[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

How Will Bill Evers Interpret Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark?

*****************************************
ABSTRACT
Physicist Derek Muller hopes that the *correct* interpretation of Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark (2006) (KSC) and Klahr and Nigam (2004) (KN) will "serve to move American education more towards interactive engagement and increased conceptual understanding." However, the hard lessons of the Science and Math Wars suggest that direct instruction zealots such as Bill Evers, now U.S. Assistant Secretary of Education, will not desert their anti-progressive agendas so as to interpret KSC and KN as justifying "interactive engagement" methods of education. 
*****************************************
If you reply to this long (17 kB) post please don't hit the reply button unless you prune the copy of this post that may appear in your reply down to a few relevant lines, otherwise the entire already archived post may be needlessly resent to subscribers.
Derek Muller (2007a), in his PhysLrnR post of 25 Feb 2007 titled "Re: study after study shows children learn better with hands-on experience than with direct instruction #2]," wrote [bracketed by "MMMMMM. . . . "; my inserts at ". . . . [[insert]] . . . ."]: 

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
I still find it amazing that Hake writes . . . . .[[in the abstract of Hake (2007b)]]. . . . [bracketed by lines: "HHHHH..."] 

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
I argue that (a) Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark's (2006) "direct instruction" approximates the guided "interactive engagement," found to be relatively effective in promoting student learning by physics education researchers. . . ." 
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

and then follows in his most recent post . . .[[Hake (2007d)]]. . .  with:

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
I fear that Kirschner et al. (2006) and Klahr and Nigam (2004) will be misinterpreted, and thus serve to move American education more towards passive student lecturing. 
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Call me an incurable optimist, but would it not be equally appropriate to write:
I hope that the correct interpretation of Kirschner et al. (2006) and Klahr and Nigam (2004) will serve to move American education more towards interactive engagement and increased conceptual understanding. 
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
I may be an incurable pessimist, but, in my opinion, Muller's suggested wording:
"I hope that the correct interpretation of Kirschner et al. (2006) and Klahr and Nigam (2004) will serve to move American education more towards interactive engagement and increased conceptual understanding,"
would display an abysmal ignorance of the hard lessons of both the Science Wars [Woolf (2005), Klahr & Li (2005), Hake (2004, 2005, 2007c, d)] and the Math Wars [Schoenfeld (2004), Hake (2007e, f), Klein (2007)] .
Would anyone familiar with the history of the Science or Math Wars believe, e.g., that the newly appointed U.S. Assistant Secretary of Education, Bill Evers <http://www.hoover.org/bios/evers>, will desert his anti-progressive stance so as to interpret "Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching" [Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark (2006)] as justifying Dewey-like "interactive engagement" methods?
In "How Progressive Education Gets It Wrong: John Dewey invented progressive education a hundred years ago. It was wrong then and hasn't gotten better," Evers (1998) wrote: 

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
School reformers today are still trying to put into effect the turn-of-the-century progressive education ideas of John Dewey and others. These ideas were largely misguided a hundred years ago, and they are largely misguided now. . . . .There is an alternative to the progressive approach: direct instruction or explicit teaching. DIRECT INSTRUCTION RECEIVES SUPPORT FROM RECENT FINDINGS IN COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY: Although children do naturally pick up what psychologists call "primary cognitive abilities" (such as spoken language and fine motor skills) without being taught, CHILDREN ARE BORN IGNORANT AND NEED TO BE EXPLICITLY TAUGHT MOST SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE ("secondary cognitive abilities") by people who know the subjects. Teachers are expected to know more than students and should seek to transmit that knowledge. Teachers should not respond to all questions from students in class (as some discovery learning teachers do) with "What do you think?" 
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Thanks to Larry Woolf (2006) for the above quote.
If Evers is right that Dewey's ideas "were largely misguided a hundred years ago, and . . .are largely misguided now," then how come "interactive engagement" methods of the Dewey type [Ansbacher (2000)] have been found to yield about a two-standard deviation superiority [Hake (1998a, b)] in normalized learning gains over the traditional methods championed by Evers? 


Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
24245 Hatteras Street, Woodland Hills, CA 91367
<rrhake@earthlink.net>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi>
"Only by wrestling with the conditions of the problem at hand, seeking and finding his own solution (not in isolation but in correspondence with the teacher and other pupils) does one learn." 
      John Dewey (1997) "How We Think."
"The most important instrument for encouraging student achievement has in recent years been state-level academic standards and accountability systems based on student test results." 
         Bill Evers & Clopton (2006)

REFERENCES [Tiny URL's courtesy <http://tinyurl.com/create.php>.]
Ansbacher, T. 2000. "An interview with John Dewey on science education." The Physics Teacher 38(4): 224-227; freely online at <http://www.scienceservs.com/id13.html> as a 1.3 MB pdf. A thoughtful and well-researched treatment showing the consonance of Dewey's educational ideas (as quoted straight from Dewey's own writings, not from the accounts of sometimes confused Dewey interpreters) with the thinking of most current science-education researchers. Ansbacher's valuable web site is at <http://www.scienceservs.com>.
Dewey, J. 1910/1997. "How We Think," Dover new edition. Amazon. com information a <http://tinyurl.com/2pyo9r>.
Evers, W. & P. Clopton. 2006. "High-Spending, Low-Performing School Districts" in Hanushek (2006, p. 162;), online at <http://media.hoover.org/documents/0817947817_103.pdf> (3.1 MB).
Evers, W. 1998. "How Progressive Education Gets It Wrong: John Dewey invented progressive education a hundred years ago. It was wrong then and hasn't gotten better." Hoover Digest No. 4, online at <http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/3533286.html>.
Hake, R.R. 1998a. "Interactive-engagement vs traditional methods: A six thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses," Am. J. Phys. 66: 64-74; online at 
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi/ajpv3i.pdf> (84 kB).
Hake, R.R. 1998b. "Interactive-engagement methods in introductory mechanics courses," online at <http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi/IEM-2b.pdf> (108 kB) - a crucial companion paper to Hake (1998a).
Hake, R.R. 2004. "Will the NCLB Tend to Propagate California's Direct Science Instruction Throughout the Entire Nation?" online at <http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0501&L=pod&O=D&P=12783>. Post of 14 Jan 2005 to AERA-C, AERA-D, AERA-G, AERA-H, AERA-J, AERA-K, AERA-L, APPhysics, ASSESS, Biopi-L, Chemed-L, Edstat-L, EvalTalk, Math-Learn, Math-Teach, Phys-L, Physhare, PhysLrnR, POD, & STLHE-L.
Hake, R.R. 2005. "Will the No Child Left Behind Act Promote Direct Instruction of Science?" Am. Phys. Soc. 50: 851 (2005); APS March Meeting, Los Angles, CA. 21-25 March; online at 
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake/WillNCLBPromoteDSI-3.pdf> (256 kB).
Hake, R.R. 2007a. "Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark Revisited," online at <http://tinyurl.com/36klac>. Post of 18 Jan 2007 21:47:28-0800to PhysLrnR and MathLearn.
Hake, R.R. 2007b. "Re: 'Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work', " online at <http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0701&L=pod&O=D&P=20140>. Post of 19-20 Jan 2007 to AERA-A, AERA-B, AERA-C, AERA-J, AERA-K, AERA-L, ASSESS, EdResMeth, ITForum (rejected), PBL, POD, RUME, MathTalk, STLHE-L, TIPS, PsychTeacher (rejected), TeachingEdPsych.
Hake, R.R. 2007c. "Re: study after study shows children learn better with hands-on experience than with direct instruction," online at <http://tinyurl.com/2tzsah>. Post 14 Feb 2007 16:21:34-0800 to PhysLrnR and ScListserv.
Hake, R.R. 2007d. "Re: study after study shows children learn better with hands-on experience than with direct instruction #2" online at <http://tinyurl.com/35768b>. Post 25 Feb 2007 15:35:11-0800to PBL, PhysLrnR, and ScListserv.
