23.2 Need for educational change

23.2.1 Changing Society

Education is receiving increasing pressure from changing global economic circumstances and complex societal needs. Yet, according to Lynton (1989, p. 23), "At this time ... education is far from fully contributing to the economic well-being of this country" [United States]. Public and private institutions are demanding employees who can think critically and solve a range of problems, yet they claim that those people are difficult to find.

Education, to its credit, is neither deaf to the plea nor ignorant of the need. Calls for restructuring the way students learn come from a variety of institutions including the American Association for the Advancement of Science (1989) and the National Council of Teachers for Mathematics (1989). Educators agree that we must help students learn to solve problems and think independently (Bransford, Sherwood, Hasselbring, Kinzer & Williams, 1990; Feuerstein, 1979; Linn, 1986; Mann, 1979; Resnick & Klopfer, 1989; Segal, Chipman & Glaser, 1985). The challenge for educators is to develop strategies that teach content in ways that also teach thinking and problem-solving skills (Bransford et al., 1990).

22.2.2 Weaknesses within the Current System

There is considerable evidence that today's students are not particularly strong in the areas of thinking and reasoning (Bransford, Goldman & Vye, 1991; Nickerson, 1988; Resnick, 1987). Bransford (1990, pp. 115-16) states that the "basic problem is that traditional instruction often fails to produce the kinds of transfer to new problem-solving situations that most educators would like to see." Neither do children often experience in the classroom the kinds of problems that make knowledge relevant to them (Collins, Brown & Holum, 1991). "They [students] treat knowledge as ends rather than as a means to important ends" (Bransford et al., 1990, p. 117). Students treat new information as facts to be memorized and recited back rather than as tools to solve problems relevant to their own needs.

23.2.2.1. Inert Knowledge. Research shows that knowledge learned but not explicitly related to relevant problem solving remains inert (CTGV, 1993c; Perfetto, Bransford & Franks, 1983; Whitehead, 1929). Knowledge acquired in abstract circumstances without direct relevance to the needs of learners is not readily available for application or transfer to novel situations (for a review of transfer research, refer to Butterfield & Nelson, 1989; Clark & Voogel, 1985). The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (CTGV) (CTGV, 1993c) specifies the following flaws in our conventional approaches to schooling and teaching that lead to inert knowledge:

1. In the constant battle of breadth versus depth, breadth usually always wins. We (educators) tend to fill our students with facts and leave no time for dealing with topics in depth. "Students who rely on memorized algorithms for solving problems typically do not perform as well on transfer problems as do students who rely on an understanding of the underlying concepts" (Robertson, 1990, p. 253).
2. In our desire to cover as much material as possible, we focus our instructional activities on abstract decontextualized basic skills, concepts, and technical definitions that we believe have broad applicability and that are unaffected by the activities or environments in which they are acquired and used (Brown, Collins & Duguid, 1989). However, when we do this, students do not learn when to apply those skills or within what kinds of contexts they work. We do this despite a large body of evidence that indicates that abstracted skills are seldom transferred from one domain to another (Butterfield & Nelson, 1989; Clark & Voogel, 1985).
3. When we do provide practice for our students, we give them arbitrary, uninteresting, unrealistic problems to solve. The example of story problems in math is overused. We can also find examples of oversimplified, unrealistic problems in the sciences, language arts, and social studies. Again, we do this in the mistaken belief that we must emphasize decontextualized skills that are applicable everywhere.
4. We treat students passively for 12 to 16 years, rarely giving them the opportunity to take responsibility for their own learning, to explore ideas of their own choosing, to collaborate with one another or with teachers, or to make valuable contributions to the learning of others. They do not learn to take charge of their own learning, nor do they learn the skills necessary to become lifelong learners and daily problem solvers.

I add a couple of more items not cited in the CTGV article to the list of conventional educational practices:

5. Students are not evaluated in authentic ways. After teaching in decontextualized ways, we test in the same ways. We do not look at actual performance but use complex paper-pencil tests to measure the quantity of knowledge learned.
6. Finally, our current school practices often have negative effects on the morale and motivation of students. Perelman (1992, p. 72) states that "Students are forced to compete to achieve as much as they can within the periods of time allotted for each activity. This design requires that most students fail or do less well most of the times so that a minority of them can be labeled "excellent." The main functional focus of the system is not 'learning,' it is 'screening out' "(p. 72).

