectiveness of their team.

Informal team discussions not only help participants personalize the information but also help them develop collaborative skills wherein the animal care personnel know they have joined as key members of the research team and the researcher gains a better understanding, appreciation for, and communication base with the animal caregivers. If these discussions (i.e., informal learning events) occur periodically throughout the research study, each member of the team has numerous opportunities to learn new skills and knowledge as the study progresses, and the team as a whole has numerous opportunities to learn and practice collaboration skills. In other words, these informal team discussions can create a community of practice (see Authentic Experiences below for more information about communities of practice).

Learning Strategy #3: Metacognition

Metacognition is the process of self-monitoring (i.e., self- assessment and self-correction) (Grabinger 1996; Schraw 1998). It is the process of regulating and modifying our cognitive activity (Von Wright 1992), planning and selecting learning strategies, monitoring the progress of learning, correcting errors, and changing learning strategies when necessary (Ridley et al. 1992; Schraw 1998). Metacognition includes descriptions of "how I learn," correcting errors I make in my own thinking, answering self-check questions, and rereading instructional information.

Two quintessential metacognitive statements are, "I got it!" or the reverse of that statement, "I'm lost." In a study investigating how adults learn from self-paced, technology-based corporate training, one of us (Dobrovolny 2003b, 2006) found that adult learners used metacognition more frequently than any of the other five learning strategies (Table 1). Dobrovolny's study also indicated that adult learners assessed their knowledge not only using the self-check questions, simulations, and practice exercises in the courses they took but also creating their own internal self-assessments. Additionally, they assessed their understanding by comparing their prior experiences with examples in their courses, looking for similarities and differences. If their self-assessment was positive (i.e., "I understand"), they continued to read and reflect on the usefulness, relevancy, and big picture of the course content. If the participants' self-assessment was negative (i.e., "I'm confused"), they often reviewed parts of the course and tried to resolve their confusion by (1) comparing the instruction to their prior experiences, (2) reflecting on the personal usefulness of the instruction, and (3) looking for familiar terminology.

Metacognition, like conversations, can occur before, during, and after the training experience. Before training, learners are typically novices so their metacognition focuses on the gaps in their skills or knowledge and questions they have about the content and how they will use it. During and after training, learners continually assess their understanding of the new information and their ability to apply (i.e., personalize) that new information. While students generally do not like tests, adult learners generally do like self-checks and other ungraded opportunities to measure their learning progress (Dobrovolny 2003b).

Examples: How to Design Metacognitive Training Strategies to Enhance Laboratory Animal Science Training

Standard operating procedures (SOPS¹). One way to support self-assessment in the laboratory animal science environment is to provide trainees with a written SOP for a specific husbandry task, such as changing a rack of dirty rodent cages. After reading the SOP and discussing it with other learners, the trainees take a quiz (self-check) to assess their understanding of the core material. Trainees may take the quiz individually or may complete the quiz as part of a group exercise (i.e., conversation).

Checklists. Next, the trainees receive a checklist and watch an expert perform the procedure, checking off each task as the expert performs it. The trainer then conducts a discussion about the procedure, giving students an opportunity to ask questions and see the expert perform all or part of the procedure again.

Performance. The third step is for the trainees to use the checklist to perform the procedure with an experienced worker (i.e., the trainer or their supervisor) who helps them assess their performance and correct any misunderstandings or areas of confusion. Finally, the trainee performs the procedure "solo," using the checklist as a job aid.

The goal of all metacognitive activities is for students to be able to say, "I got it!" One of the most effective ways to ensure that students reach this point is to provide numerous opportunities to self-assess and self-correct.

Learning Strategy #4: Reflection

Metacognition is a management process in which learners take control of their learning and modify their cognitive activities (Grabinger 1996). Reflection, by comparison, is thinking about the implications and consequences of applying the instruction (Von Wright 1992). It is an interpretative process of abstracting meaning in an effort to understand reality (Boud et al. 1985; Jonassen and Reeves 1996) and to make sense of our experiences (Cyboran 2005; Mezirow 1993). Reflection enables learners to generalize across experiences (Fosnot 1996; Foshay et al. 2003) and to envision the "big picture" within which they will use the new information (Dobrovolny 2003a, 2006; Foshay et al. 2003).

Reflection, like metacognition and conversations, occurs before, during, and after a training experience, as learners personalize the new information (Dobrovolny 2006; Dobrovolny J, Rotach B, Jedd S, Bradley-Springer L, manuscript in preparation). Before the training, learners may reflect on their expectations of the course, skills they hope to learn, goals they hope to meet, and/or problems they hope to resolve. Some instructional designers recommend facilitating pretraining reflection by sending out information before the training, which answers the question many students ask: "What's in it for me?" (Stolovitch and Keeps 2002; Wick et al. 2006).

During training, adult learners often reflect on how new information applies to their past, their present, and their future. They compare the new information with their prior experiences, often as part of their metacognition, with the present and how the new information applies to their current job responsibilities, and with the future and how the new information might apply to new responsibilities (Dobrovolny 2003a, 2006).

After a training experience, adult learners often reflect on how something in the course relates to a current experience (Boud et al. 1985). The training experience is now a prior experience, and learners often compare current experiences with what they learned in training. If there is a disconnect or incongruity between the learner's current experience and what he or she learned in training, then typically, the learner engages in a metacognitive process, trying to resolve the discrepancy (Dobrovolny 2003a).

