Learning Theories Compared: Self-Regulated, Community, and Expansive

Focus of Learning Perspectives

Cultural-historical activity theory suggests that throughout a person's life, there are many types of activities—including games, study, and work—that evolve through three generations: preschool, school-age, and adulthood. Each stage contains numerous learning factors that enable lifelong learning. Learning is a complex system, and while different researchers propose different learning theories, no single unified theory has achieved universal acceptance. The theory of learning continues to develop; some scholars return to traditional reinterpretation, while others explore new ways of thinking.

This essay compares and contrasts three different perspectives on learning presented by Engeström (2001), Kerno and Mace (2010), and Zimmerman (1989) across three main dimensions: focus, motivation, and type of learning. Through these three dimensions, the analysis reveals how these three theories differ and align, and explores the implications they hold for human resource development.

Although the articles presented by Zimmerman (1989), Kerno and Mace (2010), and Engeström (2001) all address learning, they focus on different kinds of learning. Zimmerman (1989) focuses on self-regulated learning; Kerno and Mace (2010) focus on group learning; and Engeström (2001) focuses on both individual and group learning.

In Zimmerman's (1989) perspective, self-regulated academic learning is a self-regulatory process involving standard setting, delay of gratification, goal setting, self-reinforcement, self-instructions, self-efficacy perceptions, and self-evaluation. This means people are metacognitively, motivationally, and behaviorally active participants in their own learning process (Zimmerman 1986, 1989). For example, regardless of how others evaluate your work, you clearly understand whether you performed the job well. Similarly, when everyone's performance falls short, you recognize this as well. To make these judgments, you must set your own learning goals, understand the behaviors required in the job, and monitor yourself during task completion.

However, as noted earlier, no single unified theory achieves universal acceptance. Kerno and Mace (2010) offer a different perspective from Zimmerman (1989), focusing more on group work and communities of practice. Communities of practice can be defined as a process of social learning that typically occurs when a group of people sharing a common interest in an area collaborate over time, sharing ideas, finding solutions, and building innovation. Wenger (1998) provides a concise definition: "Communities of practice are groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly." This definition reveals the significant difference between Zimmerman's (1989) and Kerno and Mace's (2010) perspectives. One emphasizes individual study, self-control, and self-regulation, while the other centers on group learning where members share ideas and pursue common purposes.

Another social learning model is Engeström's expansive learning theory (Engeström 2001), which presents a more philosophical and profound perspective compared to Zimmerman (1989) and Kerno and Mace (2010). Expansive learning begins when a collective activity allows certain individuals to take action and attempt to transform the activity system through re-conceptualization of the activity's object. Additionally, when compared to the previous mode of activity, the new activity encompasses a wider horizon of possibilities.

Motivation in Three Learning Models

After comparing and contrasting these three perspectives, the differences in focus become clear: Zimmerman (1989) focuses on how individuals learn independently; Kerno and Mace (2010) focus on how individuals learn within groups; and Engeström (2001) focuses on how groups collectively learn new things.

Motivation is the second analytical dimension. Motivation is not directly observable because it forms part of a person's cognitive structure. Instead, motivation is defined in terms of its effects on behavior, which are more observable. Some researchers define motivation as the direction, persistence, and amount of effort an individual expends to achieve a specified outcome. Since the three articles by Zimmerman (1989), Kerno and Mace (2010), and Engeström (2001) address different kinds of learning, their approaches to motivation differ during the learning process.

Self-regulated learning assumes that individuals are motivationally, metacognitively, and behaviorally active participants in their own learning process (Zimmerman 1986, 1989). In terms of motivation within self-regulated learning, the model assumes motivational orientation sustained by continuing self-perceptions of efficacy when individuals perform specific work (Zimmerman 1989). When people perform work and learn independently, they develop motivation to improve their knowledge and self-enhancement, leading to continued self-perceptions of efficacy.

In contrast, Kerno and Mace (2010) focus on group learning and communities of practice. Communities of practice consist of groups that share ideas, experience, tools, and insights in areas of common interest, with members desiring to learn from and contribute to the community with their varied experiences (Kerno and Mace 2010). Motivation can be defined as the willingness of senders to share their knowledge and the willingness of receivers to accept knowledge from senders. In communities of practice, newer or less experienced participants may acquire more knowledge, skills, or abilities in proportion to more experienced members, while master participants share knowledge with newer members. Thus, the motivation to share knowledge is a critical factor for success in communities of practice.

In situated learning theory, motivation to learn springs from participation in culturally valued collaborative practices where something useful is produced (Engeström 2001). For example, people gradually gain knowledge through relatively stable practices. In expansive learning, during major transformations of activity systems, members develop greater competence and knowledge during the activity and become more motivated to transform the activity and create new knowledge.

