Module 6 - Motivation

This week’s readings and activities emphasized the concept of persistence and self-regulation. Gladwell (2008) notes these skills in his discussion of the rice farmers in China. It is their desire to become more efficient and more profitable at what they do that drives them to continue to improve their farming techniques and make decisions on the types and quantities of rice crops that they will plant. In her discussion of growth-oriented teaching, Dweck (2006) notes how seemingly unnatural persistence is to students. This is something that also comes up in the videos that we watched this week, and was also discussed a lot in our previous section in information processing and problem solving. If, as Bandura notes, we are increasingly exposed to symbolic modeling through technology and media, how will the globalization of media will influence the way that we approach learning in the future? How is it influencing learners now?

According to Gladwell (2008), hard work is a part of success, but just as important are those chance circumstances and opportunities that influence individuals. This is also an idea supported by Bandura’s (2011) approach. Individuals are in charge of how they choose to behave in a situation once it presents itself. Their behavior will be the result of a variety of previous cultural, social, and personal experiences that will ultimately determine the action that they will choose to take. Similar is Dweck’s (2006) concept of the growth mindset, which acknowledges that all individuals have the potential to grow in a given domain, even if they are not “naturally talented” in that area. For instructors, I think that this would be a good approach to use because it implies that individual students always have potential to improve.

For teachers, the ultimate message found in this week’s readings is that you cannot ignore the individual experience or the environment when studying how one learns. This ties in with the constructivist approach offered by Vygotsky and Piaget in its emphasis on the individual connecting to the learning material in a personal way. There will always be a need for certain content to be learned, and, as Airasian and Walsh (1997) note, a firm methodology must be developed and followed in order for implementation to be successful, but this should not come at the expense of individual meaning making. After all, it is these individual connections that help students internalize the information in a way that it can be more easily retrieved later. There are a variety of factors that contribute to our beliefs in what we can and cannot do. These come from personal experience, symbolic modeling from those close to us as well as the social media, and other areas. It is important to take these into consideration because, once we do, we are able to help to influence a child’s future confidence in a positive way. The helpful hints provided by Dweck (2006) at the end of her chapter get at this point and also reiterate the powerful roles that parents, teachers, and other adults play in a child’s life. These seemingly small day-to-day experiences accumulate into a sum of experiences which the child may draw upon for some time to come. In striving to create meaningful and positive experiences, instructors can help the student to acquire good learning habits that they can continue to apply into adulthood.


References:

Airasian, P. W., & Walsh, M. E., (1997). Constructivist cautions. Phi Delta Kappan, 78, 444-449.

Bandura, A. (2011). But what about that gigantic elephant in the room? In R. Arkin (Ed.), Most unappreciated : 50 prominent social psychologists talk about hidden gems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Random House.

Gladwell, M. (2008). Outliers: The story of success. New York: Little, Brown and Company.

Module 5: Learning Metaphor

Learning is like an inexperienced runner training for a marathon.

At first, you have no idea what you’re doing. You start to run, but you may not have correct form; you tire easily and may even injure yourself. You need lots of encouragement and guidance from your trainer or other advisor. Then, as your endurance and experience builds, you are able to take off on your own, going for longer and longer runs.

This metaphor ties in ideas from William James, Constructivism, and self-regulation. In learning, at first we often need more guidance, we need help obtaining those “acquired reactions” that will serve us best. Our teachers, parents, and other mentors give us verbal and non-verbal feedback as to our progress, and provide the challenges for further growth and development. They reinforce the desired behaviors and outcomes that are espoused by the culture. As we develop, we are more able to draw from our store of experiences and turn to ourselves for a read of our own progress and to evaluate what is working and what is holding us back. We know about our favorable learning conditions, and we can take it upon ourselves to create those conditions. From there, we can take off on our own, pursuing our own learning, challenging ourselves and coming to our own conclusions.

Module 5: Reflection

I thought that Nodding’s (2006) article provided some interesting insights on how learning can be approached from a problem-solving perspective. In his discussion of constructed reviews versus textbook reviews, Nodding combines a constructivist approach to learning with more structured learning objectives. Another connection with constructivism can be found in Noddings’ recommendation for teachers to present their students with problems that may not be able to be answered correctly. This seems to align with Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development in its recognition of the need for the student to contend with material that may be just out of their reach. Dan Meyer’s video on math classes also highlighted this point. I was especially intrigued by Meyer’s statement that society is conditioning us to be impatient with irresolution. I agree that, most of the time, individuals are looking for a quick solution to a problem so that they can move on to the next one (or tackle numerous problems at once, in the case of multitasking). But by doing so, are we losing out on fully developing the skill of persistence?

Generally speaking, I have found that I am a much bigger fan of “uni-tasking.” I identified with Bregman’s example of trying to send the same email three times just to get it right. However, I also agree with Silverman that multitasking is simply a fact of life for many people, especially those in higher positions. Rosen’s (2008) article on the myth of multitasking seems to get at the idea that, just because we can multitask does not mean that we should. Rosen brings up James’ point of view on attention and multitasking, which aligns multi-tasking with the native reactions of the child. While I think James would acknowledge that multi-tasking is a natural urge that humans have, I think that he would argue that undivided attention is best for optimal connection and absorption of the materials.