In a study on how health care professionals learn from a combination of lectures and clinic observations, Dobrovolny and colleagues (Dobrovolny J, Rotach B, Jedd S, Bradley-Springer L, manuscript in preparation) found that reflection was the most prevalent adult learning strategy (Table 2). Reflection in this study included the following:

Learners consider how they will use their new knowledge and skills in the future.
Learners mentally review their training experience or review the training handouts, books, and/or brochures.
Learners assess the degree to which they are comfortable with the new information.
Learners visualize something related to training (e.g., a discussion with a patient or colleague that occurred during training).
Learners assess the value of the training they received or the information they learned.
Learners consider their new knowledge and/or skills in terms of its impact on their professional health care philosophy.
Learners assess the degree to which management supports or encourages them to use their new knowledge and skills.
Learners elaborate on or consider the implications of applying their new knowledge and skills to (a) patients; (b) policies of the organization for whom they work and/or other health care organizations; (c) medications and testing; (d) clinics; (e) health care professionals; (f) disease prevention and education; and (g) epidemiology (causes, distribution, and control of disease in specific populations).

In Table 2, the frequency with which the health care professionals used each of the six adult learning strategies is shown. As can be seen, reflection was the learning strategy these learners used nearly half the time. As described below, there are a number of ways to use reflections as a learning strategy before, during, and after laboratory animal research training.

Examples: How to Design Reflection Strategies That Enhance Laboratory Animal Science Training

Pretraining reflection. Before training, the trainer may send out a few questions to help the trainees reflect on their prior experiences and what they hope to learn from the training. For example, before a management course, the trainer may ask students to come to the course prepared to describe a difficult employee relations situation they have experienced and their assessment of their performance in that situation. Another pretraining reflection activity is to send students a short case, some questions about that case, and a note that the trainer will ask students to discuss those questions as part of the course.

Small group discussions. During a course, reflective questions can be used as part of small group discussions. For example, in a surgical training class, students might work in groups of three or four to list and describe possible complications that could be encountered during a surgical procedure. Each group reports out to the whole class and the trainer keeps a "master list" on a flip chart or white board. This master list will contain ideas such as problems with anesthesia, infections, or excess bleeding. The trainer can then use this master list as a starting point for another round of small group discussions in which students generate ideas about how to avoid surgical complications. This second "master list" will contain ideas about using sterile equipment and technique, monitoring the anesthetic depth of the patient, and how to achieve hemostasis with ligation of vessels or cautery.

Another reflective activity, done as a small group discussion, is for the trainer to provide several scenarios about animals whose health is on the decline. For example, one scenario might be about an animal who has an elevated temperature, pale mucous membranes, and rapid heartbeat. Students discuss the scenario and generate a list of possible causes of these conditions and what might be done to diagnose and treat the animal. These different scenarios cover a wide variety of health problems, including animals who are not ill but have some deceptive symptoms, animals who are just beginning to show signs of ill health, and animals who have serious illnesses.

Course completion. At the end of a course, the trainer can use four or five reflection questions to encourage students to think about what they learned and how they can use it. This technique provides benefits to both students and trainers when students turn in their answers, perhaps anonymously, to the trainer. For students, giving them 4 to 5 minutes to quietly reflect on the course gives them the opportunity to assess their learning and consider how they can use their new knowledge and skills in the future. For trainers, reading how students answered the reflection questions provides valuable feedback about the effectiveness of the course activities. Table 3 provides a list of possible questions trainers might use at the end of a course.

Later reflection. Post-course reflection questions are also a valuable strategy several weeks or months after students complete the course. These surveys help students focus on what they learned in the course and the degree to which they are applying what they learned. Completing a post-training survey may also encourage students to review the course materials as part of their metacognition and, obviously, the post-course data can help trainers assess the course and make decisions about revisions.

Learning Strategy #5: Authentic Experiences

Authentic experiences are opportunities for learners to personalize new information by practicing their new skills and knowledge. It is not enough, however, for learners to merely have opportunities to practice because learning does not occur in a vacuum; it is always situated within a context. For example, school activity is often not authentic because it is taught in the school culture yet the content will be used by students in another culture such as the veterinary clinic or the research laboratory (Henning 2004). Thus, learning is "in part, a product of the activity, context, and culture in which it is developed and used" (Brown et al. 1989, p. 32). In fact, "situations might be said to co-produce knowledge through activity" (Brown et al. 1989, p. 32) Even when we are learning alone (e.g., reading a technical manual), we are still learning within a sociocultural system. For example, the technical manual is for use with a specific product, in a specific way, within a specific organization. Henning notes that in the corporate world, learning ". . . is very much situated in a particular industry and the cultural and technical practices of a particular firm" (Henning 2004, p. 163).

Because both knowledge and learning are situated, or embedded, in context (Brown et al. 1989), we cannot separate the learning process from the context or situation. Effective instruction must therefore be embedded in realistic or authentic settings. These authentic settings are typically social settings and learning can be described as a process of entering and participating in a community or network of practice. Communities of practice are typically small groups of people working on the same or similar projects (Brown and Duguid 1991). Networks of practice consist of people who share specific knowledge and practices but do not necessarily know each other (Brown and Duguid 2000).

Two instructional design strategies based on this "situated cognition" philosophy are cognitive apprenticeship and problem-based learning. The following paragraphs briefly describe these two models, both of which provide learners with authentic experiences, which are what novices lack the most (Jonassen 1999).

