If the learning process was explicitly separated into the following aspects, would it improve the student success rate?
  • Research
  • Memory
  • Understanding
  • Intelligence
These are elaborated here: The Learning Process.

Views: 159

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

You bring up an interesting theory. The way you have posted it is too simple. For instance, we need to speak to the research that shows us the various changes in the brain as the child ages. I have seen research that shows the young brain is setting up the framework for future gathering of information and that it requires more kinetics than most children are now getting in grades 1-3. This is part of the basis of Montessori and other alternative process teaching.
Under intelligence we must pay attention not only to IQ but also to EQ or EI and we need to understand that everyone does not need to know everything. I think we make some people feel guilty because they do not have a talent for some areas of learning but do well in others. Similarly, we all do not learn at the same pace. I would argue that some of the people who seem to take longer to "get it" actually know more about the subject than those who appear to get it immediately. Some of those immediate learners are only superficial and do not always see the purpose behind the process.
Yes I agree with you Deborah. People learn at different rates; and some of the slower learners may turn out to understand some topics better than others. Also, it may be worth helping people to become stronger in those areas where they have a natural talent.
Very much agreed that we need to pay attention to EQ - and social intelligence as well. The links seem very basic without links between them or what is required for them (which is different at every age.) And where do we fit things like Reflection? Just a thought.
Dear Donna,
You bring out a very important concept - reflection. I see you have posted a work of art to represent you in this group. This tells me you appreciate art. Let's look at art as it relates to education. Why does an artist do what they do. We run the scale from Norman Rockwell that paints so realistic we might think it a photograph all the way to modern and/or abstract art. Now the next question is this. Does the art have value if YOU do not understand it? I say yes but the Conservatives will say no. The answer depends on if your overall view is inclusive or exclusive. The Tea Party just had a field day rallying against what they referred to as "The Liberal Elite". They are, in effect, saying that if they do not understand education it is therefore not working right. We now have a few in Congress that want to hold for-profit schools accountable for students who do not pay back their loans. Education is not responsible for unemployment. Investing in destructive wars and allowing Exxon Mobile to not pay ANY taxes to the Federal system; rather than invvesting in economic development and retraining people who have obsolete skills is not working. You see the Status Quo seeks to protect their turf. There is nothing democratic about business. Each business is a dictatorship. When was the last time you heard of a CEO or a CFO being elected?
I have visited the recommended site "The Learning Process" and it is a most useful site to see the consolidation of research on technology and education. I can say that I believe we are just beginning to understand the power of technology and the Internet and just in the infancy of online education. With proper infrastructure online education can do anything. It was interesting to see that post graduate students do not think highly of online education. I think at least part of this view is due to the perception that employers and the world population in general do not accept online education as valid. In my opinion this attitude has much to do with resistance to change and perceived job security. Actually, if done right, online education will lead to more work for teachers than ever before but it will be more diverse and creative work.
Yes, I too think e-learning can evolve into a main-stream form of teaching for most students.

I'd go even further. Computers are getting more powerful, smarter, and already host most of the world's knowledge. They'll become a transition phase in this century where some mental tasks will be delegated to the AI computer. Some of the mental skills that we're taught may no longer be required in a couple of decades.

This has significant implications for the future role of teaching and learning. As AI takes on more of our intellectual tasks we also have to ask what will be the purpose of teaching and learning? How's that for a big question? :-)

Just for the sceptics, here's some food for thought:

"we won't experience 100 years of progress in the 21st century—it will be more like 20,000 years of progress"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerating_change


Article about the Singularity University:

http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100915/full/467266a.html
That is some of the roads to learning but well descrived.
Very great idea. The steps in learning process is very hierarchal and practical.

Like most of your headings all but one intelligence. My questions isn't everyone intellgent in one way or another?

 

The word intelligence over the years has caused many aruements of who is and who is not.

 

Every child is gifted, some just open their present sooner than others.

 

Maybe change it to 'learning preferences' much nicer and students will not then compare themselves and say I am more intelligent than you. After all 'we are all equally different'

 

 

Hi Lee - I agree everyone has potential in some area.

 

The intelligence step is testing their ability to apply their understanding of the topic - rather than testing their IQ. 

There's a brief example of that here:

https://sites.google.com/site/electronicacademic/processes/learning...

RSS

A Learning Revolution Project

Education Quotes & Commentary

Twitter Feed

© 2019   Created by Steve Hargadon.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service