What does it mean to learn? Include thoughts on the definitions and conceptualizations of knowing and understanding.
As I began to reflect on what it means to learn, I decided to try and asses my own prior knowledge about the learning process before I read and listened to what the experts had to say in this week’s readings. Here’s what I started with:
- Learners start by bringing their own perspective (culture, previous experience, prior knowledge, learning style, etc.) to new learning tasks. The personal nature of learning means everyone’s process is different. There is a social context to learning; it doesn’t happen in a vacuum.
- As new information is presented, learners seek to understand it though their unique lens. Often there is a period of uncertainty or grappling with the information (what Piaget would call “disequilibrium”), as a learner tries to assimilate new knowledge with what s/he already knows.
- Knowledge leads to understanding. That is, a grasp of the facts can lead a learner to hook those facts onto what s/he already knows, and make meaning out of the new information.
- It is only when a learner has made new information (or knowledge) meaningful to herself by interacting with it in a meaningful way, that true understanding can occur.
Post-reading, my initial thoughts are mostly the same, but a bit more clear.
(Also, I want to marry Sir Ken. Don’t tell my husband. Brilliant.)
I agree with Wiggins and McTighe (2006) that “knowledge” constitutes the facts, and that knowledge leads to “understanding,” or the deeper meaning of the facts. I would add that knowledge might also include what a learner already knows or assumes as they encounter new information. Wiggins and McTighe and Bloom all put a higher priority on understanding over just knowledge, as does one of my favorite educational thinkers, Eleanor Duckworth. In her fabulous book, The Having of Wonderful Ideas, she states: “Knowing the right answer requires no decisions, carries no risks, and makes no demands. It is automatic. It is thoughtless” (Duckworth, 2006). I believe what Duckworth is saying (and I think Bloom, etc. would agree) is that providing learners the opportunity to interact with information—to experiment, to predict, to explore assumptions and test out theories—is a key link in the chain of understanding. Without the chance to construct meaning out of knowledge, the knowledge is sort of useless. I appreciate also Wiggins and McTighe’s point about incorrect knowledge or a misunderstanding of the facts as useful tools in helping learners gain a deeper and truer understanding of new material.
If you believe Sir Ken (and I do), it seems that this critical process of using knowledge to give rise to understanding in a personalized way is not happening in our schools, in general. With an emphasis on standardization (of curriculum and assessment) and un-differentiated learning, it’s no wonder students are turned off. As a school librarian, I am excited about the opportunities I have to interact with students a bit outside of that standard paradigm, and help support them as they learn about what they’re interested in.
