Even if a practice is supported by research, it doesn't follow that the explanation is supported by research. This article offers a case in point. Strategies such as focusing attention, staged repetition and interleaving are described. No problem. But the explanations are a mish-mash, sometimes treating the brain as a computer (eg., "what you teach is actively being processed"), a storage device ("pulling a stored memory out of long-term memory"), and a network ("activating and making connections to prior knowledge"). The terms 'data', 'information' and 'knowledge' are used almost interchangeably. Be wary of the explanations! They stimulate models or metaphors in the readers' minds that lead to erroneous assumptions about learning and development.
Today: 4 Total: 206 [Direct link] [Share]