Cognitive Apprenticeships

Cognitive apprenticeships create authentic experiences for learners by pairing them with an expert (Collins et al. 1991; Wilson and Cole 1996). The goal of a cognitive apprenticeship is to "enculturate students into authentic practices through activity and social interaction in a way similar to . . . craft apprenticeship" (Brown et al. 1989, p. 37). In other words, in a cognitive apprenticeship, an expert demonstrates a procedure and then assists one or more novices as they attempt to learn that procedure. The context for a cognitive apprenticeship is an authentic setting; experts are demonstrating a procedure they have mastered and students are learning to perform that procedure by personalizing the new information as they practice and improve their skills. There are six steps in the cognitive apprenticeship model (Collins et al. 1991; Dennen 2004):

Modeling: Experts demonstrate and explain a process or activity to learners.
Coaching: Learners attempt the process or activity and experts provide feedback, hints, reminders, and more modeling.
Scaffolding: Experts provide job aids, assistance, and "fading," which is the gradual removal of supports.
Articulation: Learners describe their knowledge, reasoning, and problem-solving processes to an expert, who provides feedback and suggestions.
Reflection: Learners compare their performance with experts and other learners.
Exploration: Learners pose and solve their own problems. Experts may also pose problems for learners to solve.

The cognitive apprenticeship model has been used in numerous adult training settings such as meteorology (Lamos 1993) and engineering, medicine, and educational administration (Merriam and Caffarella 1999).

Problem-based Learning (PBL¹)

PBL creates authentic experiences by providing complex, authentic problems, which have multiple solutions (i.e., there is no one correct answer). The primary characteristic of PBL is that ". . . the problem drives the learning, rather than acting as an example of the concepts and principles previously taught" (Jonassen 1999, p. 218). In other words, students learn by working through the problem and reflecting on this process. "We do not want the learner to study science—memorizing a text on science or executing scientific procedures as dictated—but rather to engage in scientific discourse and problem solving" (Savery and Duffy 1996, p. 138).

The "problem" in a PBL scenario is realistic and sufficiently difficult so as to challenge learners and allow them to fail. Experiencing failure is an important and effective learning strategy (Fosnot 1996; Riesbeck 1996). It allows learners to make and correct common mistakes, develop effective and ineffective solutions, and explore contradictions (Fosnot 1996).

Learners in a PBL scenario usually take a specific role in a "problem" (e.g., they are the laboratory technicians) and they usually work with a small team of other learners to solve the problem. The instructor is a facilitator who challenges the thinking of the learners, asking questions such as "Why?"; "How do you know that's true?"; "Is there anything else?" (Duffy and Cunningham 1996).

As a general model, PBL was developed in the mid-1950s for medical education and has been refined and implemented in more than 60 medical schools (Savery and Duffy 1996). It has also been used in an MBA program (Milter and Stinson 1994) and in architecture, law, engineering, and social work (Bould and Feletti 1991).

Examples: How to Design Authentic Experiences That Enhance Laboratory Animal Science Training

Sensory learning. An effective authentic experience in laboratory animal science training is to take students into an animal room to smell the odor of ammonia buildup when a cage is overly soiled. The strong odor becomes a strong memory students will not forget. This experience is also a good example of "dual coding" and using the "imaginal" memory system (see Learning Strategy #6: Dual Coding and the "Picture Superiority Effect" below).

Discussions. Another effective authentic experience in laboratory animal science training is for veterinarians to present to and discuss with the animal care and veterinary technical staff any interesting, unique, or unexpected clinical findings in an animal. These discussions (i.e., conversations) become "teachable moments" to diagnose the problems, the causes, and the treatment options.

Handling. An example of using cognitive apprenticeship in laboratory animal science training might be when training novices to handle rodents for dosing or blood sample collection. In the first step, modeling, an expert demonstrates the technique. This could be either a live or video demonstration.

In the second step, coaching, the trainee may use a stuffed animal, orange, or other inanimate object to practice the restraint technique or the proper procedure for how to operate a needle and syringe for blood collection. During the coaching step, an expert works with the student, giving advice, suggestions, and perhaps modeling part or all of the procedure again. Also during the coaching step, the trainee may start to work with live rodents after demonstrating proficiency with the orange or inanimate object. During the coaching step, the student may use a rigid restraint device and/or leather gloves, which are "support tools" to help novices gradually master the skill.

In the third step, scaffolding, the expert gradually removes the support tools. For example, once a student masters the use of a rigid restraint device, the expert, who is coaching the student, may move the student to a plastic bag restrainer and once the student masters that tool, the trainer may then move the student to a soft towel or simple hand restraint. The scaffolding step is managed by the expert, who starts by providing numerous support tools for the student and then gradually removing those support tools as the student masters each one.

In the fourth step, articulation, trainees describe to the expert and/or their colleagues how they felt most comfortable restraining the animal or collecting the blood. The trainer might then use this opportunity to explain how certain aggressive rodent strains might need to be handled differently to ensure safety.

In the fifth step, reflection, trainees discuss with the expert and perhaps their colleagues their comfort level with, or confidence in, their new skills and the degree to which they need more training.

In the sixth step, exploration, trainees solve hypothetical problems posed by either themselves or the trainer (e.g., the optimal way to handle a very obese rodent strain vs. the best way to handle a preweanling rodent).

