AliciaWilton

The research I did for this essay was very exciting for me because I have thought about all of these concepts myself at one time or another, and it was a great discovery to realize that not only were my thoughts valid, but that there is actually a name for this type of learning. I have always believed that rote memorization and the passive learning only of “what we know” has been a flawed method of teaching. I think this because I experience much greater understanding of concepts or subjects when A) I realize that the same principles that govern them also govern other concepts & subjects as well, and B) I realize that there is room for outgrowth from this initial knowledge (i.e., the knowledge being imparted is not finite). In this way, I have used those governing principles to figure things out that I did not previously know. For example, after using a couple of different Microsoft programs, I realized that many of the hotkey commands were the same across multiple applications (like CTRL-z for Undo and CTRL-v for Paste). Once I realized this, I began to use those hotkey commands in all Microsoft applications, and they worked, even though no one had taught me to use those commands for those specific applications. And then I used them with other, non-Microsoft applications, and some of those worked too.

This premise is the basis of Constructivist Theory and Inquiry-Based Learning. I think this theory of learning is summed up best in the Concept to Classroom article: [Constructivism is to] “think of knowledge not as inert factoids to be memorized, but as a dynamic, ever-changing view of the world we live in and the ability to successfully stretch and explore that view.” (2) Learning by this approach, students are not just digesting information, but manipulating the information, relating it to their prior experiences and knowledge, and drawing new conclusions based on a combination of the existing and the new knowledge. In this way, “this previous knowledge is the raw material for the new knowledge [the student] will create”. (2) This approach to teaching, in my opinion, is far more effective than simply learning through the repetition of a fixed set of facts. Students tend to forget rote facts as soon as they don’t have to remember them anymore (i.e., when the course is over or they progress to the next grade level), and I believe that this is because there is nothing with which to connect those rote facts to give them any personal meaning for the student. In the absence of personal meaning or a “parent” context in which to fit the information in one’s mind-maps, it becomes meaningless and forgettable. However, if the student understands the larger context of a set of facts, those facts will take on more personal meaning to them and thus will be remembered. In addition, since the facts have now been associated with other information, new conclusions can now be drawn using a combination of the old and new knowledge.

I can remember many, many times trying to explain to my son as he complained that he hated his biology class that he would love it if he only understood how that biology fit into the “bigger picture”. In fact I talk to my son about the “bigger picture” quite a bit, for these very reasons. Studying neural synapses by themselves would undoubtedly be boring for a young person; however, if you explained to that same student that those neural synapses were the key to understanding memory and intelligence, suddenly they take on an entirely different meaning.

Constructivism and Inquiry-based Learning are based in part on this idea of a “bigger picture”. Not only do neural matters impact intelligence, but biology therefore impacts sociology (due to humans’ behavior towards each other), and sociology impacts literature (because literature reflects society), and so forth. This cross-disciplinary approach allows the student to interrelate concepts across the (former) boundaries of discipline and grade level. In this manner, the student is not only learning, but she is learning how to learn.

A person who has learned how to learn will undoubtedly be more successful at life because of the ability to consistently absorb and process new information effectively. But more than that, it allows a person to be successful in today’s society and its abundance of new and/or available information. A person who has been taught using the traditional “linear” method of learning will have developed habits of mind that focus on fixed facts and static knowledge, habits which are highly ineffective in a world where facts are growing, not fixed, and knowledge is expanding, not static. As the Concept to Classroom article states, “Memorizing facts and information is not the most important skill in today's world. Facts change, and information is readily available -- what's needed is an understanding of how to get and make sense of the mass of data.” (3)

I could not agree more with this philosophy. As a person who has worked with data for over 7 years now, I can state unequivocally that the information is out there – the trick to making use of it is knowing where to get reliable data, how to interpret that data with respect to the topic at hand, and how to relate that data to previous knowledge or information in order to draw new conclusions. In other words, in today’s world, it is more important to know how to correlate and make sense of things than it is to know bare facts by themselves (or even as a set).

Our modern society is faster paced, globally networked, technologically oriented, and requires workers who can problem solve and think critically… Our schools must change their approach to education to produce students who can thrive in the modern world. (3)

What all of this really translates to, in my opinion, is Problem-Solving. I have watched a cashier at McDonald’s not be able to make change when the cash register display screen was broken. Whether or not this person had any knowledge of subtraction is unknown to me, but my guess would be that she did know at least a little bit of elementary math. What was missing was the ability to solve a problem. The girl had become so reliant on the little screen to tell her the correct amount of change that it did not even occur to her that she could figure it out herself. This, in my view, is the primary problem with the educational system in this country. Students are not taught how to apply things, how to relate them to other things, how to interpret what they see or draw conclusions based on what they already know. They are not taught how to problem-solve.

I attended a Gifted & Talented school for elementary and junior high schools, and I remember doing this one exercise that I hated (but now that I have this knowledge about Inquiry-based learning, I understand completely why we were made to do it). A special teacher would come in to our classroom once a week and we would have “Problem-Solving” time. We would be split off into groups of four, given a large-scale problem (like Pollution or something similar) and asked to “Brainstorm” all potential solutions or remedies that we could think of. Everyone in the group would then have to write down all their solutions on separate slips of paper and throw them into the middle of the group’s table, until the group had a big pile of solutions. Then we would go through each solution one by one as a group, and talk about why we did or did not think that solution would work, until we settled as a group on one solution that made the most sense. We would then be asked to explain the reasoning behind our choice. I remember thinking that the exercise was so pointless (I was young, what can I say…) but now it makes perfect sense! Apparently my little Texan Gifted-and-Talented school was light years ahead of its time by making use of Constructivist Learning Theory and Inquiry-based learning in the early 1980’s, before it was widely accepted. Funny the things you wake up to when you get older.

Overall, I think that these concepts, and my feelings on the matter, can best be summed up by the following quote from an article on Inquiry-based Learning:

Content of disciplines is very important, but as a means to an end, not as an end in itself. The knowledge base for disciplines is constantly expanding and changing. No one can ever learn everything, but everyone can better develop their skills and nurture the inquiring attitudes necessary to continue the generation and examination of knowledge throughout their lives. For modern education, the skills and the ability to continue learning should be the most important outcomes. (3)

I couldn't agree more.