learntolearn

Learn: what…why…how…you and…

General Frameworks About Learning

As a final post in this series of posts looking at general  frameworks about learning, I want to contrast the degree to which the frameworks specifically mention “metacognition,” “executive function” and/or “learning how to learn.” Subsequent posts will look at three other types of teaching/learning frameworks: individualizing learning, personal qualities of learners, and the “metacognition/executive function” literature which focus more singularly and specifically on ideas related to “executive function”.

Two of the “learning framework” sources—Understanding by Design and  Authentic Learning certainly suggest principle of learning/instruction relevant to “metacognition/executive function” when they address topics or issues of student choice or motivation, meaningful learning, paying attention to conceptual misunderstanding, reflecting on, reviewing or revising their work, engaging students in self-assessment and use of feedback, students comparing their ideas and work to others or to work at other times, and articulating and transferring their learning to other contexts. Considering this as “executive function” work may depend on how explicit teachers are in labeling these practices as “executive function.” In addition, whether or not these are “executive function” practices will depend on whether students make  their thinking about learning explicit.

The Cognitive Apprenticeship framework I believe is more explicit about the teaching/learning principles that are directly related to “metacognition/executive function” insofar as this framework focuses explicitly on Reflection, Articulation, and Strategies.

The two other frameworks–noted below– explicitly espouse at least one principle central to “metacognition,” “executive function,” or “learning how to learn.”

How People Learn by John D. Bransford, Ann L. Brown, and Rodney R. Cocking, editor

Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning, 2000

http://www.nap.edu/read/9853/chapter/3

Summary Points

“Overall, the new science of learning is beginning to provide knowledge to improve significantly people’s abilities to become active learners who seek to understand complex subject matter and are better prepared to transfer what they have learned to new problems and settings. Making this happen is a major challenge (e.g., Elmore et al., 1996), but it is not impossible. The emerging science of learning underscores the importance of rethinking what is taught, how it is taught, and how learning is assessed (p 13)

Key Findings

This volume provides a broad overview of research on learners and learning and on teachers and teaching. Three findings are highlighted here because they have both a solid research base to support them and strong implications for how we teach” (pp. 14-18)

  • “Students come to the classroom with preconceptions about how the world works. If their initial understanding is not engaged, they may fail to grasp the new concepts and information that are taught, or they may learn them for purposes of a test but revert to their preconceptions outside the classroom
  • To develop competence in an area of inquiry, students must: (a) have a deep foundation of factual knowledge, (b) understand facts and ideas in the context of a conceptual framework, and (c) organize knowledge in ways that facilitate retrieval and application.
  • A “metacognitive” approach to instruction can help students learn to take control of their own learning by defining learning goals and monitoring their progress in achieving them.”

 

Implications for Teaching (p 19-21)

  • Teachers must draw out and work with the preexisting understandings that their students bring with them. This requires that:…
  • Teachers must teach some subject matter in depth, providing many examples in which the same concept is at work and providing a firm foundation of factual knowledge. This requires that:…

 

  1. The teaching of metacognitive skills should be integrated into the curriculum in a variety of subject areas.

Designing Classroom Environments:  (pp.23-25)

  1. Schools and classrooms must be learner centered.3. Formative assessments—ongoing assessments designed to make students’ thinking visible to both teachers and students—are essential…. 
  2. 4. Learning is influenced in fundamental ways by the context in which it takes place…..
  3. 2. To provide a knowledge-centered classroom environment, attention must be given to what is taught (information, subject matter), why it is taught (understanding), and what competence or mastery looks like.

 

Making Leaning Whole by David Perkins

Summary Points for “Learning the Game of Learning”—Passenger or Driver?

Learning to learn has to do with many things: directing one’s attention, choosing time and place, relating new ideas and skills to what you already know.  Indeed, it has a lot to do with the previous six principles.  The self-managed learner makes a point of practicing the hard parts, even when no coach or teacher imposes a regimen.  The self-managed learner makes a point of playing out of town—connecting ideas and skills with other contexts—even when no coach or instructor sends the team out of town…..”