Learning Strategy #6: Dual Coding and the "Picture Superiority Effect"

Dual coding theory (Pavio 1990) proposes that we have one memory system for verbal information and another separate memory system for visual or imaginal (nonverbal) information. Our verbal memory system includes language systems (both auditory and speech) and our imaginal memory system includes visuals, graphics, charts, sounds, tastes, smells, and nonverbal (imagination) thoughts and reflections. Information in either system can activate information in the other system (Barron 2004; Moore et al. 2004; Winn 2004) and, most importantly, "the chance of learning is much greater when two, rather than one, memories are involved" (Lohr 2003, p. 37).

The picture superiority effect addresses our ability to remember pictures and is based on consistent findings from numerous research studies (Moore et al. 2004; Rieber 2005). "There is significant evidence that generally memory for pictures is better than memory for words. This consistent finding is referred to as the 'picture superiority effect'" (Anglin et al. 2004, p. 871).

Given the picture superiority effect and dual coding theory, it is tempting to believe the cliché, "A picture is worth a thousand words." Unfortunately, this cliché, like most others, is not completely accurate. Visuals that are consistent with the text and the goals of the instruction improve learning, but visuals that are inconsistent with or do not complement the text or the goals of the instruction inhibit learning (Clark and Lyons 2004; Lohr 2003; Moore et al. 2004; Rieber 2005). Designing effective visuals is accordingly a very important part of designing effective instruction. A short list of visual design resources is provided at the end of this article.

Examples: How to Use Dual Coding to Enhance Laboratory Animal Science Training

Text and photographs. The use of text and photographs together is a dual coding strategy to effectively teach students how to determine the gender of rodent pups or how to assess the severity of fight wounds. Combining verbal (text) with a visual (photograph) activates the two different memory systems, and while a person with relevant prior experiences may need only the text, a novice, who may never have examined a rodent, may be confused by the text alone. For example, a description of gender differences (e.g., "males may have hairless scrotal sacs ventral to the base of the tail, have a longer distance between the genital papilla and the anus and don't have nipples") may be adequate for a person with significant prior experiences, but novices may need to read this description and see what a genital papilla looks like in a rodent pup before they can identify male and female rodents.

Similarly, a detailed description of rodent fight wounds might include the depth of the wounds, the number of wounds, the site of wounds over the shoulders, back, and genitals, whether the wounds are necrotic and appear to have purulent exudates, and the general state of the animal (i.e., depressed, lethargic, or anorexic). This terminology is understood by a person with a medical background or significant prior experiences but for novices, this terminology may be confusing and leave them feeling uncertain about what they might actually see on an injured rodent. Combining the textual description with detailed photographs, which show fight wounds of varying severity, can help students visualize how they will use this new information in the future, what to look for on an injured animal, and how to assess the severity of the injuries so they are best prepared to minimize pain and distress in the rodents.

Figure 1 is an example of dual coding in which the trainer is teaching students how to determine the age of postnatal mice. The important characteristics of this dual coding example are the following: (1) the text, which identifies important landmarks, is in close proximity to the corresponding photograph; (2) the text is clear and concise; (3) the photographs and corresponding text are consistent, describing the same characteristics; (4) the photographs are in clear focus, and the angle of view is close enough to be able to easily identify the landmarks described in the text; and (5) there are no distracting backgrounds. It is important to note that color is a required feature of Figure 1 because in three of the four photographs, the text specifically refers to color as an important variable in determining the age of the mice. While research on the effectiveness of color in instructional materials is mixed (Lohr 2003; Winn 1993), it consistently indicates that color is an effective method of identification (Winn 1993), as is exemplified in Figure 1.

Figure 1 This figure is an example of using dual coding to teach students how to determine the age of postnatal mice. The full instruction might include photographs and the corresponding text for the first 12 or 14 days of life.

Videos. Trainers can also use videos to dual code information. For example, teaching students the proper technique for blood collection can include a written description of the procedure and/or a job aid along with a short video, which clearly shows each of the necessary steps. Students can monitor their job aid while viewing the video, which shows how the vein is vasodilated in a warm water bath, how the animal is restrained, how the blood is collected, and how hemostasis is achieved. The voiceover on the video provides verbal information that is consistent with the verbal information in the written description and/or job aid. The voiceover may also include verbal information that cannot be viewed (i.e., is not dual coded) with a visual image, such as the size of the needle or the temperature of the warm water. In these situations, it is important to include this verbal information in the written description and/or job aid because students typically use these paper-based descriptions when practicing their new skills and knowledge.

Integrating the Six Adult Learning Strategies into Laboratory Animal Science Training

We have designed the following example to demonstrate one approach to integrating the six adult learning strategies described above into a course about the Animal Welfare Act, as required by US Department of Agriculture (USDA¹). The regulations state that "Training and instruction of personnel must include guidance in at least the following areas: (1) Humane methods of animal maintenance and experimentation . . ." (9 CFR 2.32: CFR 1989). The following example assumes that the training includes one or more lectures and/or other structured presentations of new information.