Another important area of problem solving is creativity. As discussed by Pretz, et al (2003), without some creativity, it becomes difficult to see problems and alternative solutions outside of those typically done in similar situations. In our automaticity of thought, it is very easy to fall into a routine of soliciting a given response for previously experienced circumstances. However, the problem solving approach would argue that individuals must be more mindful of situations if they hope to see new solutions.

Metacognition, problem solving, self-regulation and multi-tasking get at the learner’s need to be aware of their own process. Metacognition and problem solving both put the focus on being more mindful of how we process and categorize information. Allowing for perception of material in new ways and allowing oneself to deeply engage in the material are key components of both ideas. Self-regulation and multi-tasking have to do with the ways in which individuals carry out their learning goals. Multi-tasking focuses more in efficiency in processing information or task completion, while self-regulation focuses more on the skills utilized to process information or complete the task.

References:

Kegan, R. (1994). In over our heads: The mental demands of modern life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard College Press.

Noddings, N. (2006). Critical lessons: What our schools should teach. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Pretz, J. E., Naples, A. J., & Sternberg, R. J. (2003). Recognizing, defining, and representing problems. In J. E. Davidson & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of problem solving (pp. 1-30). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Rosen, C. (2008). The myth of multitasking. The New Atlantis, 64, 105-110.

Module 4 - Information Processing Part II

“The connecting is the thinking.” This concept from James’ Talks to Teachers is easily related to information processing in terms of how individuals are able to store and retrieve information over the long term. This is accomplished through encoding, mnemonics, and the deep processing of information. This deep processing, or mindfulness, forces the individual to take more time with the information. Information is only as good as the way in which it is encoded. This is a point further emphasized in Marsh and Butler (in press), where they review some of the theories and techniques emphasized in memory. One important concept highlighted in this chapter is that of desirable difficulty; “introducing difficulties during learning will result in superior long-term retention because the greatest gains in storage strength occur when retrieval strength is low” (Marsh & Butler, in press, p. 5). This reminded me of Vygotsky’s concept of the zone of proximal development, whereby development occurs by having individuals participate in activities that are just beyond that which they can do by themselves. By stretching learning and recall over longer periods of time, connecting it to more and more ideas and experiences, individuals are able to learn information in a deeper way than if they were simply cramming for a test.

Kirschner, Sweller and Clark (2006) note that constructivism should not happen at the expense of content knowledge, and that teacher’s should be wary of introducing minimally guided instruction into their classrooms. “Not only is unguided instruction normally less effective, there is also evidence that it may have negative results when students acquire misconceptions or incomplete or disorganized knowledge” (Kirschner, et al., 2006, p. 84). While I can see their point, I think that regular assessment and feedback such as that suggested by Marsh and Butler (in press) can assess when students go off track with their connections and help them to make more meaningful and accurate connections with the information. If you remove too much of the constructivist approach, I think that you lose some of that flexibility needed to help the student connect to the material.

I do not have a very good memory. This week’s readings make me think about the ways in which I process information and how I could process it in a more meaningful way. The one reading that stood out the most for me this week was the New York Times article written by Joshua Foer. Foer (2011) notes the importance of practice and persistence when it comes to developing and maintaining a good memory. Last week’s readings and activities focused a lot upon attention and our abilities to focus on the important things in the task at hand. Foer’s reference to the mental athlete’s “gear” reminded me of a white noise website (www.simplynoise.com) that I use when I find myself getting distracted from whatever it is I am doing by outside noise (hopefully, I will not have to resort to blinders).  Foer’s discussion of hitting a plateau in his memory capacity made me think that, like many abilities, when things get difficult it is easier to say “oh well, I suppose this is as good as it gets,” instead of persisting in our efforts to increase our memory. I thought it was interesting that Ericsson had him use a metronome to help him push his processing speed even further. This seems to also tie in Marsh and Butler’s reference to desirable difficulty, and also the often-invoked phrase “use it or lose it.” If we are not constantly using and challenging our memory, it seems quite possible that it will be more difficult to encode information in a meaningful way than if we were engaging our memories more frequently.

References:

Foer, J. (2011, February). Secrets of a mind-gamer: How I trained my brain and became a world-class memory athlete. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/02/20/magazine/mind-secrets.html?hp.

Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41, 75-86.

Marsh, E. J., & Butler, A. C. (in press). Memory in educational settings. In D. Reisberg (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

The Free Will debate continues...

Just thought I would share this opinion piece that appeared on the New York Times website this week:

Is Neuroscience the Death of Free Will?

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/13/is-neuroscience-the-death-of-free-will/

The author, Eddy Nahmiahs, talks about whether or not findings in Neuroscience can prove that free will does not exist, or if they simply explain it in a new way. Enjoy!