“I can hardly think of anything more worth learning than learning how to learn….”  (p. 14)

To review those principles:

    1. Play the whole game…at least some “junior” or “threshold” version….some accessible version of the game. “You may not do it very well, but at least you know what you’re doing and why you’re doing it.” (p. 9)
    2. Make the game worth playing. Rather than, “You’ll need it later,” learners need to see some application early on, to be able to “foster my own commitment and interest.” (p. 202)….by connecting the “game” to work they are interested in at an appropriate level of challenge.
    3. Working on the hard parts. …with enough of this kind of work individually targeted (p. 10)…provided with enough of and the kind of feedback that allows revising the work; with learners being able to ask themselves questions about sticking points, confusion, poor skills, and time and place to work on those.
    4. Playing out of town…to stretch and adapt skills and insights…to work on generalizing…to transfer the learning….(p. 12). To step into the messy real world, where the learners needs to take on different roles, approaches, questions, and tasks (p. 204)
    5. Uncovering the hidden game…..learning to think like the “expert” in the particular field, who knows the unwritten and non-obvious rules of playing the game. “Any complicated and challenging activity always has multiple layers beneath the obvious.” (p. 13). Learners need to look for, and to know to look for, underlying strategies, approaches to problem solving in a particular domain, games of “evidence” and games of “pitfalls of evidence.” (p. 204)
    6. Learn from the team…learning is not a solo game, not a one source game, not a one context game. “Still there is much to learn from others who have mastered the art.” (p. 205)
No Comments »

Kids as Executive Learners (5): Understanding By Design (UbD)

This is the last in a series of learning framework that focuses more generally on how students learn, although each has some reference to the concept of self-management. Subsequent posts will look at two other types of teaching/learning frameworks: individualizing learning and personal qualities of learners, which focus more singularly and specifically on ideas related to “executive function”.

In this post I focus on what I understand to be the connections between the PORTALS framework and the Understanding by Design framework.  The connections noted come from a publication that lists “The Big Ideas of Understanding by Design,” published in http://www.grantwiggins.org/documents/UbDQuikvue1005.pdf For additional details of their work, see the links below the chart.

Portals Door ppp Understanding by Design by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe is a well- developed framework first published as a text in 1998 and revised in 2005.

In listing their Big Ideas of Understanding by Design, they list #1 as “UbD is a way of thinking purposefully about curriculum planning and school reform, a set of helpful design tools, and design standards—not a program or recipe.” (p. 14)  I directly quote these Big Ideas below.

PURPOSE 6 UbD transforms Content Standards and other goals into focused learning targets based on “big ideas” and transfer tasks.
OPERATIONS 3 Evidence of understanding is revealed through performance—when learners transfer knowledge and skills effective—using one or more “facets” (explain, interpret, apply, shift perspectives, empathize, and self-assess).
REMEMBERING 2  “…and the ability to transfer learning….”
TEAM WORK 4 Educators are coaches of understanding, not mere purveyors of content and activity.

8 UbD reflects a “continuous improvement” approach to design and learning. The results of our curriculum designs (e.g., assessment results, quality of student work, degree of learner engagement) inform needed adjustments.

ACTION 2 The end goals of UbD is understanding and the ability to transfer learning—to appropriately connect, make sense of, and use discrete knowledge and skills in context.

5 Planning is best done “backward” from the desired results and the transfer tasks that embody the goals.

LAYING A FOUNDATION 2   “….to appropriately connect, make sense of, and use discrete knowledge (and skills) in context.”
SELF-MANAGEMENT 7 Design Standards guide self-assessment and peer reviews of curriculum, instruction, and assessment for quality control.

 

For additional information about the Understanding by Design framework, see the links below.

See McTighe’s ASCD article on the “confluence of evidence from two streams—theoretical research in cognitive psychology, and results of student achievement studies.” Found at

http://jaymctighe.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/A_Summary_of_Underlying_Theory_and_Research2.pdf

For a detailed description of this UbD work see:

http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/siteASCD/publications/UbD_WhitePaper0312.pdf

Source: Adapted from Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2011). The Understanding by Design guide to creating high-quality units. Alexandria, VA: ASCD

Or see comments on the 2nd Edition:

http://www.ascd.org/Publications/Books/Overview/Understanding-by-Design-Expanded-2nd-Edition.aspx

About This Book

”What is understanding and how does it differ from knowledge? How can we determine the big ideas worth understanding? Why is understanding an important teaching goal, and how do we know when students have attained it? How can we create a rigorous and engaging curriculum that focuses on understanding and leads to improved student performance in today’s high-stakes, standards-based environment?

