Running head: SITUATED COGNITION AND PERSONALIZED LEARNING

Situated Cognition and Personalized Learning

Sarah Tolson
University of South Carolina

Author Note
This paper was written for EDET 709-J50, taught by Dr. Michael M. Grant, for Spring 2016 and
submitted on April 12, 2016. Contact: nader@email.sc.edu

SITUATED COGNITION & PERSONALIZED LEARNING

Abstract
Personalized Learning contains many aspects of Situated Cognition Theory, including
personalized feedback, student assessment, and deeper learning. Personalized Learning allows
learners to make choices and control the resources, tools, methods, and references they utilize.
Complex tasks allow students to collaborate with others on projects and problems that are of
high interest to them. By setting their own learning goals and choosing materials that are
relevant to them, learners are able to truly be engaged in and accountable for their own
successes. Three cases explore Personalized Learning and its impact on student success.
Keywords: Situated Cognition, Situated Cognitive Theory, Personalized Learning, complex
tasks, personalized feedback, student assessment, deeper learning, technology, portfolio

SITUATED COGNITION & PERSONALIZED LEARNING

Situated Cognition and Personalized Learning

Personalized learning is a fairly new concept that has been quickly been gaining
popularity in many schools and districts. Personalized learning is defined as instruction that is
student-centered, based on students individual learning preferences and interests (Cator &
Adams, 2013). Learning objectives, content, resources, and methodology can be differentiated to
individualize instruction in a personalized environment.
Personalized learning implements many aspects of Brown, Collins, and Duguids (1989)
Situated Cognition Theory. Knowledge is constructed within the context and culture in which it
is learned, as well as through social collaboration. Personalized learning provides students with
opportunities to collaboratively problem-solve and discuss as they learn content. Content is
presented through context and experiences, which are relevant to the students and their interests
(Brown et al., 1989). One major emphasis of Situated Cognition Theory is that students know
how to do something as opposed to just recognizing what something is (e.g., knowing strategies
such as equal groups, number bonds, tape diagrams, arrays, number lines, decomposition, and
repeated addition to multiply unknown numbers v. just knowing the fact 10 x 3 = 30), so students
are able to apply the concept to a variety of situations (Brown et al., 1989).
The environment and content-area experts are utilized to help students solve problems
that simulate real-world situations (Brown et al., 1989). These authentic activities provide
exposure to appropriate experience, language, etc. Participating in worldly activities allows for
collaboration, multiple practice, reflection, and articulation, which allow learners to generalize
more specific content so that strategies and concepts may be replicated in other situations
(Brown et al., 1989).

SITUATED COGNITION & PERSONALIZED LEARNING

Personalized learning with aspects of Situated Cognition Theory is important as learners

are engaged in relevant, meaningful education that is personalized to their needs, interests, and
preferences. Digital native students are learning strategies over facts, preparing them to be
efficient and successful throughout the rest of their educations and future careers. Educators
need to prepare students as effectively as possible by providing them with strategies that are
applicable in real life.
This paper discusses aspects of Situated Cognition Theory and Personalized Learning. It
presents three cases that look at aspects of Personalized Learning in education. The first case
looks at using mobile tools to customize the organization and presentation of content that can be
personalized for individual students. The second case analyzes personalized learning approaches
through integration of technology and hands-on experiences, student choice, and portfolios. The
third case explores students setting their own educational goals and the effect of accountability
through the use of goal setting and technology-based organizational systems. Finally, this paper
recommends elements of Personalized Learning and Situated Cognition Theory that can be
implemented in the K-12 classroom to help students achieve success.
Theory
Personalized Learning allows instruction to be modified or constructed to meet the needs
of each learner, as well as his or her interests, goals, and learning preferences. Frequently, this is
done through implementation of technology, project-based learning, problem-based learning,
community-service involvement, and apprenticeships (DiMartino & Clarke, 2008; Gomez &
Lee, 2015; Grant & Basye, 2014; Huang, Liang, Su, & Chen, 2012; Liew, Tan, & Seydali, 2013;
Mohd & Shahbodin, 2015; Tomlinson & Allan, 2000). Many of these methods implement the

