A framework for the redesign of K-12 education in the context of current educational reform

The historical context for the development of the Learner-Centered Psychological Principles (LCPs) is summarized. This context includes a discussion of why the LCPs and their practices are particularly important in the current educational reform era. Implications for practice are provided, and the article concludes with how the LCPs can contribute to a national framework for the systemic redesign of K-20 education. The learner-centered framework provides validation for practices that achieve a balanced focus on both learning and learners. Research-validated principles establish a foundation for clarifying components of a positive learning environment at classroom and school levels that can increase the likelihood of more students experiencing success.

**********

TO SET THE STAGE for this issue of Theory Into Practice, it is important to understand the historical context in which the Learner-Centered Psychological Principles (LCPs) were developed. As part of this context, I summarize (a) why I believe the principles and their associated practices are particularly important in the current educational reform era, and (b) implications for practice based on some of the latest research from current literature. I conclude with how the LCPs can contribute to a national framework for the systemic redesign of K-20 education. The learner-centered framework and teaching practices offer a promising alternative to many current reform initiatives. They offer hope while also being consistent with our best available knowledge of what supports positive learning and change for all people in the system.

Context for the Development of the Learner-Centered Psychological Principles

The late 1980s and early 1990s were a time when many U.S. political leaders were responding to what some educators had called a "crisis in education"--an alarming decline in student achievement that threatened America's national standing as compared with student achievement in other countries (e.g., Japan). The National Governors' Association was asked to meet with presidential committees and formulate the National Education Goals, which later became Goals 2000: Educate America Act. Discussions began about the need for national standards in all academic disciplines, and talk abounded about the need for national and state assessments that could provide greater levels of accountability for student achievement of rigorous academic standards.

In the midst of these discussions and policy decisions, the year 1990 saw the formation of the American Psychological Association's (APA) Presidential Task Force for Psychology in Education. The newly elected president of the APA, Dr. Charles Spielberger, and a group of well-known and respected educational and school psychologists joined together to address what they considered well-intended but not well-informed decisions (from the perspective of what is known about learning) about directions in education reform. Members of the Task Force were united in seeing psychology as a scientific field that studies learning phenomena and processes at basic and applied levels. There was concern that the profession had a responsibility to present its accumulated and research-validated knowledge base relevant to learning and education in ways that would be helpful to educators and policy makers alike.

Development of the Learner-Centered Psychological Principles (LCPs)

A major project under my leadership during the three-year term of the APA Presidential Task Force was an analysis and synthesis of research on the personal and environmental conditions that best support high levels of learning and achievement. The result was a document published in early 1993 entitled The Learner-Centered Psychological Principles: A Framework for School Reform and Redesign (APA Task Force on Psychology in Education, 1993). The Task Force saw this product as a "living document" that would be revised and reissued as more was discovered about learning, motivation, development, and individual differences that must be addressed to achieve optimal learning for all. The Principles document is now in its second iteration and continues to be widely disseminated to educators and researchers in the United States and abroad (APA Work Group of the Board of Educational Affairs, 1997). The 14 LCPs shown in Table 1 define a research-validated knowledge base about learning and learners.

The LCPs summarize what research shows about how students learn and the motivation, development, and individual differences that influence learning. They also define factors or domains of human functioning during the learning process. The practice implications and their domains of influence emerged during the development of the LCPs.

When work on the Principles began, what the final product would look like or what it would be called wasn't clear. A set of principles emerged that have stood the test of time across a variety of learning contexts and with diverse learners across various age spans. This knowledge base, defined as a set of principles, had an additional feature--the principles could be categorized into important domains. These domains reflect the holistic nature of factors influencing learners and learning (cognitive and metacognitive, motivational and affective, developmental and social, and other individual differences). Furthermore, as early drafts were disseminated for a wide review by researchers and practitioners at all levels of the PreK-20 system and beyond, another phenomenon emerged. We saw that the principles had not only the support of researchers, but also of experienced teachers who had learned from their own practice the validity of the principles. These practitioners recognized the "truths" represented in the principles--truths about human nature, learning, motivation, and development. They recognized that knowing, believing, and practicing this knowledge base had allowed them to make a difference in the lives and learning potential of their individual students from diverse social, ethnic, and racial groups.