Authors Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe answer these and many other questions in this second edition of Understanding by Design. Drawing on feedback from thousands of educators around the world who have used the UbD framework since its introduction in 1998, the authors have greatly revised and expanded their original work to guide educators across the K–16 spectrum in the design of curriculum, assessment, and instruction…. “

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No Comments »

KaEL: Cognitive Apprenticeships (4)

 

Cognitive Apprenticeship:  Making Thinking Visible by Allan Collins, John Seely Brown, and Ann Holum:

Authors’ permission for publishing on the internet noted on internet site:  Reprinted with permission from the Winter 1991 issue of the AMERICAN EDUCATOR, the Quarterly journal of the American Federation of Teachers.

The authors draw a contrast between “cognitive apprenticeship” and both schooling and traditional “apprenticeship.”   They provide details about creating environments with focus on the content taught, pedagogical methods employed, the sequencing of learning activities and the sociology of learning.  Following a critique of schooling based on the lack of visibility of both the teacher’s and the students’ thinking and problem solving, they propose a model that:

“^Identifies the processes of the task and makes them visible to students;

 ^Situates abstract tasks in authentic contexts, so that students understand the relevant of the work; and

 ^Vary the diversity of situations and articulate the common aspects so that students can transfer wheat they learn.”

Before going into detail on the “cognitive apprenticeship” model, they offer examples in reading (Reciprocal Teaching). Writing ((1985; Scardamalia, Bereiter, and Steinbach, 1984), and Math (Schoenfeld (1983, 1985).

P.O.R.T.A.L.S. Cognitive Apprenticeship:  Making Thinking Visible by Allan Collins, John Seely Brown, and Ann Holum:

There are 4 dimensions to the Cognitive Apprenticeship model: Content (Domain Knowledge, Heuristic strategies, Control strategies, and Learning strategies); Method (Modeling, Coaching, Scaffolding, Articulation, Reflection, and Exploration); Sequencing (Global before local skills, Increasing complexity, and Increasing diversity), and Sociology (Situated learning, Community of practice, Intrinsic motivation and Cooperation)

Purpose Sociology: Intrinsic motivation;

Method: Exploration (teacher invites students to pose & solve their own problems

Operations Content: Heuristic strategies, Control strategies, Learning Strategies
Remembering Sequencing: By implication-tasks leading to generalization

Sociology: Situated Learning: Carrying out tasks and solving problem that reflect use in the future

Team Work Sociology: Situated learning. Community of practice, Cooperation.

Method: Modeling, Coaching, Scaffolding

Content: types of knowledge required for expertise: Heuristic strategies, Control strategies, Learning strategies)

Action Method: Exploration

Sequencing: Increasing complexity, Increasing diversity

Laying a Foundation Content: Domain Knowledge, Global before local (building a conceptual map before exploring the terrain)

Content: types of knowledge required for expertise: Heuristic strategies, Control strategies, Learning strategies)

Self-Management Method: Articulation, Reflection, Exploration

 

Some additional links. Note that some of these links have cautions about opening the link.

 

The 21st Century Learning Initiative gives you the full article from American Educator

http://www.21learn.org/archive/cognitive-apprenticeship-making-thinking-visible/

Remember to scroll down on this site to get to the article on Cognitive Apprenticeship

 

Cognitive Apprenticeship links:

http://web.cortland.edu/frieda/ID/IDtheories/37.html

 

Developed by Linda Darling-Hammond, Kim Austin, Ira Lit, and Daisy Martin With Contributions From Annmarie Palincsar Stanford University School of Education

http://www.learner.org/courses/learningclassroom/support/08_cog_app.pdf

 

No Comments »

Skip to toolbar