And more good news.<\/p>\n
Good News<\/em>: we have lots and LOTS of research. We can talk about attention, or working memory, or the spacing effect, or motivation, or stress\u2026the list is long. And super helpful.<\/p>\n So much practical advice!<\/p>\n Bad News<\/em>: actually, the bad news is the same as the good news. We\u2019ve got SO MUCH good research that it\u2019s honestly hard to keep track of it all.<\/p>\n I mean, seriously. Should you start by looking at attention<\/strong> research? Or stress<\/strong> research?<\/p>\n Should we think about the motivational effects<\/em> of student-teacher relationships, or the perils of working memory overload<\/em>, or the benefits of desirable difficulty<\/em>?<\/p>\n Which is most important?<\/p>\n Honestly, I think our next priority is not so much finding out new truths<\/strong> about learning, but organizing<\/strong> all the information we already have.<\/p>\n If you agree that we really need someone to sort all these suggestions into a coherent system, you’ll be\u00a0delighted\u00a0<\/em>to read this article<\/a> by Stephen Chew (Twitter handle: @SChewPsych) and William Cerbin (@BillCerbin).<\/p>\n Other scholars — for instance, Barak Rosenshine<\/a> — have put together a coherent system based on learning principles. Chew and Cerbin, instead, organize their system around\u00a0cognitive challenges<\/em>.<\/p>\n That is:<\/p>\n If students feel anxiety<\/em> about a topic or discipline, that emotion will interfere with their learning.<\/p>\n If students have prior misconceptions<\/em>, they will distort students’ understanding.<\/p>\n If classroom work or assignments go beyond working memory limits<\/em>, students won’t learn effectively (or, at all).<\/p>\n When planning a course or a lesson or an assignment, teachers can think their way through these specific challenges. By contemplating each one, we can design our work to best facilitate learning.<\/p>\n If you’re thinking “this is such excellent news! It just can’t get any better!” — well — I’ve got some news: it gets better.<\/p>\n Chew and Cerbin write:<\/p>\n There is no single best teaching strategy for all students, topics, and situations. The proposed framework is not prescriptive … and can guide adaptation of teaching practice.<\/p>\n In other words, they’re\u00a0not<\/strong> saying: here’s a list of things to do<\/em>.<\/p>\n Instead, they\u00a0are<\/strong> saying: here are several topics\/problems to consider<\/em>.<\/p>\n Teaching advice should not include “best practices.” (That’s a business concept.) It should include “best questions to ponder as we make decisions.” Chew and Cerbin make this point repeatedly.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/braindevs.net\/blog\/\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/AdobeStock_220309711_Credit.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\nMore Good News<\/h2>\n
Getting the Emphasis Right<\/h2>\n