"For the last few years," writes Alfie Kohn, "we have witnessed a defensive, defiant embrace of instructional strategies that turn back the clock, notably a focus on transmitting chunks of information to students - and doing so through direct instruction." But the evidence that supports this approach is slim and misleading. Take, for example, the oft-cited 'baseball study'. It has a tiny sample size, is narrowly focused, and assumes its own conclusion when it evaluates 'success'. And yet it's called "seminal". What really matters, says Kohn (and I agree) is that "getting kids to unpack or remember a specific text is a very different goal from helping them to become 'successful independent readers' over time. Moreover, knowing more stuff has a very limited role to play in helping students to read more proficiently, or think more clearly, or solve problems better."
Today: Total: [Direct link] [Share]
