Monthly Archives: December 2016

It ain’t what you know it’s… oh, no, sorry, it is what you know. The Foundation of Learning is Knowledge

Written by Ian Kelleher,

edited by Julia Dean and Molly Magner

 

 HHHHHH.jpg
               I sense that the tide is beginning to turn on the debate over whether to prioritize knowledge or skills, ’21st Century’ or otherwise. There is an increasingly confident voice shouting a phrase that educators have shouted for thousands of years: knowledge is essential. Even in this Google-able world, students need a sturdy foundation of knowledge to become critical thinkers.

With this edition of “The Bridge,” we as evidence-informed professionals boldly provide an epistemic nudge: an argument for the importance of knowledge that includes research-informed ideas for teachers on how to build knowledge and make it stick.

I recently heard Robert Pondisco, senior fellow at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, speak at ResearchED DC on the importance of a re-commitment to teaching knowledge. During his talk, Pondisco eloquently painted the picture of President Obama during his first Inaugural Address, gazing down the length of the Mall to the Lincoln Memorial where Martin Luther King Jr. declared his dream to the nation just over fifty years ago. In this clip, Obama describes the sacrifices and struggles of past Americans that led to Obama’s inauguration: a monumental moment in American history.

After showing this clip, Pondisco posed the following questions: what knowledge do children need to have to understand the significance of Obama’s words at this moment in time? Do they have this knowledge? How would they have received this knowledge? Who might have it and who might not? How does this fit into the existing inequality gap? Pondisco’s thought experiment provokes us to think of knowledge as a critical base for the analytical thinking skills that we strive to teach our students. That being said, what can we do to help our students have a solid basis of knowledge?

1) Acknowledge the limits of active working memory

Active working memory can hold fewer things for less time than most people realize. Though it is hard to measure, 7 things for 30 seconds for adults is a well-agreed-upon estimate. For children the numbers are lower. There is a trade off too; we can hold more things but for progressively less time. Having knowledge stored in long-term memory frees up the active working memory to more effectively help with higher order thinking tasks. In other words, having stored knowledge helps us think.

2) Teach for stickiness

Whether we are teaching with a focus on direct instruction or with a focus on projects, we need to get content knowledge to stick in long-term memory. Fortunately, there is robust research to guide us that suggests both things we should and should not do.

Things to encourage students NOT to do

(1) Reread notes 

A trip down the aisles in Staples confirms what we already know – students love highlighters and markers. But research suggests that the staple of studying, rereading notes or the textbook, is a terrible, ineffective way to study. It tends to lead to what Brown, Reedier and McDaniel call “the illusion of fluency,” in which students become so familiar with the text that they believe they know it before they actually do.

(2) Misuse flashcards

Similarly, students tend to misuse flashcards, turning them over too quickly to see the answer. The key advantage of using flashcards is the process of deep pondering to try and figure the problem out, even if that proves to be a difficult task.

Things to encourage students to do

(1) Retrieval practice

Retrieval practice is the idea of trying to recall knowledge from memory. Even if a student is unable to recollect information, research suggests that the act of trying helps memory storage and recall. Retrieval practice can take many forms: self-testing, proper use of flashcards or online tools such as Quizlet, or taking a sheet of paper and writing out everything you know on a subject. The key is having students try deeply to recall, then check their work against their notes or model answers.

(2) Spaced studying

There is great research around the spacing effect, which entails studying, leaving a gap of time, then studying again. As educators, we can encourage students to space their studying rather than rely on massed studying, which does not lead to durable learning. Allowing your memory to become a bit rusty between study sessions makes the next study session more challenging, but in doing so, it helps create knowledge that is both more durable and more flexible. This is a concept that Clark and Bjork call “desirable difficulty.” But what is the optimal spacing gap for your students, your subject, and the content you are teaching? Embark on your own learning adventure to discover the ways in which spacing can work best for your classes.

Things for us to do as educators

(1) Formative assessments

Replace pop quizzes with no- or low-stakes formative assessments. As you give them, say something along the lines of, “This is for you to figure out where you are, for me to figure out where you are, and for us both to adjust what we do accordingly.” More of the brain restructuring associated with learning occurs when we struggle and when we get things wrong; therefore, we need to craft no- or low stress opportunities for students to make mistakes from which they can learn.

