Active Processing in Education: Moving Beyond Participation Toward Deeper Cognitive Engagement

Introduction: Active Processing, the Science of Learning, and Why This Conversation Matters

By: Alicia Peletz

Something I have noticed in the education world that is super buzzworthy right now is centered around the Science of Learning. I keep noticing post after post on LinkedIn about it. I can’t escape it! For those unfamiliar, the Science of Learning is research from cognitive science, neuroscience, and psychology that helps us understand how people learn, retain, and apply knowledge. If you want to learn more about it, I recommend this book.

For many educators, this has brought renewed attention to clarity, modeling, explicit instruction, and structured practice. These are important elements of strong teaching and have seemed like a missing link for many teachers in recent years. The research behind them has helped schools reassess how they support all learners.

At the same time, educators who value inquiry, project based learning, and other learner-centered, constructivist approaches sometimes feel tension in these discussions. It can begin to sound as though learning must be one thing or another, almost enforcing binary thinking, such that it’s either lecture or exploration, direct instruction or inquiry, structure or autonomy. But, as with most things, when we look closely at the research itself, the picture is far closer than divided, and at times, conversations focus only on parts of the research rather than the full picture.

However, the Science of Learning reminds us that students need opportunities to actively make meaning, which means connecting ideas, explaining their thinking, reflecting on misunderstandings, and reorganizing their knowledge. Constructivist and learner-centered approaches have long emphasized these same processes.

At ACP, we define constructivism as an approach to learning based on the belief that people actively construct or make their own knowledge through various experiences by the learner, which is very similar to what the Science of Learning advocates for as well. The difference is not whether learning should be structured or inquiry-driven, but whether learners are truly doing something with the information they encounter. It is not a “this-or-that” situation; it is a “yes, and” progression.

That is why I invited Dr. James Pelech, a longtime university professor, former high school mathematics teacher, Fulbright Specialist, and past president of the Association for Constructivist Teaching, to share his work on Active Processing.

Jim’s framework, which has been a work in progress for years, provides a strong way to think about learning that brings these perspectives together. Rooted in constructivist theory yet deeply aligned with cognitive research, Active Processing focuses on the mental actions students take as they transform knowledge by comparing ideas, monitoring their understanding, encountering moments of disequilibrium, and creating new meaning through reflection and collaboration.

Being the true constructivist that he is, you will notice that Jim’s writing prompts you to pause and think along the way. These reflection points are intentional. He does not want you to just read this blog passively. Instead, he invites you to actively participate so you can make those active processing connections. You don’t need to complete every prompt formally. Instead, consider them opportunities to notice how these ideas connect to your own classroom or coaching context.

As you read his blog below, I encourage you to see how small instructional shifts in questioning, reflection, and task design can move learning beyond participation and toward deeper cognitive engagement. My ultimate hope is that this perspective helps us move past “this/or that” conversations and toward a more integrated understanding of teaching and learning, where research, inquiry, and meaningful thinking work together.

The following section, written by Dr. James Pelech, reflects his voice, experiences, and framework for Active Processing.

---

Active Processing in Education Or “Do Something with that Information”

by Dr. James Pelech

“Coming Attraction” (or Sneak Preview)

I want you to get to “really buy into” the Active Processing concept, so here are some “coming attractions” — they represent some of the general ideas we will be discussing. I am hoping you will become excited and interested in Active Processing.

Let’s look at this classroom situation. In ending a class or review session, I would very often ask students to write a summary of the lesson; while there is some active processing in this activity, let’s take a look at a modification based on Active Processing:

One possible shift might involve asking students to:

A.    Write a newspaper article that summarizes the main ideas of the lesson; this would include putting it in newspaper format.

B.    Write a reflection discussing and explaining how writing the newspaper article enabled them to think differently about the topic.

Let’s take a look at a second example. This example is not as complex as our first example, but it will clearly demonstrate Active Processing.

Ask an open-ended question, and when the student answers, ask them to rephrase their response or put it in different words. One variation is to have another student complete the rephrasing.

All right, hope you are looking forward to the rest of this article and are very excited about the possibilities which are afforded by Active Processing!

Let’s Get Started!

It is important that we not just “Talk the Talk”, but actually “Walk the Talk”. As you read, consider how these ideas might show up within your own classroom or coaching context. With that in mind, I am asking you to “jump into” Active Processing and complete Reflective Prompt 1.

Reflective Prompt 1

Get some paper and write down the following:

A.    Your definition of Active Processing

B.    What it looks like, sounds like in the classroom

You have actually started the process of actively processing knowledge, so be sure to keep your responses in a safe place, as we will get back to this a little later!

Some History

There are a couple of incidents that have merged together to form the foundation of creating and pursuing the concept of Active Processing. Let’s examine them.