Pretraining Communication

Three or four days before the day of training, the trainer sends students information about the course such as a course outline, time, date, location, and, most importantly, information to help students answer the question, "What's in it for me?" In other words, what will this course do for students to help them improve their performance on the job? For example, "what's in it" for the principal investigators is that in order to publish their research findings, their research methodology must meet the USDA regulations. Another important part of this pretraining memorandum or email is to include two or three reflection questions and ask students to prepare for a discussion about each question. Examples of pretraining reflection questions are:

What does the term "humane care of animals" mean to you?
Do animals feel pain similar to the way you feel pain?
Why should laboratory animals be treated humanely?
Have you ever witnessed inhumane treatment of animals? If so, what did you do?
What obligations do we have as a scientific community with regards to laboratory animals?
How does humane care of animals support good science?

In this pretraining memorandum, the trainer might also ask students, "What does your supervisor or manager want you to learn in this course?"

Prior Experience

One of the first activities during the training is to discuss students' prior experiences with the course content. For this course, students discuss #1 above ("What does the term "humane care of animals" mean to you?") and #4 ("Have you ever witnessed inhumane treatment of animals? If so, what did you do?"). The goal of this discussion is to enable students to personalize what it means to humanely care for animals. This discussion may become emotional, and that consequence is both appropriate and effective. The trainer's responsibility in this discussion is to ensure that all students have the opportunity to participate in the discussion without being chastised or offended by other students.

Communications and Authentic Experience

Another effective activity for this course is for the trainer to pose a possible research scenario and ask students to work in small groups of two or three to determine whether there is a better way to design this study. This activity supports both conversations and authentic experience learning strategies. Here is an example scenario that could be presented:

"The following research study is awaiting approval from the institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC). The focus of the research is urinary incontinence and the research animals are pigs. According to the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK), at least 13 million American adults suffer from urinary incontinence. Incontinence may affect a person's self esteem, motivation, dignity, and independence, Incontinence has also been associated with depression (www.niddk.nih.gov/federal/advances/2005/Kidney_Urologic_Hematologic.pdf). The research methodology calls for a metal ring to be surgically placed around the neck of the bladder of a young pig. As the pig grows, it is hypothesized that the neck of the bladder will become more occluded and eventually the pig will only urinate in small amounts and will no longer be able to empty his or her bladder. Because urine remains in the bladder for long periods of time, urinary tract infections are expected occur and the accumulation of urine will cause dilation of the renal tubules and ultimately renal disease. The pigs will experience severe complications and will probably need to be euthanized by three months of age. Working in your teams, answer the following questions:

What kind of pain and distress are experienced by a pig who has a constant need to empty his or her bladder but cannot?
Urinary tract infections are known to cause burning pain on urination; how does this affect the pig?
Will the pigs need to urinate more than normal due to increased stress, which causes an increase in many bodily functions, which causes an increase in the production of waste, which causes an increase in urination?
What changes would you recommend in the research methodology?"

After discussing these four questions for 15 or 20 minutes, each group summarizes their discussion and reports to the whole class. The role of the trainer during these "report out" presentations is to ask questions such as, "Why do you think that is true?" or "What is the advantage of that approach?"

Another effective use of conversations and authentic experience in this course is to ask students to work in small groups to answer the question, "How does the humane care of animals support good science?" For example, distress might be a significant variable in the urinary incontinence study described above. The distress experienced by the pigs might have an impact on the reliability and validity of the results, but the research methodology neither measured nor accounted for it. In the alternative research methodologies, which students identify in their discussions, this distress should be reduced and the results would accordingly be more accurate and useful. Additionally, the pigs would live relatively normal lives and not need to be euthanized due to renal disease or other complications caused by the research methodology.

A third effective use of conversations and authentic experiences is for students to role-play a conversation with a friend or family member who questions the ethics of animal research and their role in that research. Once students understand the regulations that enforce the humane care of animals and how the humane care of animals supports good science, they have the information with which to inform and educate their family and friends. These role-playing activities are also very effective for helping students personalize the new information.

Metacognition, Reflection, and Conversations

To help students self-assess and self-correct (metacognition), the trainer can distribute several different case studies, each of which poses an ethical question or problem. Students read the cases, make notes about their ideas or answers, and then work together in small groups to compare their answers. The trainer can also provide students with a one-page job aid or list of key ethical questions to help guide the discussion. Reporting out to the whole class can then help students visualize not only different humane research methodologies but also how they can use the information from the course at some time in the future.

Another strategy to help students consider how to apply the new information to their project and their responsibilities on that project is for the trainer to group students in pairs and ask them to use the list of key ethical questions to evaluate current projects. Students can also be asked to create a "notes to self" document that lists questions they want to ask or issues they want to research concerning the ethical and humane treatment of animals on the project to which they are currently assigned. This strategy combines conversations with reflections and authentic experience learning strategies.

Course Completion Reflection

The last activity in the course can be a few minutes for students to anonymously answer four or five reflection questions such as those listed in Table 3. The trainer can collect this information, tally the results, and send this tally to each student. This summary information gives students another opportunity to reflect on their instructional experiences and compare those experiences with those of the other students in the course.

At the conclusion of the course, the trainer can recommend that students meet with their supervisor or manager to discuss what they learned in the course and how it applies to the student's individual responsibilities and the project to which the student is assigned. The trainer can also enroll students in an online discussion "listserv" where they can discuss current ethical and humane issues. The listserv may be associated with a project, department, organization, or industry.