Module 3: Activity 1 - Perception Resource

http://www.readingrockets.org/shows/launching/meaning/

PBS Video, “Reading for Meaning”

A portion of the third PowerPoint this week focused on the importance of attention and perception as factors that affect the sensory registers in the information processing theory. I was particularly interested in the brief video that was shown as part of this PowerPoint that featured a student who had trouble with reading comprehension, and decided to track down additional resources on reading comprehension and some of the tools that can be used to improve it. It seems like this is best accomplished through connecting reading experiences to ideas that are tangible and relatable for kids. This video, “Reading for Meaning,” highlights several classroom and community programs that are designed to help students improve their interest in reading as well as their reading comprehension.

For each approach, there is a reference to the way in which it helps students retain reading knowledge. The first program discussed, CORI, focuses on non-fiction reading as a means of getting students to ask their own questions and communicate about their reading with others. At one point, the teacher asked the student to interpret the actions of the town reacting to the tornado sirens. At another point, a student was asked to present the results of her independent reading on a topic related to the weather and answer questions from her fellow students. In addition to emphasizing the way in which information is perceived and internalized, this example also touches on the importance of meaningfulness. By exposing the student to the subject matter in a variety of different ways over a period of time as well as allowing the student to ask and answer their own questions within the subject matter, the student is able to make connections to the material. In the example of Theme Scheme, teachers work with their students to find the meaning of the story and connect it to a student’s real life moral dilemmas. In another example, an author and illustrator work with students to create stories that have personal meaning to them through text and art. Each of these activities helped to reinforce what was read while also helping the student connect the material with something that they could relate to.

These activities align with the constructivist interpretation of information processing theory outlined by Mayer (1996), which calls for “an active search for understanding in which incoming experience is reorganized and integrated with existing knowledge… in this view, processing is not a series of discrete algorithms executed in order, but rather a coordinated collection of processes aimed at making sense out of incoming experiences” (p. 156). Perception in terms of reading comprehension can be understood as helping to connect incoming information to the existing structure. As the student in the PowerPoint video notes, he understands what he is reading but he cannot recall it and synthesize it in any meaningful way. Asking students to actively make connections and latch on to reading selections and subjects that are most meaningful gives them an active area of interest that they can use to strengthen their connecting abilities.

References:

Mayer, R. E. (1996). Learners as information processors. Educational Psychologist, 31, 151-161.

Module 3: Activity 3 - Learning Styles

Before I read this article by Pashler, McDaniel, Rohrer and Bjork (2009), I probably would have said that I am in favor of individualized instruction according to learning style.  It makes sense to me that students should receive information in whatever way it can be processed most efficiently.  But given the information presented in this article, it seems like there are still some issues in the research that need to be addressed before we wholeheartedly subscribe to the idea that there is "one best way" for students to receive information.  

 In their article “Learning styles: Concepts and evidence,” Pashler, McDaniel, Rohrer, and Bjork (2009) investigate whether it is useful for schools to identify the learning styles of their students as a means of improving student performance. Pashler, et al (2009) describe the concept of learning styles as falling into two camps; learning styles as study preferences, and what they identify as the learning styles hypothesis. To investigate the importance of findings on learning styles, the authors employ a crossover interaction between learning style and method as their criteria. This type of interaction allows for each group to demonstrate which method is most effective (Pashler et al., 2009).

In reviewing the literature on aptitudes, aptitude by treatment, and personality by treatment for crossover interaction between learning styles, the authors were unable to find any studies that were well-constructed enough (given their criteria) to support the use of learning styles. This was primarily due to a lack of robust research methodology, and the authors encouraged further work involving random assignment and the examination of crossover interactions as a way to further investigate the use of learning styles in the classroom. Given the current research and findings, however, the authors do not see the benefit of the cost and time associated with the identification of student learning styles.

I am more inclined to align myself with the “study preferences” approach to learning styles. I do think that individuals may be more inclined to remember things if they are presented in a way that is their “preferred mode of taking in new information and studying” (Pashler, et al., 2009, p. 108). At the close of their article, Pashler, et al (2009) offer the following statement: “given the capacity of humans to learn, it seems especially important to keep all avenues, options, and aspirations open for our students, our children and ourselves. Toward that end, we think the primary focus should be on identifying and introducing the experiences, activities, and challenges that enhance everybody’s learning” (p. 117). Being exposed to information in a variety of different ways helps to build more connections and make the information stick. As James (1899/1962) notes, “the same thing recurring on different days, in different contexts, read, recited on, referred to again and again, related to other things and reviewed, gets well wrought into mental structures” (p. 64). In terms of information processing, I venture to guess that we all have our own methods that work best for us to “encode information;” however, sometimes receiving information in a novel way helps us to pay closer attention and gain a fresh perspective in a way that we might not have if we always received information in the same way.

References:

James, W. (1899/1962). Talks to teachers on psychology and to students on some of life's ideals. New York: Dover.

Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2009). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9, 105-119.