More discoveries about brain-based learning
4. Brains are poorly designed for rote learning.
From a list in Brain-Based Learning: Possible Implications for Online Instruction, Stephanie A. Clemons http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Sep_05/article03.htm)
This is one of my favorite discoveries. Not the statement about how brains are unsuited to rote learning. I discovered that by the third grade. My discovery is that some people apparently did not know this and needed brain-based research to find it out.
Actually, I am not sure what the author meant by “rote learning.” That is one of the problems with abstract statements. It is not a brain problem. It is a communication problem. Abstract terms are usually open to multiple interpretations. Of course, this is just a single line. The author may have given a thorough definition elsewhere.
But I prefer to speculate. That way, I will understand the concept. Then I won’t have to memorize the definition by rote learning.
Since the statement is in an educational context, I assume that it refers to something that happens in education. I wonder, however, whether many instructional plans actually specify “rote learning” as a learning objective. I think the add and multiply tables could reasonable have rote learning as an objective, but I think it may end there.
There are certainly instructional objectives that call for memorizing things. But objectives don’t specify methods. Students are assigned the task of memorizing a speech or a poem. I would not call this rote learning. They generally understand the flow of meaning and the rhythm. You can hear the difference between rote and understanding in the way they deliver the recitation.
The Thinkerer offers several suggestions for how to memorize things in ways that go beyond rote. See: Memorizers
My impression is that rote learning is not a moral imperative imposed by educators. I think it is a method chosen by students who don’t know any better method. You can argue that argue that if educators don’t teach other methods, they are indirectly imposing a method previously taught. I won’t dispute that.
But if something is not being done, it takes more than educators not to do it. It also takes parents not to do it. I suppose it even takes psychologists not to do it. So here is another opportunity for a book:
What they won’t tell you about memorizing. Maybe I’ll use that as a headline for a page in the Thinkerer. Not a book, of course. Much shorter. Much cheaper.
From a list in Brain-Based Learning: Possible Implications for Online Instruction, Stephanie A. Clemons http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Sep_05/article03.htm)
This is one of my favorite discoveries. Not the statement about how brains are unsuited to rote learning. I discovered that by the third grade. My discovery is that some people apparently did not know this and needed brain-based research to find it out.
Actually, I am not sure what the author meant by “rote learning.” That is one of the problems with abstract statements. It is not a brain problem. It is a communication problem. Abstract terms are usually open to multiple interpretations. Of course, this is just a single line. The author may have given a thorough definition elsewhere.
But I prefer to speculate. That way, I will understand the concept. Then I won’t have to memorize the definition by rote learning.
Since the statement is in an educational context, I assume that it refers to something that happens in education. I wonder, however, whether many instructional plans actually specify “rote learning” as a learning objective. I think the add and multiply tables could reasonable have rote learning as an objective, but I think it may end there.
There are certainly instructional objectives that call for memorizing things. But objectives don’t specify methods. Students are assigned the task of memorizing a speech or a poem. I would not call this rote learning. They generally understand the flow of meaning and the rhythm. You can hear the difference between rote and understanding in the way they deliver the recitation.
The Thinkerer offers several suggestions for how to memorize things in ways that go beyond rote. See: Memorizers
My impression is that rote learning is not a moral imperative imposed by educators. I think it is a method chosen by students who don’t know any better method. You can argue that argue that if educators don’t teach other methods, they are indirectly imposing a method previously taught. I won’t dispute that.
But if something is not being done, it takes more than educators not to do it. It also takes parents not to do it. I suppose it even takes psychologists not to do it. So here is another opportunity for a book:
What they won’t tell you about memorizing. Maybe I’ll use that as a headline for a page in the Thinkerer. Not a book, of course. Much shorter. Much cheaper.
posted by Selby Evans at 2:07 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home