(2) Interleaving

Interleaving is a way to deliberately build the spacing effect into how you design your courses. Instead of starting the year with unit one, followed, perhaps, by unit two then unit three, there is an alternative way to organize your courses that will promote learning. After moving on to a new unit, plan on revisiting the core knowledge at least a few more times at spaced intervals later on in the year.

(3) Pre-testing

“Research suggests that starting a unit of study with a pre-test helps creates more enduring learning. It appears to give students something on which to hang subsequent information. This test should, of course, not be graded, or if it is, it should be graded for effort rather than correctness. The other point of this pre-test is to give the teacher an idea of where the level of the class generally is, and what knowledge each individual student brings with them already, so that the teacher can tailor subsequent classes to best match the needs of the class. It is important to avoid seeding boredom, and to avoid the potential skipping of foundational knowledge that could prevent future learning. These are two common toxic effects on learning.”

(4) Acknowledge Deficiencies in Project based learning (PBL)

PBL appears to have “silver bullet” status as a transformative teaching technique, but the actual evidence on its effectiveness is shaky. An excellent review of the literature can be found in the Education Endowment Foundation’s recently released report on the results of a large randomized control trial on PBL. Two key areas where support is crucial are knowledge building and executive functioning building:

“Balancing didactic instruction with independent inquiry will ensure that pupils develop a certain level of knowledge and skills allowing them to comfortably engage in independent work.”

“Student support: pupils need to be effectively guided and supported; emphasis should be given on effective time management and student self-management”

Without this support, PBL may actually contribute to the achievement gap as students from disadvantaged backgrounds often enter with deficiencies in knowledge and skills that are necessary to succeed on projects.

This echoes the work of Paul Kirscher (twitter: @P_A_Kirschner  -one of the great voices in research on education that you perhaps have not heard of)., Although unguided or minimally guided instructional approaches are very popular and intuitively appealing, the point is made that these approaches ignore both the structures that constitute human cognitive architecture and evidence from empirical studies over the past half-century that consistently indicate that minimally guided instruction is less effective and less efficient than instructional approaches that place a strong emphasis on guidance of the student learning process. The advantage of guidance begins to recede only when learners have sufficiently high prior knowledge to provide “internal” guidance.

We may still decide to use project based learning to teach a range of different skills or to increase engagement – though this may only work if we expertly craft the project by incorporating factors such as student choice, relevancy to their lives, or empathy. However, research suggests that when we choose to do project based learning rather than direct instruction, an amount of direct instruction teaching that focuses on knowledge building is still important for students to gain sufficient knowledge so that they can grapple meaningfully with the project. In other words, even when we do projects, we need to begin them by explicitly teaching key knowledge in ways in which it will stick. Part of pedagogical content knowledge, that highly interlinked combination of subject knowledge and how to teach it, is to know exactly what knowledge-scaffolding students need to successfully launch into a project. If we want to create great projects, we also need to be great at teaching knowledge – and great at discerning what knowledge that needs to be.

A thought on how this links to assessment

Since I was a little kid, I have always enjoyed words. Some are more fun to play with than others, of course, but one of the best is ‘facile.’ We often use it to refer to someone who appears to be so good at something they do it with an effortless ease. But it’s more nuanced meaning is to refer to a demonstration of thinking that at first glance seems neat, concise and elegant, but which on closer inspection is only neat, concise and elegant because it is over simplistic, itself lacking in nuanced details.

The writing of this article has inspired a future one that needs to be written: how do we avoid facile demonstrations of knowledge by our students? How do we craft assessments that steer students away from this? Or, as Rob Coe and David Didau put it in their musings on a very simple theory of learning, where will students think hard in this lesson? But in the time before this article is written, I encourage you to explore this idea yourself. If you have ideas as to what should go in such an article, please let us know.

Interested in participating in our professional development adventure this summer? Click here for information regarding the Science of Teaching and School Leadership Academy, a five-day workshop co-designed by the CTTL and individual faculty from Harvard’s Graduate School of Education and the Johns Hopkins University Science of Learning Institute.

