-
Sir Ken Robinson: The Purpose of Education – THE DAILY RIFF – Be Smarter. About Education.
-
Getting It Wrong: Surprising Tips on How to Learn
New research makes the case for hard tests, and suggests an unusual technique that anyone can use to learn
-
http://manuals.makeuseof.com.s3.amazonaws.com/MakeUseOf.com_-_How_The_Internet_Works.pdf
April 4th, 2011 at 1:55 pm
I found the “Getting It Wrong” link most interesting. I have one comment and one question on this article. Maybe you can tell me what you think.
First, I find failure an important part of learning in my personal life, and, of course, it is not an altogether “good” thing. In a positive light, when I must write a proof, failure is key to the successful completion of the job. Typically I like to write a “bad version” and try to find a way out that works logically. The result is generally positive, although it can be frustrating until mastery is achieved.
Second, there is the human desire to avoid the pain of failure, which can cause some to work hard or simply give up. When a test is too hard, some will internalize the pain of failure and one could risk fostering a learned helplessness. Perhaps an error-free strategy needs to be mixed with a “hard test” strategy. The error-free test could boost confidence and inspire persistence before the hard test.
The question that comes to mind after this article is this: how can one integrate such a strategy into a traditional course with grades? I honestly don’t have a clear idea on this question, but would love to hear any thoughts.
April 4th, 2011 at 3:22 pm
Personally, I also see failure as a good motivator to “figure things out”, which, is, more or less, the definition of being an engaged learner. I took the findings of that study to be evidence of the effect that being engaged and interested in a subject has on a person’s ability to learn it. So, even if you’re not engaged or interested, if you get in the habit of acting like you are (by routinely asking yourself to define new terms you read, or trying to summarize an argument even before you feel you understand it), you might just trick your brain into learning just the same.
I’m not sure that failure on a test (like a mid-term) and failure as this study is using it are the same thing; failure on a test is really just a one-time event, and is associated with a lot of negative judgement and emotional baggage. Failure, as you describe it in the example of working on proofs, seems to be more like “the acceptance of the necessity to work hard to achieve success”. Implementing crazy-difficult graded tests in a class would be discouraging to most students, and since the feedback would be one-time only, it wouldn’t necessarily serve to encourage any good habits of mind. Failure on a one-time, monolithic test may not give a novice learner much guidance on how to continue. Breaking down a huge task into manageable (and useful) chunks, and practicing the heck out of each is a lot more helpful.
IMHO the need to give grades at all helps to create a environment that makes this type of engagement more difficult. (Alfie Kohn is an researcher who has written a lot on this subject– a good article is online here: http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/fdtd-g.htm ).