Read an Excerpt
CHAPTER 1
The Science of Learning in a Social Science Context
Melinda Messineo
Perhaps you have heard the quote attributed to William Glasser suggesting that we learn 10 percent of what we read, 20 percent of what we hear, 80 percent of what we experience, and 95 percent of what we teach others. Possibly an adaptation of Dale's Cone of Experience (1969), the percentages are merely symbolic and are meant to illustrate the importance of engagement in the learning process. Research shows that the more active you are in the learning process, the more it "sticks" and the more capable you are at applying and adapting what you have learned to other contexts (Meyers and Jones 1993). The last 30 years have witnessed a significant push for higher education to employ active-learning strategies (Pascarella and Terenzini 2005; see also the journal Active Learning in Higher Education). Instructors in higher education have moved toward highly diverse delivery formats that involve a myriad of assessment strategies (Angelo and Cross 1993; Barkley and Major 2016). At the heart of these approaches is active learning.
ACTIVE LEARNING
Active learning is an umbrella term that describes a variety of learning experiences in which the learner demonstratively engages in the learning process (Bonwell and Eison 1991; ERIC thesaurus). Active learning focuses more on what the student is doing in the learning process as opposed to the behaviors of the instructor. If the instructor is the most active person in the classroom, the odds are that the students are at risk of being disengaged from the learning experience. As a result, learner-centered pedagogies that increase the engagement of students have emerged as the most effective for learning and retention. Research across many fields documents the positive impact that active strategies have on student engagement and learning outcomes (Michael 2006; Prince 2004). Learner-centered strategies are more likely to lead to active learning. As a result, the justification for the shift toward learner-centered strategies is based on evidence that active learners learn more (Bransford, Brown, and Cocking 2000).
The challenge of interpreting learning outcome data, however, lies in deciding how to actually measure improvement. Some studies focus on the degree to which students master objective exams (Hake 1998; Martin, Grimbeek, and Jamieson-Proctor 2014). Other studies focus on more subjective measures of improvement (see examples in Prince 2004). In many cases, typical assessments are ill equipped to measure the value added through these more complex approaches. For example, cooperative and problem-based strategies often create benefits in students in terms of teamwork and improved interpersonal skills. However, change in these areas is difficult to measure (Terenzini et al. 2001). Despite these challenges, research shows that active-learning strategies increased learning and affective outcomes. Specifically, the active student engaging in more authentic learning experiences learns and retains more (Fink 2013). Changes in brain scanning technology and cognitive science can now provide an explanation for why it is that student-centered active learning works.
THE SCIENCE BEHIND ACTIVE LEARNING — HOW THE BRAIN LEARNS
Recording, Sorting, and Storing
Learning involves change in the learner's brain, and this change occurs through electrical and chemical processes (Clay 2007; Ford 2011; Learner Centered Teaching n.d.; Stroman 2016). External stimuli activate specific patterns in the brain that allow for the recording and storage of information. We are generally aware that different parts of the brain do different things and that the reactivation of patterns strengthens the pathways across these parts and assists in recall. Learning occurs through the development of connections between existing patterns and new patterns. As babies, our brains have no established patterns or constructs. However, once we have some existing patterns, it is easier to store new information because we have something to attach it to. The more the pathways are fired or activated, the stronger the paths and patterns become, and the learner has an easier time with future recall and connections (Ford 2011). This explains why older memories are the most stable patterns in the brains of individuals with dementia and Alzheimer's disease. Having been fired the most, they are the strongest and most stable in the brain (Smith and Squire 2009). The challenge with learning is that you can only fire neural pathways for a brief period of time before the brain fatigues. Involving other parts of the brain can extend the learning time block, but a very narrow, focused task usual tires the brain in four to eight minutes (Perry 2000). The brain needs to rest for a few minutes and then can work on finding patterns and making connections again. This intense firing of electricity and chemicals means the brain also burns a fair amount of energy in the process. Learning is work.