SITUATED COGNITION & PERSONALIZED LEARNING

three main aspects of Personalized Learning: personalized feedback, student assessment, and
deeper learning (Evans, Pruett, Chang, & Nino, 2013).
Personalized Feedback
Students thrive from receiving feedback, but feedback must be specific, corrective (as
necessary), and personalized (Evans, Pruett, Chang, & Nino, 2013). Educational-based games
have the potential to promote social skills through interactivity and discussion, but are most
effective when they provide corrective feedback (Evans et al., 2013). Game-based data can be
analyzed to determine whether a student is truly trying and being successful or struggling, or just
guessing (Evans et al., 2013). Game-based learning can be an effective means of authentic
practice or assessment, when accompanied with personalized feedback.
Personalized feedback on any activity, from project-based learning to technology
integration to reading and writing activities, allows learners to correct any errors they have made
and assess their existing knowledge. Feedback also allows for interaction between the instructor
and the learner, which allows for a deeper relationship to be established, especially through the
use of positive feedback. Feedback allows for students to reflect on and synthesize their
progress, which will also help them set individualized goals for learning and assessment.
Student Assessment
Assessment is an integral part of learning. Situated Cognitive Theory and Personalized
Learning, like any other curriculum and methods, need to be assessed. Research explores the
importance of goal-based assessment, student choice and its impact on assessment, and student
created portfolios (Grant & Basye, 2014; Hwang, Chen, & Huang, 2016; Kim, Olfman, Ryan, &
Eryilmaz, 2014; Song, Wong, & Looi, 2012).

SITUATED COGNITION & PERSONALIZED LEARNING

Goal-based assessment. Students creating their own goals seems to show higher
achievement (Kim, Olfman, Ryan, & Eryilmaz. 2014). Learners create and use technology to
organize their goals, resources, activities, performance, and reassessment (Kim et al., 2014).
Students were more accountable, frequently reminded of their goals, and committed to their
goals and finding resourcespersonalizing their own educations (Kim et al., 2014).
Student choice. Song, Wong, & Looi (2012) observed personalized learning approaches
on a unit with integration of technology and hands-on experiences that students could select
based on the goals that were set. Students, with their goal in mind, chose their own methods for
reaching the learning goalsome students selected to use technology and hands-on experiences,
whereas others selected one over the other (Song et al., 2012). Grant and Basye (2014) also
show that, with meaningful guidance, students can choose their own research, which is allowing
them to differentiate their own learning through the use of technology and student choice.
Learners are being held accountable for their achievement and learning, as well being engaged
through finding resources and/or activities that are meaningful to them.
Portfolios. Student-created portfolios show great benefit to students engaged with
technology and student choice. As stated above, the students were able to present the
information they learned and show their understanding through their portfolios: students used
different methods, but all showed assessment of the same goal through multiple methods (Song,
Wong, & Looi, 2012). Hwang, Chen, & Huang (2016) suggest students having access to their
portfolios and all their scoresas well as sorting questions/scores into higher order thinking and
lower order thinking questionsas a method for helping students interact with the material.
Assessment and portfolios allow students to know where they currently are and can help them set
goals to achieve a deeper understanding.

SITUATED COGNITION & PERSONALIZED LEARNING

Deeper Learning
Deeper learning is an integral part of personalized learning. As explained in the
introduction, it is imperative for students to understand and be able to apply strategies to new
situations independently. Deeper learning can be achieved through the use of technology
integration, complex tasks, and reflection.
Technology integration. Technology is a tool that has no bounds when it comes to
finding resources and tools that can be differentiated and personalized for individual students.
Instructors and learners have a variety of information and resources at their fingertips, and
resources, tutorials, videos, tools, instructional narratives, texts/eBooks, etc. may be pulled for or
selected by different studentsinstantly personalizing learning (Ali, Ghani, & Latiff, 2015;
Grant & Basye, 2014; Huang, Liang, Su, & Chen, 2012; Kim, Olfman, Ryan, & Eryilmaz, 2014;
Liew, Tan, & Seydali, 2013; Mohd & Shahbodin, 2015; Song, Wong, & Looi, 2012).
Complex tasks. Problem-based learning, project-based learning, community-service, and
other complex tasks allow learning to be centered on the students with the instructor moving
from an authoritative figure to a supportive figure. Students are engaged in learning, driving their
own performances and choosing their own methods, as well as learning collaboratively in reallife, complex situations (DiMartino & Clarke, 2008; Gomez & Lee, 2015; Liew, Tan, & Seydali,
2013; Mehta, Geissel, Rhodes, & Salinas, 2015; Powell, & Kusuma-Powell, 2011; Song, Wong,
& Looi, 2015)
Reflection. Reflection is an integral part of success in education. Kim, Olfman, Ryan,
and Eryilmaz (2014) emphasize the importance of reflection, which, in turn, helps learners
become more effective in designing their own instruction and practice. Reflection allows