Transformational Learning Frameworks

Motivation appears across all three perspectives, as it enables people to learn knowledge and gain competence more efficiently. However, each perspective generates different types of motivation. Self-regulated learning produces motivation through self-controlled study that leads to self-enhancement; communities of practice generate motivation when group members share common interests; and in contrast to self-regulated learning and communities of practice, expansive learning's motivation springs from people creating new knowledge.

The third dimension is transformational learning. Three main types of learning constitute transformational learning: instrumental learning, communicative learning, and emancipatory learning. The three perspectives of learning link to different types of transformational learning. Zimmerman (1989) self-regulated learning links to instrumental learning; Kerno and Mace (2010) communities of practice link to communicative learning; and Engeström (2001) expansive learning links to emancipatory learning.

The proposed view of self-regulated learning assumes reciprocal causation among three influence processes: personal, environmental, and behavioral determinants of self-regulated learning. Self-regulated learning is not determined solely by personal processes but is assumed to be influenced by environmental and behavioral events in reciprocal fashion (Zimmerman 1989). Thus, self-regulated learning links to instrumental learning because instrumental learning focuses on controlling and manipulating the environment through task-oriented problem solving and determination of cause-and-effect relationships.

This contrasts with Kerno and Mace (2010) perspective on communities of practice. Communities of practice have three required components: domain, community, and practice. The domain has an identity defined by a shared domain of interest, with membership implying commitment to the domain and a shared competence that distinguishes members from others. The community consists of members engaging in shared activities to share information and help one another. They build relationships that allow members to learn from each other. The practice comprises members as practitioners who develop a shared repertoire of resources, requiring time and sustained interaction within the group (Kerno and Mace 2010). The community component demonstrates that communities of practice link to communicative learning, as communicative learning involves how individuals communicate their needs, feelings, and desires while understanding each other's inner world. As mentioned previously, community of practice membership requires members to communicate and discuss with one another to share common interests.

However, expansive learning by Engeström (2001) differs from both self-regulated learning and communities of practice, linking instead to emancipatory learning. Expansive learning occurs when individuals take action to transform the activity system, which can also be described as knowledge creation. A model describing four basic modes in this type of knowledge creation includes socialization, externalization, combination, and internalization. This represents emancipatory learning: becoming free of hegemonic assumptions while emphasizing learner transformation.

Implications for Human Resource Development

Expansive learning differs significantly from self-regulated learning and communities of practice. Self-regulated learning tends to focus on individuals learning new things through self-control and self-study; communities of practice tend to work with knowledge already present in the group, with members simply acquiring and understanding that knowledge; and expansive learning tends to occur when individuals pose questions to the group, after which the whole group attempts to use new modeling to find solutions.

Understanding learning theories is very important in human resource development, particularly in the design of training programs. Managers must examine the basic elements of learning theories and understand their relationship to training. After comparing and contrasting the three perspectives on learning presented by Engeström (2001), Kerno and Mace (2010), and Zimmerman (1989), it becomes clear that learning takes different forms depending on context and approach.

Zimmerman's (1989) perspective on self-regulated learning offers value; however, if company employees use only self-regulated learning to complete their jobs without communicating with other members, the organization cannot develop effectively. Knowledge constitutes intangible organizational assets, and when employees leave without sharing their knowledge, the company loses these valuable assets. Therefore, self-regulated learning alone has limited utility in the workplace and for human resource development.

Engeström's (2001) perspective on expansive learning also holds merit, but this approach is more useful in organizations that consistently pursue innovation rather than those seeking more stable development. The constant questioning and transformation required by expansive learning may not suit all organizational contexts or strategic goals.

Conclusion

Kerno and Mace's (2010) perspective on communities of practice appears most applicable to diverse organizational contexts. An increasing number of organizations across different sectors now focus on communities of practice as a key concept for improving performance. Communities of practice require all group members to share information, maintain common interests, and build relationships through communication. Communication fundamentally drives work performance development, making communities of practice particularly valuable for human resource development and organizational effectiveness.

This essay has compared and contrasted three different perspectives on learning presented by Engeström (2001), Kerno and Mace (2010), and Zimmerman (1989) across three main dimensions: focus, motivation, and type of learning. Analysis of these three dimensions reveals how these perspectives differ and align, providing deeper understanding of their comparative strengths. Furthermore, examination of the implications these theories hold for human resource development demonstrates that communities of practice offers particular value in workplace contexts and organizational development. The systematic comparison across consistent analytical dimensions provides a framework for practitioners selecting appropriate learning models for specific organizational and developmental contexts.