The initial storage capacity of short-term memory is rather small. The classic research by Miller (1956) solidified the idea that we can remember seven items at a time, give or take two items. These items can be without context and can be recalled fairly easily. What is useful to note, however, is that the items can be clustered together as "chunks," and then the chunks can become the seven items (plus or minus two) that can be recalled. Chunks that consist of three pieces of information are the most manageable, and this feature is evident in the way that we remember Social Security numbers. Instructors can help student learning by clustering material and by helping students to use the technique themselves.
APPLYING THE SCIENCE OF LEARNING TO TEACHING
Practice and Context Matter
Given that neural pathways fire, and that they strengthen the more they fire, the use of practice as part of the learning experience becomes extremely important. Practice helps to strengthen pathways for improved learning and recall (Ambrose et al. 2010). However, the practice activity cannot be simply "time on task" or "busy work." It needs to be deliberate practice on authentic problems that is guided by an expert. Unfortunately, practice inadvertently fell out of favor when the critique of rote learning and memorization hit its stride. Bloom's taxonomy lists "remembering" as the least complex type of learning that can occur (Bloom et al. 1956). The problem with rote learning (i.e., the process of reviewing discrete facts over and over until they are memorized) is that it is too narrow and often without context. The critique is justified since decontextualized memorization is not an effective way to learn material if you hope to apply it to other contexts. Think of those neural pathways again. Rote memorization fires between two regions over and over until the path is well set. That path, however stable, is not connected to other areas of the brain, which means it is difficult to connect that idea to other ideas. In contrast, practice in general, and deliberate practice in particular, is important to the learning process (Ericsson and Lehmann 1996). With more areas of the brain engaged while learning occurs, retention increases, as does the flexibility to use that information in other places and other ways.
Emotion and Learning
Developments in brain science have helped us better understand the role of emotion in the learning experience. Connecting with emotion centers is especially important for learning; therefore, enjoyment, pleasure, wonder, and fear can be powerful forces in the learning process. Positive first contact with people and ideas impacts the brain differently than negative experiences (Tendler and Wagner 2015). Research shows that peptide neurotransmitters (biologically occurring peptide chemical chains) are a critical element in how the body experiences emotions (Tendler and Wagner 2015). Focusing on just two for this conversation, instructors can benefit from understanding the roles of cortisol, often called the stress hormone, and endorphins, frequently associated with positive emotions. Research shows that cortisol heightens attention and focus in the classic "fight or flight" response system. It can also contribute to a sense of euphoria when control is established. However, chronically high cortisol levels can eventually compromise the neurons associated with learning and memory (Vincent 1990). Gazzaniga's work (1989) shows that even short-term, stress-related elevation of cortisol in the hippocampus can prevent learners from effectively determining what is important in a learning environment. Thus, stress can heighten awareness, but if chronic, it can impede learning (see also D'Mello and Graesser 2012). It is not that stress and confusion are always bad; rather, it is about moderation.
Endorphins, in contrast, are opiate peptide pain inhibitors and can increase focus and retention, resulting in a sense of euphoria. The positive feelings associated with endorphin release can increase learning and retention. Instructors can facilitate endorphin release through physical activity and positive social contact (Levinthal 1988). Laughter and play are mechanisms that can produce endorphins. In fact, learning itself can release positive-feeling neurotransmitters like dopamine, which the body experiences as a reward. This positive feeling reinforces the motivation in many learners to keep learning. Together, all of these pieces illustrate why active learning in a positive social classroom environment can lead to better learning outcomes and increased motivation to learn.