We have created an evaluation, testing, and grading substructure that helps perpetuate the system. Education is often a "game" that teaches our students to focus on tests and grades rather than on problem solving in a risk-free environment. The best students learn early on that they succeed best by working by themselves as quickly as possible. They learn to "beat" the tests.

23.2.2.2. Erroneous Assumptions. We begin to change these conventional practices by calling into question some of our basic assumptions. Berryman (1991) says that the educational practices described above stem from five erroneous assumptions about learning that have governed education since the beginning of the industrial age. He holds that we often assume incorrectly that:

1. People easily transfer learning from one situation to another if they have learned the fundamental skills and concepts.
2. Learners are "receivers" of knowledge in verbal forms from books, experts, and teachers.
3. Learning is entirely behavioristic, involving the strengthening of bonds between stimuli and correct responses (see 2.2).
4. Learners are blank slates ready to be written on and filled with knowledge.
5. Skills and knowledge are best acquired independent of realistic contexts for use.

To begin to address the issues of transfer and instructional methods to meet employer and societal needs, reasoning and problem-solving skill development must be an integrated part of an interdisciplinary program of study in education (Lynton & Elman, 1987), a program or environment that places students in situations where they can practice solving problems in a meaningful and constructive manner.

23.2.3 We Need to Look at Other Ways

One view of an alternative framework comes from researchers who are beginning to emphasize the importance of anchoring or situating instruction in meaningful problem-solving environments ... (CTGV, 1993c, p. 8 1).

The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1993c) is a leader in describing alternative frameworks of instruction and schooling. The group posits the following necessary changes: first, we as educators must establish new goals for learning. We must move from emphasizing decontextualized reading and computational skills to developing independent thinkers and learners who engage in lifelong learning. This does not mean that we abandon the important skills of reading and computation; instead, we should be teaching reading and computation within more situated contexts that demonstrate, the value of those skills. Second, in contrast to our long operative conventional assumptions (see above), we must base our teaching on new assumptions about the nature of thinking, learning, and instruction. We must accept that:

... the mere accumulation of factual or declarative knowledge is not sufficient to support problem solving. In addition to factual or declarative knowledge, students must learn why, when, and how various skills and concepts are relevant (CTGV, 1993c, p. 79).

Effective problem solving and thinking are not based solely on motivation and knowledge of thinking strategies but also on well-organized and indexed content knowledge. Learners must have rich knowledge structures with many contextual links to help them persevere with complex problems. Therefore, to compare new assumptions about learning with the aforementioned old assumptions, we propose the following changes (see also Table 23-1 for a summary):

1. People transfer learning from one like situation to another with difficulty. Learning is more likely to be transferred from complex and rich learning situations. Learning activities must help students think deeply about the content in relevant and realistic contexts (CTGV, 1993c).
2. Learners are "constructors" of knowledge in a variety of forms and from peers in addition to experts and teachers. They take an active role in forming new understandings and are not just passive receptors.
3. Learning is cognitive and involves the processing of information and the constant evolution and creation of knowledge structures. We must focus on and make visible thinking and reasoning processes as well as content. We are not suggesting abandoning the teaching of content to teach only thinking and reasoning, because "knowledge of concepts, theories, and principles empowers people to think effectively" (Bransford et al., 1990, p. 115). (See Chapter 5 for a more extensive discussion of cognitions and Chapter 21 for a discussion of cognitive learning models.)
4. Learners bring their own needs and experiences to a learning situation and are ready to act according to those needs. We must incorporate those needs and experiences into instructional strategies to help students take ownership and responsibility for their own learning.
5. Skills and knowledge are best acquired within realistic contexts. Morris (1979) calls this transfer appropriate processing. Transfer appropriate processing means that students must have the opportunity to practice and learn the outcomes that are expected of them under realistic or authentic conditions.
6. Assessment of students must take more realistic and holistic forms utilizing projects and portfolios and deemphasizing standardized testing. Educators are increasingly aware that conventional achievement and intelligence tests do not measure the ability of people to perform in everyday settings and adapt to new situations (CTGV, 1993c).

A discussion of the foundations for these assumptions, their implementation, and research issues makes up the rest of this chapter.