I fondly recall my first few days as a young Geometry teacher; I actually had my Educational Psychology book on my desk, turned to the pages on Piaget. Well, I am sure that you know what happened…after five minutes of trying to teach, there wasn’t much assimilation, accommodation, or anything that even remotely resembled learning. I do vaguely remember that during my planning period, I scrambled to open the book and see if Piaget could help me. Well, there were NO  specific examples or even suggestions for translating Piaget’s ideas into concrete, observable behaviors. This started my quest for translating his theories into concrete classroom practices.

My quest for understanding Piaget led me to researching the Constructivist philosophy (we will get back to this in a little bit). Over the years, I studied educational psychologists/researchers such as Vygotsky, Bruner, von Glaserfeld, Kamii, and Dewey. This engulfed a major part of my teaching career.

Creating Guidelines

As I started my quest to turn Piaget and the teachings of Constructivist theorists into concrete behaviors (now, active processing), I developed Learning Guidelines, which I eventually renamed and reorganized into Active Processing Guidelines. 

Before I share them, it is important to note that there is one assumption underlying these guidelines: The learner is an autonomous entity, interacting with others and the environment to create knowledge.

These guidelines have experienced changes throughout the years, but here is where they are for now as of April 2026.

The previous paragraphs have described my journey into the “Active Processing” realm, but have they enabled you to actively process? Let’s do that now!!

Reflective Prompt 2

1.     Now that you have experienced more ideas on Active Processing,  write down your definition of Active Processing.

2.     How does it compare to what you wrote in Learning Activity 1? What enabled your change?

3.     Following is my personal definition of Active Processing:

The act of the mind in transforming/manipulating information or previous knowledge into a more meaningful or complex form

4. Compare your definition to mine; How are they the same? How are they different?

Translating the Guidelines into an Instructional Delivery System

While these guidelines (whether you call them “Constructivist” or “Active Processing”) make the learning process more visible, they still do not make it easy to apply to a classroom situation. What I have done in the past is to organize these guidelines into categories which enable the educator to create a cohesive lesson.  

Let’s look at Guidelines 1, 8, 10, 11, 12; they provide general guidelines for the learning process. They serve as a template or overarching framework for enabling students to “do something with their knowledge.

But what are some of the specific actions when people learn or create new knowledge? What does one see and hear when entering a classroom in which students are actively processing experiences? What are the cognitive actions that students implement when they are actively engaged in their learning? Well, Principles 2, 6, 7, and 9 provide specific actions in the knowledge creation process.

While these categories may overlap, they have proven very effective for me in terms of planning, organizing, and analyzing my classroom practice. Following is a summary of these categories and their respective classroom behaviors.

Additionally, in my previous writings, I categorized the Guidelines differently, but this categorization has given me a new perspective and will help us understand the process. Also, isn’t creating a new format or organization a sign of Active Processing?

Active Process Framework*

Bridging Constructivism and Cognitive Science

GENERAL ACTIONS: How learners interact with knowledge	SPECIFIC COGNITIVE ACTIONS: What thinking looks like during learning
Connect prior knowledge Monitor learning & plan improvement Experience disequilibrium Self-explain & teach others Collaborate to create new perspectives	Create patterns & categories Compare & contrast ideas Summarize concepts Hypothesize & evaluate Use multiple modes Reorganize thinking Solve authentic problems

*Underlying Assumption: The learner is an autonomous meaning-maker interacting with others and the environment to construct knowledge.

Examples of General Actions for Active Processing

While I am totally positive that you have already done a form of these activities, I want to provide some examples which have an “Active Processing Twist” to them. 

When we begin to look at these familiar strategies through the lens of Active Processing, something shifts. What may have once felt like a simple instructional move becomes a deliberate cognitive experience for learners. Rather than focusing only on what students are doing, Active Processing asks us to consider how students are thinking by connecting ideas, deepening their understanding, and expanding their knowledge.

This subtle shift in perspective can transform everyday classroom practices into powerful opportunities for deeper learning, which isn’t that something we are all after? Check out some of my examples below.

What follows are examples that illustrate how these guidelines move from theory into practice. Rather than viewing these strategies as isolated activities, consider how each one intentionally invites learners to connect ideas, rethink assumptions, and actively transform knowledge. The goal is not simply to keep students busy, but to design experiences where thinking becomes visible and meaningful.

1. The Bonus Question Example: In my college-level assessment class, I provided students with a reading list of articles they were to read before class, and these questions were on the quiz. The quiz often included a bonus question that was not on that day’s required reading but would be on the quiz for the following class session. My discussions with students indicated that once they realized this, they started looking for the Bonus Question on the following quiz. They not only activated their prior knowledge, but there was active processing involved as students often realized that their initial understanding was incorrect or needed to be modified (Principles 1 and 3). By shifting the question’s purpose from recall to anticipation, students begin to monitor their own thinking and revise their prior understanding. The learning moment becomes less about getting the answer right and more about recognizing how knowledge evolves over time.
   