Novelty Matters
The brain is quite proficient at distinguishing the familiar from the novel. Some research suggests that our ancestors used this strategy for survival. Early humans would scan their environment to distinguish between what was new or unusual (and a possible threat) and what was known and already classified. As a result, the brain actually seeks out novelty and moves focus or attention away from the familiar (Ford 2011; Perry 2000). Combine this novelty-seeking strategy with an easily fatigued brain and it becomes clear why attention spans are not particularly long. This explains why students have difficulty retaining a long recitation of facts. Even if the facts themselves are not familiar, the sameness or lack of variation in the experience itself will lull the listener into losing focus.
At times the facts are so novel that the student has no familiarity with the idea or concept and thus no cognitive constructs with which to connect the new information. In these situations, the instructor needs to create experiences that help the learner connect to their preexisting understandings. To connect with a preexisting understanding, a student needs to be aware that the understanding even exists in the first place. Faculty can help students become aware of their preexisting understandings through reflection activities, pretests, cognitive maps, and storytelling. If done well, lectures that involve engaging stories that help the listener connect the content to their own lives can be an effective teaching strategy (Bligh 2000). Add some social engagement, and you have the ingredients for an effective learning environment. The challenge lies in finding the links that can keep everyone engaged. If students are not inherently engaged with a topic, they can learn strategies to help reset their attention.
Novelty and the Learning Environment
Using classroom and study spaces intentionally also helps improve learning. The brain responds to place and time sensations, and scent and feeling markers impact recall. Do you remember your location when you were studying for an important exam, and upon recalling that space, do you remember the information you learned? These unique markers are extremely valuable to the learning process and can facilitate recall. However, unless you plan to only recall a piece of information in the location where you studied, it is better to vary your study location (Bjork and Yan 2014).
Expert and Novice Learners
Learning changes the brain. The more patterns or constructs that we have in our brains, the more paths we can explore and the more insights we can discover. Dreyfus and Dreyfus (1986) outline the progress of the learner from novice to expert and note that the way in which learners perceive problems and their potential solutions vary greatly. Novice learners fail to see the role of context in their own learning, and they have different motivations and different decision-making approaches.
At the brain level, we know that learners make memories and connections using existing constructs. Research comparing the fMRI scans of experts versus novices shows that their approaches to tasks and their impact of learning differ significantly (Solso 2001). In the novice brain, the limbic area or emotional center of the brain fires intensely as the learner attempts to learn and master new skills. These limbic processes can increase learning through endorphin and dopamine processing, but can also impede learning when cortisol inhibits retention and recall.
The expert brain, however, is in a less emotionally engaged place and is more likely to achieve a state that is often experienced as "flow" (Csikszentmihalyi 1997). As expert learners, instructors often forget what it was like to experience the struggle and confusion of forming those new pathways. Some experts move too quickly to the solution, while others struggle to see where the error is coming from in the first place (Mathan and Koedinger 2005). Assuming that your students learn and experience information just like you do can create barriers in the classroom context.
Metacognition
Another advantage that expert learners have over novices is that they have better metacognitive skills (Bransford et al. 2000). Metacognition, or "thinking about thinking," is a powerful strategy for increased learning. It is the process of applying evaluative criteria to one's thinking processes and the outcomes of one's thinking to decide if one should employ new learning strategies. Expert learners know when they "are not getting it." If they read a paragraph and are not able to make connections, they prompt themselves to reread the paragraph. If that intervention does not help, expert learners know how to break the material down into the elements that they do understand and the elements they do not understand. Then, these learners know how to use other resources to obtain clarification. Importantly, expert learners can usually distinguish between confusion resulting from the introduction of new information and confusion based on contradictory information (Masson et al. 2014). It is one thing to not understand something you have no experience with, but it is a different issue if the confusion results from this new information indicating your previous understanding of something is incorrect. Experts are prepared to explore their own understanding to determine whether or not they need to adapt old understandings to new information. In contrast, novice learners experience this tension as confusion and need guidance through the clarification process.
(Continues…)
Excerpted from "Learning from Each Other"
by .
Copyright © 2018 Michele Lee Kozimor-King and Jeffrey Chin.
Excerpted by permission of UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
