3 ms·
I like this one. It almost seems to be a contradict our current education system: "Among cognitive psychologists, there is widespread agreement that people le
by j_baker 16y ago
I like this one. It almost seems to be a contradict our current education system:
"Among cognitive psychologists, there is widespread agreement that people learn best when they are actively engaged with a topic, have to actively problem solve, as we would put it 'construct meaning.' Yet, among individuals young and old, all over the world, there is a view that is incredibly difficult to dislodge. To wit: Education involves a transmission of knowledge/information from someone who is bigger and older (often called 'the sage on the stage') to someone who is shorter, younger, and lacks that knowledge/information. No matter how many constructivist examples and arguments are marshaled, this view — which I consider a misconception — bounces back. And it seems to be held equally by young and old, by individuals who succeeded in school as well as by individuals who failed miserably.
Now this is not a scientific misconception in the sense of flat earth or six days of creation, but it is an example of a conception that is extraordinarily robust, even though almost no one who has studied cognition seriously believes it hold water.
Let me take this opportunity to express my appreciation for your many contributions to our current thinking."
- dkarl 16y agoThat one sounds rather argumentative. He's taking conventional wisdom about learning (active engagement, problem solving) that is accepted dogma among practicing teachers (at least in U.S. primary and secondary schools) and trying to paint it as a minority view. Without hearing some evidence for the robustness of the "transmission" idea, I'm tempted to dismiss this as a rhetorical trick. I suspect there are some popular classroom practices he disagrees with, and he's trying to stigmatize them by linking them to an old, discredited idea.
- johnzabroski 16y agoU.S. primary and secondary schools do not accept the constructivist school as dogma. Perhaps you have simply misunderstood the differences he was stressing. For more information on this, you should probably look at what Seymour Papert has been doing in Maine lately.
- dkarl 16y agoWhat he said was "people learn best when they are actively engaged with a topic, have to actively problem solve, as we would put it 'construct meaning.'" That isn't controversial at all, which is why I suspect it's a rhetorical trick. Scratch the surface and ask him why he thinks teachers really don't believe in it (which they all claim to do) and I'm guessing he'll say they don't believe it because they don't accept some other ideas (the entire dogma of the constructivist school, perhaps?) which he thinks are consequences of believing in engaged, active learning. In other words, he's saying Y follows from X, so if you don't accept Y then you don't believe X. It's the same rhetorical device as saying, "Nobody cares about civil liberties anymore [because George Bush got re-elected]," or "I guess nobody else here loves his country [because I'm the only one who went to the Tea Party rally last weekend]." It's always easier to stick up for a vague but popular concept (such as liberty, love of country, or active, engaged learning) than to argue in favor of the controversial concrete policies you think follow from it.
- yters 16y agoAnecdotally, I'd concur with the author. Most of my education seemed irrelevant. I learned to program and understand math because I wanted to make computer games.
- glhaynes 16y ago"people learn best when they are actively engaged with a topic" "Education involves a transmission of knowledge/information from someone who is bigger and older" These seem mostly orthogonal to me... the latter just being a generalization of (anecdotal) experience.