2. Rephrasing: This example originates from a professional development session focused on working with MLL students, which is also included in my book, The Comprehensive Handbook of Constructivist Teaching, published by Information Age Publishing on pages 65 to 66. This session indicated that when an MLL student uses incorrect grammar/syntax, the teacher should immediately rephrase the student’s comments correctly. I applied this to my practice by asking the student to rephrase/put into other words what they had just said (Principles 1, 2, 4) Rephrasing moves students from passive response to active meaning-making. Instead of relying on the teacher to correct language, learners engage in self-explanation, a powerful cognitive action that deepens understanding while strengthening communication.
   

3. What word(s) Come to your Mind When I say…Explain Your Reasoning: While this activity is very effective in enabling Active Processing, the following is a variation which “goes one step beyond.” After the student answers the question, ask ANOTHER student to explain why his classmate chose that word. Very often, students have different forms of reasoning for this, which makes for an interesting discussion (Principles 1, 3, 4, 5). When students interpret a peer’s thinking, they must compare perspectives and construct new meaning. This type of dialogue shifts classroom talk from participation toward genuine cognitive engagement.

Examples of Specific Cognitive Actions for Active Processing

This section presents some examples containing examples of specific cognitive actions. I consider these examples as the starting point for you to consider and create your own examples tailored to your practice.

As you read through these examples, you may notice that many of them mirror familiar classroom projects or assessments. The difference lies not simply in the task itself, but in how it invites learners to transform knowledge by organizing ideas, evaluating understanding, and reflecting on their thinking.

When viewed through the lens of Active Processing, these experiences go beyond mere participation and become opportunities for deeper cognitive engagement. Rather than asking students to complete an activity that often becomes a checklist to march through, the goal is to help students actively construct meaning from the learning experience. Furthermore, these examples illustrate how intentional instructional design can create moments where learners reorganize thinking and construct knowledge, the core of Active Processing. See some of my examples below:

1.  “Dummies Manual”: This example is derived from the popular book series, “The Dummies Manual” and is featured in my two books, The Comprehensive Hand book of Constructivist Teaching: From Theory to Practice.

   (2010, page 80) and Integrating the Curriculum Through Active Processing (2025, pp. 53-54, 66-88). Instead of having the traditional review period, which we all know is not always effective, I decided to have the students create a “Dummies Manual” for a topic of their own. The following are the requirements:

   1. You will create a “Dummies Manual for ……..

   2. You are to choose any topic we have studied so far.

   3. The requirements:

      1. Create a Dummies manual with a cover, Table of Contents,  Explanations, Diagrams, Use of color, and imagination/creativity.

      2. You must present at least two main ideas 

      3. You must explain these ideas, and when possible, give an example.

      4. You must also write a short reflection (very short, just a couple of sentences)  which addresses the following:

         1. How did this assignment enable you to think differently about performance assessment?assignment

         2. How did this assignment enable you to think differently from thinking for a quiz?

         3. Briefly describe the product and/or the processes.

         4. How, in your opinion, can a performance assessment like this prepare you for high-stakes tests?

   You can see many of our “Specific Cognitive Actions” in these requirements. It is very important in this system for students to monitor their learning (metacognition). Reflection will be a key staple for any educator seeking to help students actively process their experiences. The task itself is creative, but the cognitive power lies in organizing ideas, explaining reasoning, and reflecting on how understanding changes through the process.

   
   

2. Manual on Stress: I was very fortunate to be asked to teach a Physiology course at the graduate level (I was a mathematics teacher for over 30 years). The Science Department at our university decided to create a course for students who have earned their Bachelor’s degree but need a gap year.

   In this program, the gap year would include taking this course, which would result in a Master’s Degree and preparation for admission to Medical or Dental School (or other terminal coursework in the Health Sciences Field). I was asked to create a course for these students focusing on critical thinking and the concept of vocation in Health Services. 

   One of the modules focused on stress. One of the final activities involved creating an authentic product. The requirement for the first part of the assignment follows:

Manual on Stress Requirements:

The purpose of this assignment is to enable you to learn by using your knowledge of a topic to create an authentic product. In this case you are expected to learn and understand stress by creating an individual stress management plan. Requirements:

1. Create a brochure/booklet presenting a stress management plan for graduate students in the Masters in Integrative Physiology program.

2. You must use a professional tool such as__________ 

3. It must contain a definition of stress

4. It must contain the global nature of stress

5. It must contain the causes of stress

6. It must contain at least seven strategies

7. It must present a comprehensive plan using the concepts discussed in class

8. You are strongly encouraged to be creative and use graphics, color, etc.

Reflection Requirements: Answer the following questions below.

