BANDURAS

Albert Bandura was born in Mundare, Alberta, on 4 December 1925 and died on

His entry into psychology was by chance. As a member of a car-pooling group of students at the University of British Columbia, Bandura arrived early for his classes and took a psychology course to fill his morning hours. In 1949, he graduated with a B.A. and moved to the University of Iowa, where he took his M.A. and, in 1952, a Ph.D. in clinical psychology. A year later, Bandura joined Stanford University, becoming a professor in 1964. It was at Stanford that he started his research into social learning, pioneering a theory that proved influential in understanding how self-evaluations drive and regulate human behaviour, particularly with regard to aggression.
Albert Bandura was trained and began his career in the mid-twentieth century when explanations of human functioning, including classroom learning, were dominated by behavioural models advocated by researchers such as B. F. Skinner, Clark Hull, Kenneth Spence, and Edward Tolman. In this context, Bandura, along with his students and colleagues, initiated a series of studies designed to examine social explanations for why and when children displayed aggressive behaviours. These studies demonstrated the value of modelling for acquiring novel behaviours and provided initial evidence for the separation of learning and performance. They also indicated the importance of the learner's perceptions of the environment generally, of the person modelling a behaviour specifically, and of the learner's expectations regarding the consequences of behaviour. In doing so, findings from this systematic research contradicted assumptions within behavioural models that learning was the result of trial and error learning or that changes in behaviour were due primarily to the consequences of one's own actions.

Social cognitive theory (SCT) refers to a psychological model of behaviour that emerged primarily from the work of Albert Bandura (1977; 1986). Initially developed with an emphasis on the acquisition of social behaviours, SCT continues to emphasize that learning occurs in a social context and that much of what is learned is gained through observation. SCT has been applied broadly to such diverse areas of human functioning as career choice, organizational behaviour, athletics, and mental and physical health. SCT also has been applied extensively by those interested in understanding classroom motivation, learning, and achievement (Pajares, 1996; Schunk & Zimmerman, 1994; 1998).
SCT rests on several basic assumptions about learning and behaviour. One assumption concerns triadic reciprocal-ity, or the view that personal, behavioural, and environmental factors influence one another in a bidirectional, reciprocal fashion. That is, a person's on-going functioning is a product of a continuous interaction between cognitive, behavioural, and contextual factors. For instance, classroom learning is shaped by factors within the academic environment, especially the reinforcements experienced by oneself and by others. At the same time, learning is affected by students' own thoughts and self-beliefs and their interpretation of the classroom context.
A closely related assumption within SCT is that people have an agency or ability to influence their own behaviour and the environment in a purposeful, goal-directed fashion (Bandura, 2001). This belief conflicts with earlier forms of behaviourism that advocated a more rigorous form of environmental determinism. SCT does not deny the importance of the environment in determining behaviour, but it does argue that people can also, through forethought, self-reflection, and self-regulatory processes, exert substantial influence over their own outcomes and the environment more broadly.
A third assumption within SCT is that learning can occur without an immediate change in behaviour or more broadly that learning and the demonstration of what has been learned are distinct processes. One reason for this separation is that SCT also assumes that learning involves not just the acquisition of new behaviours, but also of knowledge, cognitive skills, concepts, abstract rules, values, and other cognitive constructs. This division of learning and behaviour is a shift from the position advocated by behavioural theories that defined learning stridently as a change in the form or frequency of behaviour. It also means that students can learn but not demonstrate that learning until motivated to do so.
Born in 1925, Albert Bandura was trained and began his career in the mid-twentieth century when explanations of human functioning, including classroom learning, were dominated by behavioural models advocated by researchers such as B. F. Skinner, Clark Hull, Kenneth Spence, and Edward Tolman. In this context, Bandura, along with his students and colleagues, initiated a series of studies designed to examine social explanations for why and when children displayed aggressive behaviours. These studies demonstrated the value of modelling for acquiring novel behaviours and provided initial evidence for the separation of learning and performance. They also indicated the importance of the learner's perceptions of the environment generally, of the person modelling a behaviour specifically, and of the learner's expectations regarding the consequences of behaviour. In doing so, findings from this systematic research contradicted assumptions within behavioural models that learning was the result of trial and error learning or that changes in behaviour were due primarily to the consequences of one's own actions.
The social cognitive theory developed by Bandura looks at the individual as an active participant in shaping the environment. Through the use of cognitive processes, people evaluate their life experiences, plan their behaviour and make decisions. The person is seen as an adaptive organism able to change the environment and tailor it to his or her own needs. This pits it against theories regarding individuals as basically passive respondents to their surroundings or entities governed by unconscious drives.https://www.questia.com/library/psychology/psychologists/albert-bandura14/12/2014

Children learn by observing others. By the mid 1970s these studies helped form the foundation for what Bandura initially called observational learning theory and then later social learning theory (Bandura, 1977). This precursor to SCT established a viable model for understanding how people learned through observation of models. Additional work during this time expanded aspects of the theory dealing with abstract modelling, language, and conceptual learning. In the years that followed, SCT continued to evolve, spurred by the work of Bandura and his colleagues stressing the processes of goal setting, self-efficacy, and self-regulation. The evolution of SCT also drew ideas from information processing models of psychological functioning to describe the cognitive processes that mediate learning. Ultimately, Bandura noted in the preface to his 1986 treatise, Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social-Cognitive Theory, that, in an effort to be inclusive of these more motivational and cognitive processes, he was using the label “social cognitive theory” rather than social learning to describe his framework. Throughout this book, Bandura describes the philosophical and conceptual foundation for SCT and reviews empirical evidence for its main components. Hence, it provides a concrete milestone for the birth of contemporary SCT. Since that time, SCT has continued to grow and expand especially with regard to the work on self-efficacy, self-regulation, and agency (Bandura, 1997; 2001; Zimmerman, 2000).

SCT integrates a large number of discrete ideas, concepts, and sub-processes into an overall framework for understanding human functioning. Five of the central concepts are described below. For a more complete explanation of SCT, readers are directed to works by Bandura and to the relevant chapters within textbooks on learning.
Observational Learning/Modelling - From its inception one core premise within SCT has been that people learn through observation. This process is also described as vicarious learning or modelling because learning is a result of watching the behaviour and consequences of models in the environment. Although observational learning is dependent upon the availability of models, who or what can serve this role is defined broadly. Live demonstrations of a behaviour or skill by a teacher or classmate, of course, typify the notion of modelling. Verbal or written descriptions, video or audio recordings, and other less direct forms of performance are also considered forms of modelling. There also distinctions among different types of models. Mastery models are proficient when demonstrating a skills, whereas coping models struggle, make mistakes, and only eventually show proficiency. Abstract modelling occurs when the skill or knowledge being learned is conveyed only indirectly, and cognitive modelling occurs when a model verbalizes her thoughts while demonstrating a cognitive process or skill.
According to SCT, observational learning of novel behaviours or skills is dependent on four inter-related processes involving attention, retention, production, and motivation. Attentional processes are critical because students must attend to a model and the relevant aspects of behaviour in order to learn. Retention refers to the processes necessary for reducing and transforming what is observed into a symbolic form that can be stored for later use. Production processes are necessary when students draw on their stored codes and make an effort to perform what they have observed. Finally, motivational processes are key for understanding why students engage in the prior sub-processes, including whether they ever attempt to use or recreate the new skills they have observed. Each of these processes, furthermore, are affected by factors such as the developmental level of the learner and characteristics of the model and modelled behaviour.