Later Reflection

Two or three weeks after the training session, the trainer can email three to five follow-up questions to encourage students to reflect on how they are using their new knowledge and skills. Examples of post-training reflection questions follow:

Have you used the job aid summarizing the ethical and humane treatment of research animals? If yes, how did you feel about that experience?
Have you discussed the training with your supervisor or manager? If yes, how would you assess or evaluate that discussion? Do you have any concerns about that discussion?
Have you participated in any discussions or conversations about the ethical and humane treatment of research animals? If yes, how do you assess or evaluate your role in that conversation?
Have you implemented any refinements to your studies to minimize pain or distress in the laboratory animals? If yes, please share the details.
Do you have any questions about how the humane care of laboratory animals ensures that your research integrity is optimized? If yes, please contact me (the trainer) at . . . .
Are you aware of any questionable animal care or use practices we should improve? If yes, or if you are uncertain, please contact me (the trainer) at . . .

Conclusion

Learning is a verb. It is the process of personal change whereby learners customize new information to make it relevant and meaningful. Accordingly, training is the process of helping learners change, of helping learners personalize new information.

The two essential elements in all effective adult training are structured content (Foshay et al. 2003; Kirschner et al. 2006) embedded within an environment that supports the six adult learning strategies described above. In other words, effective training is more than the transmission or presentation of information, and successful trainers are more than subject matter experts. Lectures can be effective (Arthur et al. 2003) when they help learners make connections between new information, their prior experiences, and how they expect or will be required to use the new information in the future. Trainers can be effective when they not only guide the learning process but also provide opportunities for learners to have authentic experiences, to make mistakes, and to correct their mistakes. Effective trainers understand that learners are active participants in the learning process and their goal as trainers is to guide, not dominate, that process.

The critical error trainers often make is to merely deliver a lecture and provide no support for the active learning or the personalization of new information. The result is that students complain that training is irrelevant or not useful. They may resent the trainer and the time it takes to attend training, and some may even sleep through the lectures. Learners may say there is no reason for them to attend training because they attended the training several years ago and "nothing has changed" or the new information is "wrong" because it conflicts with their experiences.

All of these problems imply that the training in question is based exclusively on lectures and the trainer is merely delivering information, not facilitating, learning. Students cannot sleep through cognitive apprenticeship or problem-based learning activities. When students work together to discuss the implications of the new information and how it applies to their current responsibilities or project, they personalize the new information and make it relevant and useful. If students have prior experiences that conflict with or are incongruent with the new information, their perception will take precedence and will interfere with their learning unless the trainer provides a forum for discussion of these incongruities, where students can compare and contrast the relevant variables and gradually change their perceptions.

In other words, effective adult training is both direct and learner centered. It contains lectures or other structured presentations of new information along with activities, projects, and/or exercises to help learners use the six learning strategies described in this article: prior experiences, conversations, metacognition, reflection, authentic experiences, and images, pictures or other types of visuals. The challenge for trainers is how to make these changes, not only in their courses but also in their perception of their roles and responsibilities as trainers. In other words, the challenge for trainers is to learn a new model. Given that learning is the process of personalizing new information, trainers can personalize this new model by answering the following reflection questions:

How can I help students link their prior experiences with the content of this course? What are those prior experiences?
How can I help students self-assess and self-correct? How can I use that self-assessment information to redesign the course?
How can I help students reflect on the usefulness of the new information? How can I help them consider the implications and consequences of applying the content of this course to their organizational responsibilities?
How can I help students prepare for this course? What kind of pretraining information and activities will help them come to the course ready to participate in the activities?
What kind authentic experiences can I include in the course? Will a cognitive apprenticeship work? Is there an existing problem-based learning scenario for this content?
Who do I know who could discuss these questions with me? Which colleagues might be helpful? Which former students might be helpful?
Given that my students are adults, with a myriad of prior experiences, how can I structure activities to enable students to learn from each other?
How do I help students apply what they learn in this course? How do I help students create a plan for implementing their new knowledge and skills once they get back to their job? How can I help students implement their plans two or three months after the training?

Answering these questions and considering the examples above, which provide suggestions for how to apply adult learning strategies to laboratory animal science training, is the first step. The next step is making time to change existing training, collecting data to assess the new course, and then revising as needed. Looking at the big picture, effective training is not an end state but rather a step in the process to ensure that all individuals working with laboratory animals minimize the pain and distress these animals experience and, ultimately, conduct good science. For more information about the evaluation of training, see the article by Foshay and Tinkey (2007) in this issue.

Finally, consider the reflections of a trainer who wrote an article titled "Active Learning for Information Literacy: Increasing the Effectiveness of Lectures and Tutorials":

"When . . . classes were active, engaged and we were learning together, it was often exhilarating. We had fun and the abilities, creativity, and cooperation of students impressed me a great deal. Instead of going home feeling drained and ‘alone’ after lectures, I often walked away saying to myself, ‘such good students" (Steiner 2001, p. 42).

Abbreviations used in this article: Guide, Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals; IACUC, institutional animal care and use committee; NIDDK, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; PBL, problem-based learning; SOP, standard operating procedure; USDA, US Department of Agriculture.

References

Anderson LK, Thomas RG. 1992. Innovation in Parent Education: Self-Reflection and Dialogue as Avenues of Learning. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

Anglin GJ, Vaez H, Cunningham KL. 2004. Visual representations and learning: The role of static and animated graphics. In: Jonassen DH, ed. Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology. 2nd ed. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. p 865-918.

Arthur W, Bennett W, Edens P, Bell S. 2003. Effectiveness of training in organizations: A meta-analysis of design and evaluation features. J Appl Psychol 88:234-245.

