The "Laws" of Learning

A central tenet of reform mathematics and constructivist teaching is that children should work cooperatively in groups to “explore” and “discover” math and figure out concepts on their own. Reformers say this method makes math interesting and fun and leads to “deeper understanding.”

Jayne Sherman, a teacher in Prince Williams County, Va., and parent of four children, said the reform program "Investigations in Number, Data, and Space" was getting her students to “think mathematically” (Sherman, 2008).

“Using the inquiry method of learning, children explore, discover and articulate their thinking,” she said. Her students supposedly discover “many strategies to solve problems.” They communicate and collaborate with each other, sharing their thinking and becoming “math literate, all while having fun.” They “make their own representations to solve problems.”

Sherman summed up her feelings by taking a poke at traditionalists: “The traditional approach to teaching no longer serves our students.”

I’m not sure how much fun this process actually is for the students, who tend to be concrete thinkers and who generally appreciate straightforward, logical approaches to learning. Experimentation in groups can be fun for them, but I suspect they’d rather it come in small doses. Otherwise, they can become stressed out trying to teach themselves 5,000 years of math in the small snippets of time they have available to them.

I was thinking about this while reading an Air Force training manual from 1974 called “Principles and Techniques of Instruction.” The manual is old, its cover is lost, and the pages are yellowed. It’s been around the block – well, around the world, actually. It contains much valuable information about teaching, learning, leadership, ethics, guidance, counseling and critiquing effectively – all presented in an incredibly concise, straightforward, readable and accessible format.

As I read through this manual, I caught myself nodding my head in agreement, saying at one point to the cat, “Now, that’s what I’m talking about!” According to this manual, there are six basic "Laws" of Learning. If I were a proponent of reform mathematics, I could see myself using three of them to support my approach:

The Law of Effect – “learning is strengthened when it is accompanied by a pleasant or satisfying feeling”
The Law of Intensity – “a vivid, dramatic, or exciting learning experience teaches more (information) than a routine or boring experience (does)”
The Law of Readiness – “a person learns best when he or she is ready to learn”

Proponents of reform mathematics could argue that those three laws support their approach: Keep it pleasant, keep it exciting, and for heaven’s sake, keep it simple. But I think those three laws actually support the other three:

The Law of Primacy - People tend to draw on the skills they learned first:

“Primacy, the state of being first, often creates a strong, almost unshakeable, impression. For the instructor, this means that what he teaches must be correct the first time. For the student, it means that his learning must be correct. Unteaching is more difficult than teaching … The student’s first experience should be positive and functional in preparation for what follows” (“Principles,” 1974).

Therefore, teachers of mathematics should want students to learn math processes properly the first time – in the most efficient, most effective and most precise way possible. Teaching them mathematics as reformers do – by asking them to muddle around in herds – is inefficient, ineffective, unpleasant and ultimately counterproductive.

The Law of Exercise – Practicing a concept is critical to learning it.

“Things most often repeated are best remembered. It is the basis of practice and drill… The mind can rarely retain, evaluate, and apply new concepts or practices after a single exposure. A student … learns by applying what he has been told, and, every time he practices, his learning continues … Repetition consists of many types of activities, including recall, review, restatement, manual drill, and physical application.”

Proponents of reform, however, have called this practice “drill and kill” and tossed it under a bus. To reformers, practicing is “rote” and “boring.” It’s an odd attitude to have about something we all do when we want to learn anything of value.

The Law of Recency – The longer we go without practicing a new concept, the easier it is for us to forget it.

“Other things being equal, the things most recently learned are best remembered, while the things learned some time ago are remembered with more difficulty.”

This law conflicts entirely with the “spiral” technique – so common in reform mathematics – where teachers briefly touch on a new concept, don't give their students the opportunity to practice it, and then present the concept again some time later (often with a new twist).

The Air Force training manual is old, and it’s probably been revised since 1974, but I like it. As a tutor, this is what I take away from these six "Laws" of Learning:

1. Make sure students are ready for the lesson.
   
2. Prepare an experience that they’ll enjoy.
   
3. Teach students the most efficient, most effective methods first.
   
4. Make the lesson exciting.
   
5. Have students practice the lesson.
   
6. Build on recently learned concepts.

This approach makes sense to me. Apparently, there is much to be learned from the things we used to know.



Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is: Rogers, L. (October, 2008). "The "Laws" of Learning." Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/

This article was also published October 9, 2008, in EducationNews.org at http://ednews.org/articles/29558/1/The-Laws-of-Learning/Page1.html

Welcome to Betrayed - Why Public Education is Failing

Thank you for joining me at "Betrayed." This is a blog for people who care about public education and who want to make it work better for the children. I'm interested in learning from you, so please write freely (observing all standard etiquettes and courtesies of public writing.)

The status of education is critical. Our children aren't learning proper math skills, aren't reading at grade level and know next to nothing about history, civics, geography or finance. Businesses and government agencies across the country are crying out for better math and science skills in their new hires. They're resorting to hiring from outside of the country. It's a tragic situation for our children, and it's totally preventable. But policy makers have insufficient motivation to make the necessary changes, since they profit off the current system. Parents are choosing to leave public education, hoping that alternatives can give their children the quality education they need and deserve.

I've just finished writing a book about public education. It's called "Betrayed: How the Education Establishment Has Failed America and What You Can Do About It." The book is 230 pages long, plus about 43 pages of references. Some of the topics included are: reform mathematics vs. traditional mathematics, the No Child Left Behind Act, standardized testing, administrative accountability, the impact of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, tutoring and remediation, statistics on education, funding for basic education, class size, gifted education, retention policies, teacher education, and parent involvement.

If you're interested in learning more about the book, please let me know. Meanwhile, I hope you will find this blog lively and interesting. Thank you for visiting.