Myths about education... A counter-voice that gets you thinking

TEL isn’t just about the techie stuff, though I do like that. As I mentioned in the second post to this blog, TEL is predominately about learning, even though the ‘Learning’ part of TEL comes last. I try to read up on learning as much as I try to keep up with technological developments – and I admit that I often find the learning literature more interesting!

A few years ago I purchased Daisy Christodoulou’s book Seven myths about education (see The Guardian's review here). The book is brief, authoritative, clear, and punchy. Christodoulou suggests that there are seven pervasive myths about how students learn, and how teachers should teach. The myths find their expression in education ministries, teacher's colleges, and right across the schooling system. I reckon the same myths are equally applied across the HE sector. Critically, the myths are in opposition to good education practice.

Her book is well worth the provocation; here’s a quick overview. 

Myth	Myth-driven practice	Solution
Facts prevent understanding	An emphasis on experience, driven by concern that facts are acontextual nuggets of information, with no apparent immediate use other than filling someone’s head.	Facts are useful components for enhancing working memory, which can become overloaded. Memorising facts enhances further mental processing, and so provide long-term benefit.
Teacher-led instruction is passive	Activity and negotiation are prioritised in the belief that students learn best by doing through problem-solving, teamwork, and self-discovery.	Teaching can provide valuable shortcuts to knowledge, and reveal important information that may not be immediately accessible.
The twenty-first century fundamentally changes everything	Problem-solving and adaptability are prioritised, to make students better prepared for 21st century life.	Knowledge always builds on other knowledge; previous ideas are often more extended than replaced. The social context does not change this.
You can always just look it up	Teaching ‘how to learn’ is emphasised, in the belief that facts are readily available; if anything can be found out by looking it up, facts do not need to be emphasised in learning.	Information processing relies on that long-term memory immediately at hand. Working memory (immediate processing) relies on long-term memory (stored knowledge) for its effectiveness. “It takes knowledge to gain knowledge”; domain-specific knowledge is essential for looking anything up meaningfully.
We should teach transferable skills	Problem-solving, analysis, critical thinking and evaluation; less time in teaching subjects, in favour of more project work.	Transferable skills are applied differently across different knowledge domains; the concepts are transferable; the practice is not. Practising the use of knowledge develops skills; attempting to develop transferable skills separate from background knowledge makes no sense.
Teaching knowledge is indoctrination	Limiting subject content in favour of process, to avoid the projection of values that a knowledge-based curriculum might bring.	Teaching a foundational corpus of knowledge that draws learners into a shared understanding, as a means of promoting equality of opportunity; taking learners beyond what they might experience through exposure to fundamental ideas.

I utterly agree with all that Christodoulou has so objectively presented, with one small caveat. Ultimately I’m not totally convinced that we should throw out all myth-driven practice as described in the table above – mainly because their extreme opposites are likely no better. It is possible to teach facts in such a way that understanding is missing, for example; it’s also possible for teacher led instruction to be passive; for 21^st century conditions to be different; to look various things up; to benefit from transferable skills; to indoctrinate by teaching knowledge. I suspect Christodoulou’s concern is that the myths represent an extreme response to issues that, perhaps inadvertently, overlook some of the very valuable means by which effective learning takes place. 

What I take from Christodoulou’s excellent presentation and argument is that we should continue to teach facts, because storage of immediate facts is foundational to both better subject engagement and meaningful, long-term independent learning. Sort of cognitive science/ learning principles 101.

What I most respect out of Christodoulou’s analysis is her focus on evaluating the latest fads and ideas using a critical lens. Online learning has had more than its fair share of myths – Second Life, anyone? – so we need to remain vigilant, and adopt the sort of critical response modeled by Christodoulou. Following Christodoulou’s lead, I suggest that spotting a myth involves considering not so much in the idea or slogan itself but rather the practice that the myth leads to, and what that practice seeks to displace. A false dichotomy of ‘you can’t learn necessary skills and facts at the same time’ seems the fatal flaw shared across those myths in the book. Under this dichotomy knowledge is displaced by activity, whereas it’s far more profitable to link the two. 

I found Christodoulou's voice here well-aligned with works I've enjoyed by Brighouse, Jeanneney, Bauerlein, Brown, Carey, and Ambrose et al. Christodoulou also makes some very helpful comments related to the perspectives of Friere, Rousseau and Dewey in addressing Myth 1, helpful in that the comments serve as a reminder of how we ought not extend others' educational views too far. Let's soak ourselves in the evidence, and stick to the facts...