SITUATED COGNITION & PERSONALIZED LEARNING

students to transfer knowledge into long term memory, allowing them to apply skills and
strategies more easily into other situations.
Cases
Technology is a tool that allows for personalization of learning. Studies have been
conducted to analyze the impact of Situated Cognition Theory and Personalized Learning in
classroom settings on learner achievement, motivation, and accountability. The following cases
explore the impact of technology integration in student-centered learning environments. The
first case explores a goal-based approach in a primary school and the impact of student choice.
The second case highlights a secondary school implementing Personalized Learning through
mobile tools and the importance of interactive learning tutorials. The last case focuses on a
higher education setting and the significance of students creating their own goals and direction of
their education. These cases were selected for a variety of settings from primary, secondary, and
higher-education learners that all implement technology as a means for Personalized Learning.
Primary: Personalized Learning in Science
Song, Wong, and Looi (2012) conducted a study in a Singapore primary school for three
years. A science curriculum based on life cycles was designed and implemented using mobile
technology, in addition to a variety of other strategies and methods that were included without
technology. Students created KWL charts and had access to instructions, websites, worksheets,
photo-taking tools, PowerPoint, Sketchy, and composition tools on their mobile devices (Song et
al., 2012). Students were able to supplement these technology-based items with hands-on
experiences, such as field trip and experiments (Song et al., 2012). The students used the tools,
in combination with reflection on their experiences and learning, to create portfolios to assess

SITUATED COGNITION & PERSONALIZED LEARNING

their understanding. The different, personalized portfolios and various flow of activities are
evidence that the students met the learning goal by using methods that work for them (Song et
al., 2012). Successes of this case study, as well as many implementations in elementary schools
across the world, include the students ability to demonstrate their understanding, make
individual learning decisions, control their own learning pace, and select activities and examples
that were meaningful to them (Song et al., 2012). The major weakness of this study is that it
only emphasized a three-week one-unit study. It would be interesting to see this used in another
content area and for a longer amount of time throughout multiple units.
Secondary: Personalizing Mobile Tools
Mohd and Shahbodin (2015) present a case study on implementing more Personalized
Learning through the use of mobile tools and digital tutorials. In this case, it was implemented in
a secondary school during a science unit on nutrition. The goal of the unit was to provide
students with science skills and technology that allows the learner to problem solve and make
decisions (Mohd & Shahbodin, 2015). Mohd and Shahbodin (2015) completed alpha, beta, and
user acceptance testing on a digital tutorial that was modified so it could be personalized for each
students needs and interests. The user interface was modified where students could transition
from section to section, upload additional files, and allow for collaboration and discussion
among users (Mohd & Shahbodin, 2015). This case shows success in that students are taking
responsibility for their leaning and determining their own educational directions (Mohd &
Shahbodin, 2015). A major challenge is, once again, that this is simply one tutorial that was
modifiedwhat potential is there for other subjects and/or units? Another challenge is whether
or not more responsibility can be given to the studentscan they create their own units as a
project-based learning activity?