Barron AE. 2004. Auditory instruction. In: Jonassen DH, ed. Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology. 2nd ed. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. p 949-978.

Bereite, C, Scardamalia M. 1989. Intentional learning as a goal of instruction. In: Resnick LB, ed. Knowing, Learning, and Instruction: Essays in Honor of Robert Glaser. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Boud D, Keogh R, Walker D. 1985. Promoting reflection in learning: A model. In: Boud D, Keogh R, Walker D, eds. Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning. New York: Kogan Page, Long/Nichols Publishing.

Boudourides MA. 2003. Constructivism, education, science, and technology. Can J Learn Technol 29(3).

Bould D, Feletti G. 1991. The Challenge of Problem Based Learning. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Broad ML, Newstrom JW. 1992. Transfer of Training. Reading MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing.

Brown J, Collins A, Duguid P. 1989. Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning. Educational Researcher, January-February: 32-42.

Brown J, Duguid P. 1991. Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Org Sci 2:40-57.

Brown J, Duguid P. 2000. The Social Life of Information. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Bruer JT. 1993. The Mind's Journey from Novice to Expert. Am Educator, Summer: 6-15, 38-46.

CFR [Code of Federal Regulations] 1989. Animal Welfare Final Rules. 9 CFR 2.32, Personnel Qualifications and Training. Effective October 30, 1989. Washington DC: Office of the Federal Register.

Clark RC. 1998. Building Expertise: Cognitive Methods for Training and Performance Improvement. Washington DC: International Society for Performance Improvement.

Clark RC, Lyons C. 2004. Graphics for Learning: Proven Guidelines for Planning, Designing, and Evaluating Visuals in Training Materials. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Cobb P, Bowers J. 1999. Cognitive and situated learning perspectives in theory and practice. Educ Researcher 28:4-15.

Collins A, Brown JS, Holum A. 1991. Cognitive Apprenticeship: Making Thinking Visible. Am Educator Winter:19-46.

Cyboran VL. 2005. The influence of reflection on employee psychological empowerment: Report of an exploratory workplace field study. Perform Improvement Q 18:37-49.

Dennen VP. 2004. Cognitive apprenticeship in educational practice: Research on scaffolding, modeling, mentoring, and coaching as instructional strategies. In: Jonassen DH, ed. Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology. 2nd ed. Mahwah NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. p 813-828.

Dewey J. 1938. Experience and Education. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Dobrovolny JL. 2003a. A model for self-paced, technology-based training. Learning Circuits 3(9).

Dobrovolny JL. 2003b. Learning strategies. Learning Circuits 3(10).

Dobrovolny JL. 2006. How adults learn from self-paced, technology-based corporate training: New focus for learners, new focus for designers. Distance Educ 27:155-170.

Duffy TM, Cunningham DJ. 1996. Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. In: Jonassen DH, ed. Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology. New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

Evans J, Clibbens J, Harris A. 2005. Prior belief and polarity in multicue learning. Q J Exp Psychol 58:651-665.

Evans J, Feeney A. 2003. The role of prior belief in reasoning. In: Sternberg RJ, ed. The Nature of Reasoning. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.

Foshay WR, Silber KH, Stelnicki MB. 2003. Writing Training Materials That Work: How to Train Anyone to Do Anything. San Francisco CA: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.

Foshay WR, Tinkey PT. 2007. Evaluating the effectiveness of training strategies: Performance goals and testing. ILAR J 48:156-162.

Fosnot CT. 1996. Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. In: Fosnot CT, ed. Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives, and Practice. New York: Teachers College Press. p 8-33.

Grabinger RS. 1996. Rich environments for active learning. In: Jonassen DH, ed. Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology. New York: Simon & Schuser Macmillan. p 665-692.

Grabowski BL. 1996. Generative learning: Past, present, and future. In: Jonassen DH, ed. Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology. New York: Simon & Schuser Macmillan. p 897-918.

Henning PH. 2004. Everyday cognition and situated learning. In: Jonassen DH, ed. Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology. 2nd ed. Mahwah N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. p 143-168.

John-Steiner V, Mahn H. 1996. Sociocultural approaches to learning and development: A Vygotskian framework. Educ Psychologist 31:191-206.

Jonassen DH. 1999. Designing constructivist learning environments. In: Reigeluth CM, ed. Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory. Vol II. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. p 215-240.

Jonassen DH, Grabowski BL. 1993. Handbook of Individual Differences, Learning and Instruction. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.

Jonassen DH, Reeves TC. 1996. Learning with technology: Using computers as cognitive tools. In: Jonassen DH, ed. Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology. New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan. p 693-719.

Kirschner P, Sweller J, Clark RC. 2006. Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educ Psychologist 41(1).

Knowles M, Holton EFI, Swanson RA. 1998. The Adult Learner: The Definitive Classic in Adult Education and Human Resource Development. 5th ed. Houston: Gulf Publishing.

Kolb DA. 1984. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood-Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Lamos JP. 1993. Applying the Cognitive Apprenticeship Learning Model in Interactive Cal. Paper presented July 1993 at the 1st International Conference on Computer-aided Learning and Distance Learning in Meteorology, Hydrology, and Oceanography, Boulder, CO.

Lave J. 1991. Situating learning in communities of practice. In: Resnick L, Levine JM, Teasley SD, eds. Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition. Washington DC: American Psychological Association. p 63-82.