1. Discuss how this assignment (either part or both) added to or changed your vision of critical thinking.

2. How this project changed or did not change your vision of vocation (career or student)

3. A prompt of your own

This assignment aligns with many of the Specific Cognitive Actions while also reflecting our General Guidelines, as learners synthesize information across contexts and make their thinking visible through the creation process.

3. Tall Tales:  While the above examples can be easily modified for many levels of education, the following is an example that I worked on with another teacher at the 7th-grade level.  This Literature class was studying the topic of “Tall Tales”. We decided they would learn this topic more effectively by creating their own “Tall Tale.” In this case, we asked students to form teams of 2 and create their own Tall Tale. A very important part of this assignment would be the prompts for the reflection. Questions about the process of creating your own work and collaborating with others are very helpful. Examples would include:

   1. What did you learn when explaining your ideas to your partner?

   2. How did you feel when your partner disagreed with you?

   3. How did this change your vision of “Tall Tales”?

   4. What difficulties did you encounter? 
      

4. Standardized Tests: This is an example that can be applied to all levels and content areas. My high school students let it be known that they enjoyed my class, but they felt that they had to be prepared for THE FORMAT OF MULTIPLE-CHOICE QUESTIONS; it was a math class after all. How was this incorporated into active processing? I would put a multiple-choice-type question on the test and ask students to show all their work (our normal procedure). But I also included an added step to understand the thinking behind their thinking. There are now two possible paths to take. The first would be to have students explain which one or two possible choices they would eliminate. Another active processing choice would involve students choosing an incorrect choice and explaining what mistake one would make to choose that option.

   This still prepared students for their standardized test at the end of the year, but it also encouraged them to analyze their thinking and understand the reasoning behind each choice, even if it was the wrong choice. In this way, even highly structured formats can become opportunities for Active Processing when the focus shifts from answering questions to understanding thinking.

5. Active Processing Questioning in a Literature Class.

   This activity is derived from The Comprehensive Handbook of Constructivist Teaching (2010 pp. 71-72) and published by Information Age Publishing. 

   
   

   The students read Robert Frost’s poem, the Road Not Taken. An Active Processing Environment is created by asking the following questions:

   1. Look at the first paragraph. Can you summarize it in your own words? (Comprehension)

   2. If the speaker were alive today, how would he describe his philosophy of life? (Analysis and Application)

   3. What type of life decisions is the speaker referring to? Be prepared to discuss and defend your position. (Synthesis)

   4. Robert Frost once said that a poem “begins as a lump in the throat, a sense of wrong, homesickness, a loneliness.” Do you think that this description applies to the poem we have just studied? Be prepared to justify your reasoning. (Evaluation)

   5. Would you recommend to your best friend to take the “road less traveled”? (Evaluation)

      
      

Wow, this section had a lot! So, now it’s time to help you actively process what we have discussed by working on the final reflective prompt below:

Reflective Prompt 3

1.     Write out one or two ideas you would like to implement in your practice.

2.     List the obstacles you predict you will encounter.

3.     Briefly explain how you will address those obstacles.

Concluding Thoughts:

As educators continue to explore how people learn, Active Processing reminds us that meaningful learning happens when students do something with information. When structure, input, reflection, and inquiry work together to deepen thinking, different instructional approaches become part of the same process and toolbox rather than competing choices.

And remember, this is only the beginning! I have presented some ideas you can actively process over the coming days, and I hope you do!

For more information and details on Active Processing, I encourage you to visit my website, www.pelechactiveprocessing.com. While the website presents some of the guidelines and specific actions differently, the main idea of “doing something with that information” remains the same.

I encourage you to stay in contact. Here is my email address to contact me jim@pelechactiveprocessing.com as you develop your own Active Processing system. Have fun!

---

Futher Reading & References:

Active Processing & Constructivist Foundations

• Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1993). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. ASCD.

• McLeod, S. (2019). Constructivist learning theory. Simply Psychology.https://www.simplypsychology.org/constructivism.html

• Pelech, J. (2010). The comprehensive handbook of constructivist teaching: From theory to practice. Information Age Publishing.

• Pelech, J. (2013). Guide to transforming teaching through self-inquiry. Information Age Publishing.

• Here is Jim’s website for Active Processing: www.pelechactiveprocessing.com

Learner-Centered Practice

• Mesibov, D., & Drmacich, D. (2022). Helping students take control of their own learning: 279 learner-centered, social-emotional strategies for teachers. Routledge.

Science of Learning & Cognitive Research

• Brown, P. C., Roediger, H. L., III, & McDaniel, M. A. (2014). Make it stick: The science of successful learning. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

• Watson, A., & Busch, B. (2021). The science of learning: 99 studies that every teacher needs to know. Routledge.

• Willingham, D. T. (2009). Why don’t students like school? A cognitive scientist answers questions about how the mind works and what it means for the classroom. Jossey-Bass