Follow the Center for Transformative Teaching & Learning on twitter: @thecttl

1.  Thank you Troy Dahlke for this playful term2.https://www.amazon.com/Make-Stick-Science-Successful-Learning/dp/0674729013

3.  Clark, C. M., & Bjork, R. A. (2014). When and why introducing difficulties and errors can enhance instruction. In V. A. Benassi, C. E. Overson, & C. M. Hakala (Eds.), Applying the Science of Learning in Education: Infusing psychological science into the curriculum.  Retrievable from the Society for the Teaching of Psychology web site: http://teachpsych.org/ebooks/asle2014/index.php

4. Whitman and Kelleher (2016). Neuroteach: Brain Science and the Future of Education

5. https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/public/files/Projects/Project_Based_Learning.pdf
6. http://cogtech.usc.edu/publications/kirschner_Sweller_Clark.pdf
7. http://www.learnlab.org/research/wiki/images/4/4d/Kirschner-Merrienboer-2013.pdf

Modeling the Research: Bringing Play, Challenge, and Engagement to Teacher Professional Development

The greatest irony of the professional development opportunities that focus on the learning brain is the disconnect between the research and how it is delivered to the adult learner audience.

So when we were invited to speak at the November 2016 Learning & the Brain Conference, we hoped to model the research we were sharing, to create a research-informed professional development session that honored how much we know about how the brain learns, works, and thrives.

There are two brains that always need to be considered in every school: the adult brain and the student brain. Because of brain plasticity, we can confidently say that both are changeable, though there are more sensitive periods of brain plasticity in the early years of life.

But the dilemma my colleague and co-author or Neuroteach Dr. Ian Kelleher and I faced was how to honor the overall theme of the conference “Engaged, Empowered Minds” while presenting a keynote address in an enormous ballroom space filled with 6 sections aligned in 16 rows of 12 seats each.

For the first two days of the conference, leading thinkers in Mind, Brain, and Education Science including Howard Gardner, Marilyn Price-Mitchell, Tony Wagner, Ron Berger and Zoe Weil shared important research, perspectives, and experiences with the audience. They recounted stories and models of how teachers and schools are using brain science to educate ethical 21st century citizens and problem solvers.  Teachers were given opportunities to turn and talk and to laugh, as well as a few moments to consider the implications of what they were hearing for how they design schools and classrooms and work with each individual student.

When it was our turn to take the big stage as the last keynote speakers for this three-day event, we knew we had to create a professional learning session that aligned with how Ian, our colleagues and I design our classes at St. Andrew’s Episcopal School each day. As we prepared, we pondered the question: “Is it possible in a ballroom setting to provide teachers a design challenge: to build the tallest, free-standing tower with 25 straws and one piece of tape?” We knew there were risks involved in this idea and that there was a high probability that this activity might fail. But since we talk about failure and struggle as critical to learning, shouldn’t we model it in our presentation?

So we went for it. As the images below attest, it worked. We used this activity to have participants consider the question, “What demand did this design challenge place on your brain?” We conducted a similar activity with our colleagues at St. Andrew’s as a playful way to begin developing a language and a mindset around being a Mind, Brain, and Education Science research-informed teacher or school leader.

In addition to this activity we also knew that for our presentation around “An MBE Research-Informed Pathway for Purposeful Teaching, Learning, and Thinking” to stick that participants needed a chance to actively retrieve what they heard and experienced during our one-hour and fifteen-minute session. The “Exit Ticket” we provided was informed by the research of Doug Lemov, author of Teach Like a Champion, and we were seeking to address one of the remaining unconscionable practices that permeate schools today. Too often, teachers teach to the last minute of a class period. While students are packing up, teachers are still giving new instructions. However, what we hope to see is more teachers using the final minutes of class for students to begin to reflect on the content and skills for that class period, to begin using that knowledge and experience to share what they know or don’t know and for that to be data for the teacher to use in the design of the next class period.

We are grateful to the Learning & the Brain Society for the invitation to share the work of the Center for Transformative Teaching and Learning with an eager audience of teachers, school leaders, policymakers, counselors and more. We appreciate all those who engaged with us during our session that is truly only valuable if some element of the research and strategies we shared actually inform participants’ work with students. But what we also hope is that our risky idea to create a design challenge for 1000 educators in a space that was not conducive to such a task becomes the norm for how we professionally develop educators. Let’s not just share the research, let’s do the research. Teachers, like students, learn best through play, collaboration, challenge, support and fun. The smiles presented in the following series of images from our session suggest what is possible for how we can develop more Mind, Brain, and Education Science research-informed educators.