Some subscribers to Phys-L might be interested in a recent post "Re:
'How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School'" [Hake
(2010)]. The abstract reads
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
ABSTRACT - GS Chandy of the Math-Teach list wrote: "I've now read
through quite sizable portions of . . . . . 'How People Learn: Brain,
Mind, Experience and School'. . . . .[[Branford et al. (2000)]] . . .
. I believe most of the book's findings and recommendations do not
square with the philosophy of the Robert Hansen-Wayne Bishop school
of thought regarding the teaching or learning of math. The book will
serve as an excellent model for the effective teaching and learning
of math - or of any other discipline, for that matter . . . . . I
shall be using it as a primary reference for all my own work."
Bransford et al. (2000) have to this to say about behaviorism: "A
limitation of early behaviorism stemmed from its focus on observable
stimulus conditions and the behaviors associated with those
conditions. This orientation made it difficult to study such
phenomena as understanding, reasoning, and thinking-phenomena that
are of paramount importance for education. Over time, radical
behaviorism. . . . . gave way to a more moderate form of behaviorism.
. . . that preserved the scientific rigor of using behavior as data,
but also allowed hypotheses about internal 'mental' states when these
became necessary to explain various phenomena. . . . In the late
1950s, the complexity of understanding humans and their environments
became increasingly apparent, and a new field emerged - cognitive
science. From its inception, cognitive science approached learning
from a multidisciplinary perspective that included anthropology,
linguistics, philosophy, developmental psychology, computer science,
neuroscience, and several branches of psychology. . . . . . New
experimental tools, methodologies, and ways of postulating theories
made it possible for scientists to begin serious study of mental
functioning: to test their theories rather than simply speculate
about thinking and learning and, in recent years, to develop insights
into the importance of the social and cultural contexts of learning.
The introduction of rigorous qualitative research methodologies have
provided perspectives on learning that complement and enrich the
experimental research traditions."
What's behaviorism got to do with math education? I used to think
that math warrior Wayne Bishop's "Mathematically Correct"
<http://mathematicallycorrect.com/science.htm> school of "direct
instruction," was a manifestation of behaviorism. But lately I've
come to realize that "Precision Teaching," an exemplar of one school
of behaviorism, may not be all bad - more than can be said for
"Mathematically Correct."
Math-Teach subscribers, who, like Chandy, think Bransford et al.
might "serve as an excellent model for the effective teaching and
learning of math" might consider subscribing to PhysLrnR, where
"Bransford" is more commonly mentioned than on Math-Teach.
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
To access the complete 17 kB post please click on <http://tinyurl.com/yahogu5>.
REFERENCES [Tiny URL's courtesy <http://tinyurl.com/create.php>.]
Bransford, J.D., A.L. Brown, R.R. Cocking, eds. 2000. "How people
learn: brain, mind, experience, and school." Nat. Acad. Press; the
entire book (with a search engine) is online at
<http://tinyurl.com/apbgf> !
Hake, R.R. 2010. "Re: 'How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and
School'," online at the OPEN! AERA-L archives at
<http://tinyurl.com/yahogu5>. Post of 1 Apr 2010 20:38:44-0700 to
AERA-L, Math-Teach, and Net-Gold. The abstract and a link to the
complete post are being distributed to various discussion lists and
are also online at
<http://hakesedstuff.blogspot.com/2010/04/some-blog-followers-might-be-interested.html>
with a provision for comments.