105: How People Learn, Assignment #1

Learning from Speculation to Science

Q: "The new science of learning does not deny that facts are important for thinking and problem solving. Research on expertise in areas such as chess, history, science an dmathematics demonstrate that experts' abilities to think and solve problems depend on a rich body of knowledge about subject matter. However, the research also shows clearly that "usable knowledge" is not the same as a mere list of disconnected facts. Experts' knowledge is connected and organized around important concepts." (p 10).
This quote really struck me as I, all too often, find myself falling into the category of giving them random knowledge, but not making it entirely applicable category. Our incredibly randomized spelling lists from the beginning of the year stood out to me especially--- without a true reason, why would my students remember the words? It is little surprise that they did as poorly on the first spelling tests as I did.

Q: The article spoke of the idea of how we must incorporate pre-existing knowledge in order to be successful. However, this is something I really struggle with when, sometimes, at the first grade level, very little pre-existing knowledge may exist. How do we tailor this to a lower-elementary level? What are some strategies to make a year a cummulative buildup of pre-existing knowledge?

C: I found it interesting to even frame learning in the context of a 'science'. It takes it to the metacognitive level, but also forces thoughts on methodology and process, and fact as opposed to 'theory'. This article kind of stood in the face of what we have all heard so often-- 'this' or 'that' theory of education. When we are forced to think of education beyond the context of theory, and take it to the level of research-compiled fact, with both the behavioral and academic contexts considered, I think we have the opportunity to reach new depths as educators.