The variation theory of learning is a theory about how we learn and, therefore, how to teach. It isn't a theory of how memories are stored. Nor is it a theory of how learning can be impeded, like cognitive load theory, which can tell you what to avoid doing. Finally, it isn't just an activity you can sometimes add to a lesson.
Instead, it's a theory of how concepts and ideas must be experienced by students for them to become aware of them. It helps us know how to present concepts to students so they can perceive what we perceive.
Notice how this puts the student in the driving seat of learning. Students aren't passive receivers of information. Meaning can't be transmitted between people, instead everyone must actively discern new things themselves.
To become aware of an aspect you must experience difference (change, or variation) in that aspect. Just defining an aspect for a student isn't going to cut it; instead, a student must be provoked into perceiving it through variation. It's in the variety that meaning can be discerned.
Think about a school that only ever reports that students are "learning well", compared to another that reports either "learning well", "learning very well", or "not learning well enough". If two parents of the different schools both receive a report saying "learning well" they both know that one is meaningful and the other isn't. In other words, if something has never changed, never varied, why would you pay attention to it?
Imagine a very isolated settlement a thousand years ago. Maybe in the middle of Siberia, and they've been told that they speak Russian. But the people have never encountered—heard, or heard of—any other language. What is their concept of language? Language to them equates to the word Russian and no matter how many times they hear Russian (hearing similarity), they don't differentiate between language and Russian.
Yet one day, some nomads happen to explore new areas and meet the Russian-speaking people. They immediately perceive that they speak a different language, and the idea of language takes a new form and gains meaning: “Russian is a type of language”. To discern "language" as a concept and make it distinct from Russian, the aspect of language itself needed to vary.
There are two salient points here. Variation theory is about learning that changes a person's awareness of aspects of the world; rather than storage, it's about perception. Only when you perceive a difference (change, or variation) within a concept does it gain any meaning because it is at this moment that a person mentally separates an aspect from everything else. That aspect then exists in the person's world and they can think with it.
In our lives, we have these conversations all the time when we ask “hold on! What’s the difference between X and Y?”. It’s obvious that someone is talking about something in a way you don’t quite understand. They see something you don’t, and to see like them, you ask them to share the distinction they’ve made.
So what about similarity? Similarity is really important, and its what helps us generalise. The people in the example above could come to see similarities in speaking a language with other things, such as sign language (non-oral), or computer code. This adds more meaning to the understanding of “language” as a concept.
The key to understanding variation theory is that it states that you first perceive a difference to understand something new and perceive similarity to generalise that concept to other examples. In that order. Difference before similarity.
The problem that happens in many lessons is that a teacher tries to help students learn something new by presenting many examples of that thing. It's like presenting the concept of elegant dancing by only showing examples of elegant dancing. Yet, if you can't see it in the first two examples, why would you see it in the next? Instead, you should show examples of varying elegance.
Nevertheless, variation theory doesn’t impose that every lesson must show difference first followed by examples of similarity. It's a theory of learning, not a theory of a lesson. If we are confident our students are already aware of a concept, we may use analogy (similarity) as our first resource. Sometimes a lesson's objective is simply generalisation.
The idea that differences are what make the difference is much deeper than the development of variation theory. However, Ference Marton’s work in developing variation theory (over decades) was in developing the idea into a theory of learning that is classroom effective.
In a nutshell, Marton realised that if “discerning” (“telling apart” or “distinguishing”) was key to perceiving difference, then logically, you would try to make the difference super obvious to students.
When perceiving new experiences, or new examples, there’s so much to be aware of. When I want students to see the deep difference between a living organism and a dead one, I could show examples of both in photos. But, different organisms, and different environments, represent so much noise that if I ask students what the difference is, they’ll point to all sorts of differences.
If I want them to perceive a particular difference, I should make everything else the same, except for the aspect I want them to perceive. For example, I can show a video of a cell, before and after it lyses (dies). The environment and composition of the cell are the same. The only difference between them is the organisation of the parts.
The key then, is to show examples that vary only in the aspect you want students to perceive—keeping all other aspects the same (as best you can, of course). This important aspect is called the "critical aspect". And is something variation theory differentiates from the content of a lesson, such as the facts, vocabulary, and technical details.
It works from the simple to the complex—just like when teaching natural selection we contrast it with Lamarck's theory. We keep the organism, its traits, and environment the same, but contrast how each theory plays out with the same starting conditions. And, of course, this technique inherently reduces cognitive load.
Rather than just "teaching it as it is" and then "defining it" as if meaning could be transmitted to students. Variation theory invites us to think always from the perspective of the student and what they can perceive. From here, we must provoke students with differences and variations to help them perceive what we perceive.
For a teacher it isn't that hard either. Often it's simply asking “what if I change this one part and leave the rest the same, what difference does it make”.
What emerges is a middle way. If we want students to perceive what we perceive we can't just lecture. Having students repeat the "correct" answers is no guarantee that they have perceived and made meaning of anything. Nor can we just give students activities to construct their own meaning because it's unsure whether they will perceive what we want them to perceive. Instead, we must provoke students with varied examples and then converse to agree a meaning of the percept. Do you want to co-construct meaning without lecturing, slide decks, or leaving students to discover for themselves? Learn how and why in my books. Download the first chapters of each book here.
References
Marton, F. 2014. Necessary Conditions of Learning. London: Routledge.