How People LearnMary Pat Wenderoth

University of Washington

How People LearnJ. Bransford, National Research Council 1999

1. Address students’ alternative conceptions

Three major findings:

2. Build BOTH a deep foundation of factual knowledge AND strong conceptual framework.3. Enhance students’ ability to monitor learning

(metacognition)

1. Address students’ alternative conceptions.What causes the seasons?

summer

spring

winter

autumn

Summer in North America

Winter in South America!

http://www.learner.org/resources/series28.html

2. Build BOTH factual knowledge AND conceptual framework.Pages published in PNAS 1950-2012

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 20200

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

Year

Pa

ge

s p

ub

lish

ed

in P

NA

S

How People Learn, Chase & Simon 1973

The value of conceptual frameworks

The chessboard challenge

Correctly place the 25 chess pieces

1 2 3 4 5 6 70

5

10

15

20

25

Master

Class A

Trial number

# p

ieces c

or-

rectl

y r

ecalled

Chess masters – Class A players – Beginners

Board #2

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 70

5

10

15

20

25

MasterClass ABeginner

trials#

pie

ces

corr

ect

ly

reca

lled

2. Build BOTHFactual

knowledgeConceptual framework

What are the key conceptual

frameworks in your field?

3. Enhance students’ metacognition.KNOWLEDGE about cognition

What to studyHow to studyWhen and why to study

How to help your students learn to monitor their

understanding?

REGULATION of cognitionPlan studyingMonitor studyingEvaluate effectiveness of

study strategies

Schraw 1998 Instructional Science 26:113

Learning Paragraphs-Due every Friday at 10 am-Respond to question posted on web

Learning Paragraphs

Results:

• 85% noted a positive influence on learning

• Got them to stop for a moment in their busy worlds.

Final Question:

How has reflecting on your learning each week influenced your learning in Biol 350?

Learning Paragraphs

“Some weeks no matter how much I thought I was paying attention in class it would be Thursday night and I’d be thinking ‘Huh? What did I learn this week? Oh yeah….’ which got me to examine what was going on in class and the learning process before the weekend completely wiped everything away.”

Student comment:

Summary Sheets

How People LearnNational Research Council 1999

1. Address alternative conceptions2. Build conceptual framework

3. Monitor learning------metacognition

How to implement in classroom?

Three major findings:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Science of Learning

Avg

. R

ete

nti

on

Rate

•Audio-visual•Demonstration•Discussion•Lecture•Practice•Reading•Teaching

Science of Learning

NTL Institute for Applied Behavioral Science 300 N. Lee Street, Suite 300, Alexandria, VA 22314

http://homepages.gold.ac.uk/polovina/learnpyramid/about.htm

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Science of Learning

Avg

. R

ete

nti

on

Rate

•Audio-visual•Demonstration•Discussion•Lecture•Practice•Reading•Teaching

Science of Learning

NTL Institute for Applied Behavioral Science 300 N. Lee Street, Suite 300, Alexandria, VA 22314

http://homepages.gold.ac.uk/polovina/learnpyramid/about.htm

•Audio-visual•Demonstration•Discussion•Lecture•Practice•Reading•Teaching

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Avg

. R

ete

nti

on

Rate

lecturereading

teaching

practice

discussion

demonstration

audio-visual

Science of Learning

The National Training Laboratories of Alexandria VA

The New Science of Teaching and Learning by Tracey Tokuhama-Espinosa 2010

Students talking

Faculty talking

How to implement in your classroom?

Use of Clickers and Peer Instruction

Smith, M. et al. Why Peer Discussion Improves Student Performance on In-Class Concept Questions. Science, 2009 January, 2. Vol. 323

Does active engagement of students during discussion with peers, some of whom know the correct answer, lead to increased conceptual understanding?

OR

Do students not in fact learn from the discussion, but simply choose the answer most strongly supported by neighbors they perceive to be knowledgeable?

Students answer a clicker question individually (Q1).

Students talk to neighbors and answer Q1 again (Q1AD for Q1 “After Discussion”).

Students answer a different question individually (Q2). Q2 is asking about the same concept as Q1 (isomorphic).

Testing the value of peer discussion:

Smith et al., Science. 2009, 323(5910):122.