SITUATED COGNITION & PERSONALIZED LEARNING

10

Higher Education: Setting and Achieving Individual Goals

Kim, Olfman, Ryan, and Eryilmaz (2014) delve into a case study exploring how students
can create their own educational goals, as well as how these unique goals can impact their
education. The expectations were for students to: establish learning goals; locate and access
resources; adopt and execute learning activities; monitor and evaluate performance; and reassess
learning strategies progress (Kim et al., 2014). The students showed promise because they were
able to create their own goals and direct their own education. They set their own goals and used
technology to help them input and organize their goals, resources and activities they selected,
performance data, and reassessment information (Kim et al., 2014). A major strength of this
study was that all data was tracked online and accessible, which truly held students accountable
for their goals (Kim et al., 2014). Students explained that, since the goals were visible during
each log in, they were frequently reminded of their goal; other users seeing their goals meant
they were more committed to achieving the goal they set (Kim et al., 2014). A major finding was
that the students truly took ownership in all aspects of their education, including finding
resources that were appropriate and relevant to the topic and their interests (Kim et al., 2014).
Unlike the other studies, this study allowed the students to reflect on their learning and determine
how they can be more effective designing their own instruction and practice (Kim et al., 2014).
A challenge of this study is that it was not completed long term or throughout other subjects.
Recommendations
Since Personalized Learning using Situated Cognition Theory is a fairly new concept,
much more research and case studies need to be completed. In the three case studies shared
above, each one lacked consistency through length of implementation. The first study, for
example, was only about a three-week unit on life cycles. Each study would benefit from having

SITUATED COGNITION & PERSONALIZED LEARNING

11

additional data from a semester-long or year-long study, if not more. These studies also were not
cross-curricular. The first two studies each only focused on one unit in science. In order to get
more accurate and consistent data, these studies could be replicated, but prolonged for a much
longer time, encompassing multiple units of study. These studies would also benefit from being
applied to other subjects: that is, how can online tutorials, digital portfolios, student goal-setting,
and personalized learning choice impact other subjects such as reading, math, and social studies?
The studies provided some evidence and data points, but would have increased value if
they have additional data points and more of a control for comparison. It would be interesting to
see how the studies would be in comparison to a non-personalized learning group without
technology integration. In study one, for example, it would be interesting to see how the
students who had personalized learning through mobile devices to learn about life cycles
compare to students who had a more-traditional, one-size-fits-all style of learning without
technology integration and student choice.
These studies could benefit from having personalized feedback and additional practice
through game-based learning, which, in turn, helps promote social skills and promote student
achievement (Evans, Pruett, Chang, & Nino, 2013). They could also be vastly improved through
integration of complex tasks, such as project- or problem-based learning, especially when the
complex tasks are related to student interests (DiMartino & Clarke, 2008; Tomlinson & Allan,
2000). These complex tasks, as well as additional data from a controlled comparison, extended
length of implementation, and cross-curricular activities would help overcome some of the
challenges of the studies.
More profound and lengthy data needs to be collected on comparing Personalized
Learning to more traditional learning methods. It would be interesting to see how learners, their

SITUATED COGNITION & PERSONALIZED LEARNING

12

achievements, successes, and assessment scores are in a Personalized Learning setting, and how
they compare to their traditional learning peers, who are not using Situated Cognition Theory.
Conclusion
As educators, it is important to personalize learning as much as possible to meet the
needs of each individual learner. By considering the learners needs, abilities, interests, and
goals, learning can be personalized through selection of resources, texts, tools, games, and
assessments. Personalized student-created portfolios allow for students to meet unique learning
goals using methods, strategies, and tools that they choose. Complex tasks, such as
apprenticeships, problem-based learning, community service, project-based learning, and
planned problem solving allow students to learn collaboratively through authentic activities in
realistic settings, exposing them to appropriate experience, language, and problem solving
strategies that can later be applied generally (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989).
The greatest challenge of Personalized Learning with Situated Cognition Theory is that
Personalized Learning is a fairly new concept and there is a limited amount of research and case
studies, especially studies that span more than a couple-week long units. There needs to be more
data collected among all content area subjects that span longer than a timeline of a few weeks.
To implement aspects of Personalized Learning and Situated Cognitive Theory, conduct
online researches. International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) is continuing to
gather more materials on Personalized Learning, which can serve as a great starting point for
educators who want to begin employing Personalized Learning in their classrooms (iste.org).