Lindeman EC. 1926. The Meaning of Adult Education. New York: New Republic.

Lohr L. 2003. Creating Graphics for Learning and Performance: Lessons in Visual Literacy. Cleveland OH: Prentice-Hall.

Merriam SB, Caffarella RS. 1999. Learning in Adulthood: A Comprehensive Guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Mezirow J. 1993. How Adults Learn: The Meaning of Adult Education. Publication no. ED368967. Education Resources Information Center (ERIC). Available online (ERICDigests.org).

Mezirow J. 1995. Transformation theory of adult learning. In: Welton MR, ed. In: Defense of the Lifeworld. New York: State University of New York Press. p 39-70.

Milter RG, Stinson JE. 1994. Educating leaders for the new competitive environment. In: Gijsealaers G, Tempelaar S, Keizer S, eds. Educational Innovation in Economics and Business Administration: The Case of Problem-Based Learning. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Moore DM, Burton JK, Myers RJ. 2004. Multiple-channel communication: The theoretical and research foundations of multimedia. In: Jonassen DH, ed. Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology. 2nd ed. New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan. p 981-1008.

Morrison GR, Ross SM, Kemp JE. 2001. Designing Effective Instruction. 3rd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

NRC [National Research Council]. 1996. Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. 7th ed. Washington DC: National Academy Press.

Pascual-Leone J, Irwin RR. 1998. Abstraction, the will, the self, and modes of learning in adulthood. In: Smith MC, Pourchot T, eds. Adult Learning and Development. Mahway NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. p 35-66.

Pavio A. 1990. Mental Representations: A Dual Coding Approach. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.

Pillay H. 1998. Adult learning in a workplace context. In: Sutherland P, ed. Adult Learning: A Reader. Sterling VA: Kogan Page Ltd. p 122-136.

Ridley DS, Schutz PA, Glanz RS, Weinstein CE. 1992. Self-regulated learning: The interactive influence of metacognitive awareness and goal setting. J Exp Educ 60:293-306.

Rieber LP. 2005. Multimedia learning in games, simulations, and microworlds. In: Mayer RE, ed. The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p 549-568.

Riesbeck CK. 1996. Case-based teaching and constructivism: Carpenters and tools. In: Wilson B, ed. Constructivist Learning Environments: Case Studies in Instructional Design. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Educational Technology Publications. p 49-64.

Roth GL. 1997. Learning to Learn in the Workplace. Paper presented at the Academy of Human Resource Development, Atlanta, GA.

Salomon G, Perkins D. 1996. Learning in wonderland: What do computers really offer education? In: Kerr ST, ed. Technology and the Future of Schooling. 95th Vol Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p 111-130.

Salomon G, Perkins D. 1998. Individual and social aspects of learning. In: Iran-Nejad PDP, ed. Review of Research in Education. Vol 23:1-24.

Savery JR, Duffy TM. 1996. Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. In: Wilson BG, ed. Constructivist Learning Environments: Case Studies in Instructional Design. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Educational Technology Publications. p 135-148.

Schraw G. 1998. On the development of adult metacognition. In: Smith MC, Pourchot T, eds. Adult Learning and Development. Mahway NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. p 89-106.

Solomon DL. 2000. Toward a postmodern agenda in instructional yechnology. Educ Tech Res Dev 48:5-20.

Steiner A. 2001. Active Learning for Information Literacy: Increasing the Effectiveness of Lectures and Tutorials. Available online (http://www.library.qut.edu.au/infoliteracy/publications/GCEd_ProjectReport_Steiner_01.pdf).

Stolovitch HD, Keeps E. 2002. Telling Ain't Training. Alexandria VA: American Society for Training and Development.

Sutherland P. 1997. Experiential learning and constructivism: Potential for a mutually beneficial synthesis. In: Sutherland P, ed. Adult Learning: A Reader. Sterling VA: Kogan Page. p 82-92.

Von Wright J. 1992. Reflections on reflection. Learning Instruct 2:59-68.

Wick CW, Pollock RVH, Jefferson AM, Flanagan RD. 2006. The Six Disciplines of Breakthrough Learning. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Wilson B, Cole P. 1996. Cognitive teaching models. In: Jonassen DH, ed. Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology. Vol 1. New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan. p 601-621.

Winn W. 1993. Perception principles. In: Fleming M, Levie WH, eds. Instructional Message Design. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs: Educational Technology Publications. p 55-126.

Winn W. 2004. Cognitive perspectives in psychology. In: Jonassen DH, ed. Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology. 2nd ed. New York: Simon & Schuser Macmillan. p 79-112.

Winn W, Snyder D. 1996. Cognitive perspectives in psychology. In: Jonassen DH, ed. Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology. New York: Simon & Schuser Macmillan. p 112-142.

Visual Design Resources

Clark R, Lyons C. 2004. Graphics for Learning: Proven Guidelines for Planning, Designing, and Evaluating Visuals in Training Materials. San Francisco CA: John Wiley & Sons.

Lohr L. 2003. Creating Graphics for Learning and Performance: Lessons in Visual Literacy. Cleveland OH: Prentice-Hall. (Second edition is in press.)

Tufte ER. 2001. The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. 2nd ed. Cheshire CT: Graphics Press.

Williams R. 1994. The Non-designer's Design Book. Berkeley CA: Peachpit Press.