Q2Individual

Q1AD

After Discussion

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Q1 Q1a Q2

Per

cen

t

Q1

Q1a

Q2

Q1Individual

102030405060708090

100

0

avg

% c

orr

ect

n= 350 students(Genetics)16 sets of questions

Easy(5 questions)

Medium(7 questions)

Difficult(4 questions)

Per

cen

t co

rrec

t

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Easy Medium Hard

Per

cent

Even when questions are initially difficult, students can answer correctly after discussion

Q1

Q1after discussion

Q2

Very few students knew correct answer to Q1, but after discussion, many more answer correctly: students are constructing their own knowledge

Smith et al., Science. 2009, 323(5910):122.

Smith, MK et al. (2011) Combining peer discussion with instructor explanation increases student learning from in-class concept questions. CBE-Life Sci. Educ. 10: 54-63.

Peer discussion followed by instructor explanation is more effective than either alone

This study provides support for peer discussion, but more importantly it provides guidance for how faculty should deliver clicker questions!

Smith et al., Science. 2009, 323(5910):122.

“Ask, Don’t Tell”

Guiding Principles

The person doing the talkingis doing the learning

Knight, J. and B. Couch presentation at SABER 2013

Senior level- Developmental Biology course

•Small group (4-5 students) work in class of 50•Two sections of same class•Use of clicker questions•Record, transcribe, analyze conversations for reasoning

0 1 2 30

10

20

30

40

50

60

% of transcripts

0 - no reasoning noted1 student gave explanation2 or more students exchanged ideas3-two or more students exchanged ideas and gave warrants

Answer-Centered class

Reasoning-Centered Class

prompt

“Discuss your answers with your table and re-vote. Then I’ll explain the correct answer.”

“Discuss your answer with your table and focus on the reasons for your answer. Then I will ask you to share your reasons.”

Quality of

reasoning

Knight, J. and B. Couch presentation at SABER 2013

Senior level- Developmental Biology course

significantly higher quality of reasoning

Avoid “Clicker Abuse” 1. Pose a challenging higher order

question (< 60% correct)

2. First, let students answer alone3. Do not show results4. Encourage peer discussion5. Revote6. Instructor led debrief

- asking for LOGIC behind answer

Smith et al. Science 2009Smith et al. CBE- Life Science Education 2011Mazur Peer- Instruction

What you say to students is key.

Increased Course Structure Improves Performance in Introductory

Biology

Freeman, Hake, & Wenderoth (2011)CBE—LSE 10, 175–186

Bloom ALL exam questions from Fall 2002 - 2009

Bloom level increased from 2.7 to 3.1

Fall 2002

--lecturing

--Socratic method

LOW

Spring 2005

--lecturing --clicker Q--reading Q

MEDIUM

Fall 2009

--No lecturing (at all) --6+ clicker Q-- weekly practice exam-- daily reading Q--15 random calls

HIGH

Spr ‘02

Spr ‘03

Spr ‘05

Fall ‘05

Fall ‘07

Fall ‘09

< 1.5 18.2% 15.8% 10.9% 11.7% 7.4% 6.3%

Increased Course Structure Improves Performance in Introductory

Biology

Faculty talking

Student learning

Freeman, Hake, & Wenderoth (2011) CBE—LSE 10, 175–186

…

TigerTiger TigerTiger

Blocked OR Interleaved

How to teach and study?

Birnbaum, Kornell, Bjork, & Bjork (2009)

16 different types of butterflies

Copper Streak NymphMark

Please identify the image. Which of the following is it?

AdmiralAmericanBaltimoreCooperEastern TigerHairstreakHarvesterMarkPainted LadyPine Elfin PipevineSpright TipperTree SatyrViceroy Wood Nymph.

Birnbaum, Kornell, Bjork, & Bjork (2009)

Which students are most

confident?Actual results

Birnbaum, Kornell, Bjork, & Bjork (2009)

38

19

“Desirable Difficulty”

Learners are poor judges of effective study

techniques

Bjork, Roediger, Karpicke

“Desirable Difficulties”• Interleave vs block

Cognitive Science of Learning

Group 1 S S S STest ------------ Test

Group 2 S S S TTest ------------ Test

Group 3 S S T TTest ------------ Test

Group 4 S T T T Test ------------ Test

“Testing Effect”-- Retrieval

1st 2nd

12 word pairs Swahili-- English

5 min

-week

Roediger and Karpicke 2004

Re-study or re-reading creates

“Illusions of knowing”

Testing enhances learning

“Testing Effect”

1. Challenge alternative conceptions2. Build frameworks

3. Enhance metacognition

How People Learn

Fixed vs Fluid mind set

“Desirable Difficulties”(interleaving)

“Testing Effect”

“Ask, Don’t Tell”