Imagine any of these scenarios: You’re in a classroom. You’re on a hospital bed in pain. You’re at a corporate training session (maybe also in pain). You’re in a psychologist’s office. All of these settings have been used to apply the concept of mindfulness since it first become popular for stress management in the 1970s, according to David Winter of the blog Careers – in Theory.
Let’s take a quick multiple-choice quiz. If you’re critical of college (and the institutionalized American education system in general), you might say it … a) acts as a cocoon; b) is a lumbering, antiquated machine; c) doesn’t prepare you for anything except more college; d) is a business that makes a lot of money off its clients.
Since the introduction of “No Child Left Behind,” it’s no secret that standardized testing has taken on new life in today’s education world. While many have doubts about the omnipresent hand of Scantron, some people object more vigorously than others. Take, for example, Marion Brady. In yesterday’s “Answer Sheet” blog (Washington Post), Brady argues that standardized tests are an education pig in a poke … “a freak, shaped by naiveté, political ideology, unexamined assumptions, ignorance of history, and myths.”
In all seriousness, in late January new findings came out on why college students learn things (or don’t) at an annual meeting of the Association of American Colleges and Universities. The fancy term for this awareness of the precise ways in which people learn is metacognition. (Yes, I encourage you to use that term at your local college watering hole.)
What is metacognition all about? Basically, as Kristin E. Bonnie, assistant professor of psychology at Beloit College, put it:
“We want those who are not doing well to think about it.”
The idea is that through forced reflection (a kind of forced retrieval?), students might be able to determine exactly why they didn’t know a particular answer. Then, the students can use the new information to improve their studying behaviors.
The real question might be, how many students will change their behaviors after only learning better ways to learn?
IHE’s write-up reveals a potential answer: professors found that the greatest results came from students who were actively surveyed and engaged in class discussions about about their attitudes and habits, proving what psychologists have told us before: it’s easy to learn how to change, but often very difficult to do it.
It may sound like a dangerous search-and-rescue tactic, but forced retrieval has just proven to be a good way to learn. According to a new study published in Sciencelast month, a form of forced retrieval—written self-testing—came out ahead of three other studying methods after a one-week interval.
The other three methods were:
concept mapping (see image below);
five minutes of reading;
short-term repeated studying (cramming?).
Written self-testing also came out 145% ahead for memory retention when placed directly against simple reading. Another groundbreaking finding was that students thought beforehand that they would learn more in the three “losing” methods than they did in the winning “testing.”
Notes are something I’ve always had trouble with. Digital devices like my iPhone have made organization easier and more efficient on so many fronts: banking/bill pay, calendar management, address book consolidation, Angry Birds, email and travel. But notes, not so much. The iPhone has a notes app, which I use occasionally—but I also use Post-its, Chrome Notepad, multiple real notepads and any piece of scrap paper that happens to be nearby.
So you want to go back to school. Maybe you want to move into a better position at work, or even change your career altogether. Returning to school could give you the boost you need to move into your next career, but do you have time to go to school part-time? Considering your current job and family obligations, how large of a course load can you handle as a part-time student? And how long will it take to earn your degree?
Via CCAP and Marginal Revolution, faculty at a major Chinese university recently asked an American professor to talk about trends in U.S. education, and an answer came out that reflected the old Chinese way: Standardized curriculum, rote memorization, and nationalized testing.
As a former teacher of English as a foreign language in China for almost 5 years, I was not surprised to read that the Chinese faculty laughed out loud after hearing this. What surprised them was that this Indiana University professor was talking about America’s schools moving towards what Chinese schools have started to move away from: standardization. As an article in the July 10 edition of Newsweek points out, education reform in China is driving more problem-based learning that stems from real-world inquiry.
Traditional Chinese approaches to learning embody what Newsweek calls the “drill-and-kill teaching style,” where everybody is looking to model the teacher in unison. Collectivist culture is reflected in the classroom, where students are more comfortable going along with the group and avoiding the spotlight.* Learning is centralized: teachers hand down wisdom from pedestals, and students passively receive the information. Plenty of this type of learning is stuck at the bottom of Bloom’s taxonomy, and can largely explain why China has never produced a Nobel Prize winner.
I am heartened to see China’s educational system begin to move toward the top of this pyramid, especially when you consider how much of the world’s future leadership will hail from its 1.2 billion+ population. Considering our national standardization movements of the last 5 years or so (fueled by No Child Left Behind), I can only hope that, conversely, the U.S. does not slip too far towards the bottom in the name of accountability.
*This “Stripes” clip of a mixed U.S. immigrant English class embodies the Chinese model, from passivity to shyness to choral repetition. Start at the 50-sec. mark for the heart of the scene. (Warning: mild language.)