In the book What the Best College Teachers Do, Ken Bain shares the results of a study he conducted of sixty five teachers across twenty-four institutions. He’s organized his findings across seven chapters such as “How Do They Conduct Class?” and ” How Do They Evaluate Their Students and Themselves?”. In the chapter entitled “What Do They Know about How We Learn?”, Bain asserts “Even when learners have acquired some conceptual understanding of a discipline or field, they are often unable to link that knowledge to real-world situations or problem-solving contexts.”
That doesn’t bode well for far transfer – the transfer of knowledge from one context to another, dissimilar context. Far transfer is the gold standard of education and seemingly even more elusive if educational experiences do not
Bain dives into four beliefs that remarkable educators demonstrate when teaching:
- Knowledge is constructed, not received
- Mental models change slowly
- Questions are crucial
- Caring is crucial
The first one – constructing knowledge – is not a new idea in the realm of education. Jean Piaget’s theory of cognitive development led to the notion of constructivism is one of the prevailing theories of how learning works). Piaget posits that instead of acquiring knowledge through memorization, learners are much better off constructing their own knowledge and understanding by building on their previous knowledge. By mentally constructing their own schema. By assembling new input on the skeletal structure of what they already know. By interrogating what they have known, observed, and experienced as new knowledge is encountered.
Bain uses phrases like “passively perceiving”, “committing to memory”, “absorbing knowledge”, and “transmitting knowledge” when talking about rigid classrooms that demand memorization and don’t offer a safe sandbox to poke, prod, and play in. Paulo Freire would likely add “banking” and “depositing” to Bain’s list, too.
The best teachers don’t think of memory that way, and neither do a lot of learning scientists. Instead, they say that we construct our sense of reality out of all the sensory input we receive, and that process begins in the crib. We see, hear, feel, smell, and taste, and we begin connecting all those sensations in our brains to build patterns of the way we think the world works. So our brains are both storage and processing units. At some point, we begin using those existing patterns to understand new sensory input. By the time we reach college, we have thousands of mental models, or schemas, that we use to try to understand the lectures we hear, the texts we read, and so forth.
For example, I have a mental model of something called a classroom. When I enter a room and receive some sensory input through the lens in my eyes, I understand the input in terms of that previously existing model, and I know I’m not in a train station. But this enormously useful ability can also present problems for learners. When we encounter new material, we try to comprehend it in terms of something we think we already know. We use our existing mental models to shape the sensory inputs we receive. That means that when we talk to students, our thoughts do not travel seamlessly from our brains to theirs. The students bring paradigms to the class that shape how they construct meaning. Even if they know nothing about our subjects, they still use an existing mental model of something to build their knowledge of what we tell them, often leading to an understanding that is quite different from what we intend to convey (page 26).
Many learning scientists agree with the idea of constructivism. But there is another theory of learning that is less known that can potentiate student learning as well. In the late 1970’s, Seymour Papert introduced the idea of constructionism that builds on Piaget’s work. In Papert’s model, students literally construct their knowledge. This might include a physical representation or a digital one. Says Papert:
The word constructionism is a mnemonic for two aspects of the theory of science education underlying this project. From constructivist theories of psychology we take a view of learning as a reconstruction rather than as a transmission of knowledge. Then we extend the idea of manipulative materials to the idea that learning is most effective when part of an activity the learner experiences as constructing a meaningful product.
Papert was famous for his early work with computers in the classroom – specifically Logo (perhaps you have used Turtle Graphics before). A simple example of constructionism can be demonstrated through use of Turtle Graphics (software that shows an overhead view of a turtle on a big canvas and the user can command the turtle to move, turn, etc.). Turtle graphics are a great way to learn computer programming because there is a visual and immediate feedback to the commands that are given. Here’s an example of a turtle drawing a circle:
Imagine a student trying this for the first time. There might be a few commands the learner needs to learn before getting started, but pretty soon the learner can play around and figure out how to make the circle (and most likely encounter ways to make it bigger or smaller or a different color or in a different location). The tool is easy to use and dilates with the learner. Pretty soon the learner will undoubtedly stumble across ways to repeat making that circle, but in a different location. And at first they might copy and paste their code, but then they will ask if there’s a better way and they’ll stumble upon subroutines. It won’t be long before the student is making sick art.
Note that there is a direct transfer of skills and concepts to programming. Adopting constructionism requires intentional alignment. For instance, making a model volcano out of chicken wire and papier-mâché that erupts with baking soda and vinegar is not a purely aligned constructionist project as the concept transfer is almost non-existent. Oother than the appearance there is very little similarity. Volcanoes are made out of rock and actual eruptions are not a chemical reaction.
The takeaway here is that learning experiences can be designed to allow for exploration, building on previous knowledge, and telescoping. Bain’s book is not meant to be prescriptive; it’s meant to be thought-provoking. Is there space in your class to hone your constructivist or constructionist skills?
Image by OpenClipart-Vectors from Pixabay
Author’s note: As I was working on this post, I was texting with my nerdy brother about Turtle Graphics.
He sent me this piece he whipped up. Next time you see him, feel free to point out his nerdiness.