Hake, R.R. 2007e. "Math Wars Peace Treaty? (was Letter in latest AJP)" online at <http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0702&L=pod&O=D&P=4676>, unapologetically cross-posted on 8 -13 Feb 2007 to AERA-B, AERA-L, AP-Physics, ARN-L, Chemed-L, Dewey-L, Math-Learn, MathTalk, Math-Teach, Phys-L, Physhare, PhysLrnR, POD, & RUME; abstract only to AERA-A, AERA-C, AERA-H, AERA-I, AERA-J, & AERA-K. The near zero response suggests that the math educators who contribute to Math-Learn, MathTalk, and Math-Teach are not much interested in moderating their positions :-(.
Hake, R.R. 2007f "Math Wars Peace Treaty? online at <http://tinyurl.com/2eexxa>, post of 13-14 Feb 2007 17:04:46-0800 to AERA-L, Math-Teach, MathTalk, & PhysLrnR; abstract only to AERA-A, AERA-B, AERA-C, AERA-D, AERA-H, AERA-I, AERA-J, AERA-K, AP-Physics, EdRedMeth, EvalTalk, Physhare, Phys-L, POD, RUME, & STLHE-L.
Hanushek, E, 2006. "Courting Failure: How School Finance Lawsuits Exploit Judges' Good Intentions And Harm Our Children," information and free download at <http://www.hoover.org/publications/books/4284872.html>.
Kirschner, P. A., J. Sweller, & R.E. Clark. 2006. "Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching." Educational Psychologist 41(2): 75-86; online at <http://www.cogtech.usc.edu/publications/kirschner_Sweller_Clark.pdf> (176 kB). For discussions see Hake (2007a, b, c, d).
Klahr, D. & M. Nigam. 2004. "The equivalence of learning paths in early science instruction: effects of direct instruction and discovery learning," Psychological Science 15(10): 661-667; online at <http://www.psy.cmu.edu/faculty/klahr/personal/pdf/KlahrNigam.PsychSci.pdf>. For a discussion of widespread misinterpretation of this paper see, e.g., Hake (2005) and Klahr & Li (2005)].
Klahr, D. & J. Li. 2005. "Cognitive Research and Elementary Science Instruction: From the Laboratory, to the Classroom, and Back," Journal of Science Education and Technology 14(2): 217-238; online at <http://www.psy.cmu.edu/faculty/klahr/personal/pdf/Klahr_Li_2005.pdf> (536 kB).
Klein, D. 2007. "School math books, nonsense, and the National Science Foundation," Am. J. Physics [OF ALL PLACES!!] 75(2): 101-102; a preprint of the published version is online at <http://www.csun.edu/~vcmth00m/nsf.html>.
Muller, D. 2007a. "Re: study after study shows children learn better with hands-on experience than. . . [with direct instruction #2]," PhysLrnR post of 25 Feb 2007 19:48:09-0700online at <http://tinyurl.com/237v2r>.See also Muller (2007b).
Muller, D. 2007b. "Re: study after study shows children learn better with hands-on experience than . . . . .[with direct instruction]. . .," PhysLrnR post of 15 Feb 2007 21:52:20-0700; online at <http://tinyurl.com/yoo42h>.
Schoenfeld, A. H. 2004. "The Math Wars," Educational Policy 18(1): 253-286; online at <http://gse.berkeley.edu/faculty/AHSchoenfeld/Schoenfeld_MathWars.pdf> (160 kB). For Schoenfeld's dim view of the machinations of math warrior David Klein (2007), use the binocular icon to search for "Klein" (without the quotes).
Woolf, L. 2007. "Bill Evers nominated to be US assistant secretary of education," PhysLrnR post of 13 Feb 2007 09:48:28-0800, online at <http://tinyurl.com/2mb5jd>. Woolf wrote: "President George W. Bush today nominated Williamson M. "Bill" Evers, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and a member of its Koret Task Force on K-12 Education, to be U. S. assistant secretary ofeducation for planning, evaluation and policy development <http://www.hoover.org/pubaffairs/whatsnew/5692526.html>."
Woolf, L. 2005. "California Political Science Education," APS Forum on Education Newsletter, Summer; online at <http://units.aps.org/units/fed/newsletters/summer2005/woolf.html>.