SITUATED COGNITION & PERSONALIZED LEARNING

13

References
Ali, S. M., Ghani, I., & Latiff, M. S. A. (2015). Interaction-based collaborative recommendation:
A personalized learning environment perspective. Transactions on Internet and
Information Systems, 9(1) 446-465.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning.
Educational Researcher, 18(1), 3242.
Cator, K., & Adams, B. (2013). Building adaptive learning systems that support personalized
learning. Expanding evidence approaches for learning in a digital world. (pp. 27-38).
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology.
Cator, K., & Adams, B. (2013). Finding appropriate learning resources and making informed
choices. Expanding evidence approaches for learning in a digital world. (pp. 63-76).
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology.
Cator, K., & Adams, B. (2013). Making sure learning resources promote deeper learning.
Expanding evidence approaches for learning in a digital world. (pp. 11-26). Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology.
DiMartino, J. & Clarke, J. (2008). A failure to adapt. Personalizing the high school experience
for each student. (pp. 1-11). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum
Development.
DiMartino, J. & Clarke, J. (2008). Personalized teaching. Personalizing the high school
experience for each student. (pp. 65-101). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision &
Curriculum Development.

SITUATED COGNITION & PERSONALIZED LEARNING

14

Evans, M. A., Pruett, J., Chang, M., & Nino, M. (2013). Designing personalized learning
products for middle school mathematics: The case for networked learning games.
Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 42(3), 235-254.
Gomez, K., & Lee, U. (2015). Situated cognition and learning environments: implications for
teachers on- and offline in the new digital media age. Interactive Learning Environments,
23(5), 634-652. doi:10.1080/10494820.2015.1064447
Grant, P. & Basye, D. (2014) How can personalized learning transform teaching? In E. Reed &
K. Hamman (Ed.) Personalized learning: A guide for engaging students with technology.
(pp. 3-20). Washington, DC: International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE).
Grant, P. & Basye, D. (2014) Why consider personalized learning? In E. Reed & K. Hamman
(Ed.) Personalized learning: A guide for engaging students with technology. (pp. 3-20).
Washington, DC: International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE).
Huang, Y., Liang, T., Su, Y., & Chen, N. (2012). Empowering personalized learning with an
interactive e-book learning system for elementary school students. Educational
Technology Research & Development, 60(4), 703-722.
Hwang, G., Chen, B., & Huang, C. (2016). Development and effectiveness analysis of a
personalized ubiquitous multi-device certification tutoring system based on bloom's
taxonomy of educational objectives. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(1),
223-236.
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). http://www.iste.org/

SITUATED COGNITION & PERSONALIZED LEARNING

15

Kim, R., Olfman, L., Ryan, T., & Eryilmaz, E. (2014). Leveraging a personalized system to
improve self-directed learning in online educational environments. Computers &
Education, 70, 150-160. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.08.006
Liew, T. W., Tan, S., & Seydali, R. (2013). Learners' field dependence and the effects of
personalized narration on learners' computer perceptions and task-related attitudes in
multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 42(3), 255-272.
Mehta, N., Geissel, K., Rhodes, E., & Salinas, G. (2015). Comparative effectiveness in CME:
Evaluation of personalized and self-directed learning models. Journal of Continuing
Education in the Health Professions, 35(1), S24-26 1p. doi:10.1002/chp.21284
Mohd, C. K., & Shahbodin, F. (2015). Personalized learning environment: Alpha testing, beta
testing & user acceptance test. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 195, 837-843.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.319
Powell, W. & Kusuma-Powell, O. (2011). Knowing ourselves as teachers. In K. Martin (Ed.),
How to teach now: Five keys to personalized learning in the global classroom (pp. 5579). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
Powell, W. & Kusuma-Powell, O. (2011). Knowing our students as learners. In K. Martin (Ed.),
How to teach now: Five keys to personalized learning in the global classroom (pp. 2154). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
Powell, W. & Kusuma-Powell, O. (2011). The challenge and the opportunity. In K. Martin (Ed.),
How to teach now: Five keys to personalized learning in the global classroom (pp. 152164). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
(ASCD).

SITUATED COGNITION & PERSONALIZED LEARNING

16

Song, Y., Wong, L., & Looi, C. (2012). Fostering personalized learning in science inquiry
supported by mobile technologies. Educational Technology Research and Development,
60(4), 679-701.
Tomlinson, C. A., & Allan, S. D. (2000). Understanding differentiated instruction: Building a
foundation for leadership. Leadership for differentiating schools and classrooms (pp. 115). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).