{"id":6795,"date":"2022-10-25T08:00:37","date_gmt":"2022-10-25T13:00:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/braindevs.net\/blog\/blog\/?p=6795"},"modified":"2022-10-25T11:17:25","modified_gmt":"2022-10-25T16:17:25","slug":"its-funny-but-its-not-our-instincts-about-learning-are-often-badly-wrong","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.learningandthebrain.com\/blog\/its-funny-but-its-not-our-instincts-about-learning-are-often-badly-wrong\/","title":{"rendered":"It&#8217;s Funny (but It&#8217;s Not): Our Instincts about Learning are Often Badly Wrong"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Every now and then, research is just plain funny. Here&#8217;s the story:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/braindevs.net\/blog\/\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Stressed-by-Demands.jpg\"><img decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignleft size-medium wp-image-6799\" src=\"https:\/\/braindevs.net\/blog\/\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Stressed-by-Demands-300x225.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"225\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.learningandthebrain.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Stressed-by-Demands-300x225.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.learningandthebrain.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Stressed-by-Demands-768x576.jpg 768w, https:\/\/www.learningandthebrain.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Stressed-by-Demands.jpg 960w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p>If you&#8217;ve spent even a hot minute at a Learning and the Brain conference, you know that <strong>multitasking<\/strong> is <em>not a thing<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>When we undertake two cognitively demanding tasks &#8220;simultaneously,&#8221; we actually switch rapidly back and forth between them.<\/p>\n<p>The result: we do worse at both.<\/p>\n<p>That is: if you&#8217;re reading this blog post while listening to the news, you won&#8217;t understand or remember either very well. (That is: not as well as you would have done with each task separately.)<\/p>\n<p>Where&#8217;s the funny?<\/p>\n<p>In 2017, Shalena Srna published <a href=\"https:\/\/repository.upenn.edu\/cgi\/viewcontent.cgi?article=1370&amp;context=marketing_papers\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">research<\/a> about our\u00a0<em>perceptions<\/em> of multitasking.<\/p>\n<p>She found that we do better at activities\u00a0<em>when we think we&#8217;re <strong>multitasking<\/strong><\/em> than <em>when we think we&#8217;re <strong>monotasking<\/strong><\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>For instance, participants transcribed a video lecture about sharks.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">Researchers told half of the participants that <em>listening and transcribing are <strong>two different<\/strong> things<\/em>, so they would be <em>multitasking<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">They told the other half that <em>listening and transcribing are <strong>one<\/strong> thing<\/em>, so they&#8217;re <em>not<\/em> multitasking.<\/p>\n<p>Sure enough, the group that\u00a0<em>perceived<\/em> transcription as multitasking transcribed more words, and remembered more content, than the group who\u00a0<em>perceived the same task<\/em> as monotasking.<\/p>\n<p>Amazing.<\/p>\n<p>Srna&#8217;s team suspects that people who think they&#8217;re multitasking\u00a0<em>concentrate harder<\/em>, and so do better.<\/p>\n<p>Hence this paradox: people don&#8217;t multitask well, but we monotask better when we think we&#8217;re multitasking.<\/p>\n<h2>The Bigger Picture<\/h2>\n<p>So, what do we do with this comical finding?<\/p>\n<p>On the one hand, I don&#8217;t think it has direct teaching implications. That is, we teachers should NOT pretend to our students that they&#8217;re multitasking so that they&#8217;ll monotask better. (Why not? Well, misleading students is usually a very bad idea&#8230;)<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, this study provides an important reminder:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Humans don&#8217;t intuitively understand how we think and learn.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>We teachers (and we students) might just FEEL that a particular learning strategy works well for us. Sadly, those powerful feelings are often just plain wrong.<\/p>\n<p>I can think of several research examples of this not-so-funny problem.<\/p>\n<p>In 2009, Dr. Nate Kornell and Dr. Lisa Son published a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.researchgate.net\/profile\/Nate-Kornell\/publication\/26240473_Learners%27_choices_and_beliefs_about_self-testing\/links\/0912f509b230e6bb64000000\/Learners-choices-and-beliefs-about-self-testing.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">study about retrieval practice<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Students learned some word pairs.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">They practiced HALF of those words with simple review.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">They practiced the OTHER HALF with retrieval practice.<\/p>\n<p>Unsurprisingly (to the researchers &#8212; and to us), the students remembered more words after retrieval practice than after review. (About 6% more.)<\/p>\n<p>Surprisingly, they PREDICTED that they would remember more words after the review. (About 7% more.)<\/p>\n<p>That is: even thought they actually formed stronger memories after retrieval practice, they thought they formed stronger memories after another (less effective) strategy.<\/p>\n<p>Why, because (say it with me):<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Humans don&#8217;t intuitively understand how we think and learn.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Honestly, this insight is just bad news.<\/p>\n<h2>The Bigger Picture<\/h2>\n<p>Another study &#8212; actually a literature review &#8212; makes the same point more broadly.