[LINK] Meaningful Learning [was Concept Model of IA Terms]

[Richard Chirgwin]

Bernard Robertson-Dunn wrote:
> Eric Scheid wrote:
>
>> On 9/6/07 11:32 PM, "Chris Pallé" <chris.palle at blueflameinteractive.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concept_map
>
> This topic seems to have a context of User Interface design, however 
> (potentially highjacking the intended thread) following up the wiki 
> link I came across this:
>
> <quote>
> Novak's work is based on the theories of David Ausubel (assimilation 
> theory), who stressed the importance of prior knowledge in being able 
> to learn new concepts.
>
>     "The most important single factor influencing learning is what the
>     learner already knows. Ascertain this and teach accordingly."[3]
>
> In his book Learning to Learn, Novak states that "meaningful learning 
> involves the assimilation of new concepts and propositions into 
> existing cognitive structures."
>
> </quote>
>
> Which I thought was a very useful set of statements.
>
> It got me thinking about the current trend to treat teaching/learning 
> as a set of discrete units which students get marks or grades for. The 
> sum of the grades being an indication of educational achievement, with 
> a particular total being a requirement for a qualification.
>
> This contrasts with my educational experience (in the UK in the 1960s 
> and early 70s) where my learing was guided by people who understood 
> the need for an ordered assimilation of "new concepts and propositions".
>
> The idea that students can direct their own learing, to me, is a 
> fallacy. How can someone who doesn't know a subject decide what they 
> need to learn?
>
> I am very suspicious of the "cut and paste" style of assignment 
> teaching - to me there is a large difference between knowing and 
> understanding. I wonder at how today's students develop an 
> understanding of a subject, rather than where to go to get data.
>
> I didn't learn as much from books as I did from the people who taught 
> me. Teachers don't seem to be as much a part of the modern education 
> system as they were.
>
> Or have I become a grumpy old man?
No, the discussion is spot on. I find myself grinding my teeth over 
"factoid education". I would love to take a couple of hundred million of 
(anyhow misspent, wasted drip-feeds to a cynical and under-delivering 
industry) school computer funds and redirect them towards knowledgeable 
teachers. But parents and politicians project their own "status symbol" 
mindset onto schools. You can't assess a teacher on a passing visit 
every now and again, but you can see a shiny toy^h^h^h new computer 
without taking the slightest interest in anything that happens in the 
school; so people who want to prove they care just have to sling dollars 
at gadgets to mollify the proles.

As to your remark that "teachers don't seem to be as much a part of the 
modern education system...", Bernard, you haven't read the drivel 
written by people like Dale Spender. Not only is it that the teacher 
isn't as involved as formerly; there are theorists and advocates who 
actively seek the teacher's exclusion. If we have computers, the 
"teaching" experience can be replaced "by a new literacy which doesn't 
involve books" in which the idea of learning is completely replaced by a 
sort of existential "experience".

RC