<\/p>\n<p>Dr. Nick Soderstrom, working with Dr. Robert Bjork, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.researchgate.net\/profile\/Robert-Bjork-2\/publication\/275355435_Learning_Versus_Performance_An_Integrative_Review\/links\/553e61880cf210c0bdaa538e\/Learning-Versus-Performance-An-Integrative-Review.pdf?_sg%5B0%5D=started_experiment_milestone&amp;origin=journalDetail\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">reviewed research<\/a> into <strong>short-term performance<\/strong> and <strong>long-term learning<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<p>To summarize this ENORMOUS review, they found that teaching strategies which benefit short-term peformance do not consistently benefit long-term learning.<\/p>\n<p>That is: imagine that I introduce a new topic in class, and give my students a quick low-stakes quiz at the end of that class. The strategies that boost class-end quizzes probably won&#8217;t help students learn well enough to demonstrate understanding on a later test.<\/p>\n<p>They understood it today, but not long-term.<\/p>\n<h2>The Even Bigger Question: So What?<\/h2>\n<p>So far, these research findings have the whiff of humor.<\/p>\n<p><em>Ain&#8217;t it funny<\/em> that we monotask better when we think we&#8217;re multitasking? LOL.<\/p>\n<p>In truth, this consistent finding &#8212;\u00a0humans don&#8217;t intuitively understand how we think and learn &#8212;\u00a0has important implications.<\/p>\n<p>Here&#8217;s what I mean:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">In theory, the field of Mind, Brain, and Education creates <em>conversations among equals<\/em>: psychology researchers, neuroscience researchers, and teachers\/academic leaders.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">In practice, this field often results in <em>researchers telling teachers what to do<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">I myself, in my own work, spent LOTS of time championing the voice of teachers.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">We teachers can, <em>should<\/em>, MUST speak up for ourselves. Our experience &#8212; both individual and professional &#8212;\u00a0<em>matters<\/em> in these conversations. We&#8217;re not here to obey; we&#8217;re here to share ideas for mutual benefit.<\/p>\n<p>However, because &#8220;humans don&#8217;t intuitively understand how we think and learn,&#8221; we must speak up for our experience AND we must do so modestly.<\/p>\n<p>We must do so with an open mind.<\/p>\n<p>Yes, my experience tells me that\u00a0<em>teaching this way<\/em> helps students learn.<\/p>\n<p>But, my definition of &#8220;learn&#8221; is &#8220;do well on the class-end quiz.&#8221; Soderstrom shows us &#8212; very convincingly &#8212; that class-end quizzes don&#8217;t predict long-term learning and understanding. (Of course: &#8220;long-term learning and understanding&#8221; is my goal!)<\/p>\n<p>Yes, my experience tells me that I can multitask! Alas, research shows I&#8217;m just monotasking efficiently.<\/p>\n<p>My gut tells me that simple rereading results in more learning than retrieval practice. Alas, my gut is\u00a0<em>just plain old wrong<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>In other words: we teachers should have a role in this Mind, Brain, Education conversation. To be most effective in that role &#8212; to merit that role &#8212; we must acknowledge the <em>limitations<\/em> of our insight, training and professional experience.<\/p>\n<p>This balance is VERY DIFFICULT to get right. I hope we can talk more about finding a harmonious tension between speaking up and listening with humility and curiosity.<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p>Kornell, N., &amp; Son, L. K. (2009). Learners\u2019 choices and beliefs about self-testing.\u00a0<i>Memory<\/i>,\u00a0<i>17<\/i>(5), 493-501.<\/p>\n<p>Soderstrom, N. C., &amp; Bjork, R. A. (2015). Learning versus performance: An integrative review.\u00a0<i>Perspectives on Psychological Science<\/i>,\u00a0<i>10<\/i>(2), 176-199.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Every now and then, research is just plain funny. Here&#8217;s the story: If you&#8217;ve spent even a hot minute at a Learning and the Brain conference, you know that multitasking is not a thing. When we undertake two cognitively demanding tasks &#8220;simultaneously,&#8221; we actually switch rapidly back and forth between them. The result: we do [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":18,"featured_media":6799,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[34],"class_list":["post-6795","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-lb-blog","tag-multitasking"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.learningandthebrain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6795","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.learningandthebrain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.learningandthebrain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.learningandthebrain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/18"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.learningandthebrain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6795"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.learningandthebrain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6795\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6801,"href":"https:\/\/www.learningandthebrain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6795\/revisions\/6801"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.learningandthebrain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/6799"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.learningandthebrain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6795"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.learningandthebrain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6795"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.learningandthebrain.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6795"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}