I would like to present some concepts that you may find to be a little bit out there, but please allow me the opportunity to explore some thoughts that relate to recent research on how the human brain learns best. Forgive me if I get a little wordy and try to make sense of what I am suggesting. I would love to have you react to the following and have you provide some of your own insights on this very interesting topic. Well; it is interesting to me and I hope it peeks some interest in the reader, also. With all that said, here we go...
I have given a great deal of thought over the years in reference to Bloom's Taxonomy in the cognitive domain. This hierarchy of complexity in thinking has served us well for over 50 years. However, we have learned so much during this time period in reference to the learning process and the human brain. With that said I am looking at a hierarchy of cognitive thinking that I believe aligns better to how the brain processes information.
The human brain learns best through the motivation of survival which is supported by what we know about the plasticity and adaptability factors. In fact, this is the essence of the human being. We learn in order to adapt to an ever changing environment and this is what allows us to survive.
Specifically, I look at the lowest level of cognitive complexity as being our response to stimuli. Bloom refers to it as awareness/knowledge. That is all well and good; however, physically and scientifically speaking it is more a matter of our response to the multiple stimuli that bombards us every second. Specific brain structures such as the reticular activating system allow a small portion of these stimuli to actually reach our conscious level. Most of what we experience is at the unconscious level and thus it is appropriate to view the initial level of cognitive complexity to be that of responding. This is actually a more accurate and active way of interpreting cognition.
After we respond we make connections. This is how the brain communicates and learns through making connections. Bloom refers to the second level as comprehension. I believe that it is much more than that. Making connections refers to recall, prior knowledge, inference and analysis. Analysis becomes part of the second level of making connections and thus my third level is performing.
Once we have responded to the stimuli and made some connections we are now able to perform in some manner. This is where declarative knowledge that is descriptive of the first two levels becomes procedural.
Preferring is the fourth level of cognitive complexity. Response followed by connections and performance provides us with the necessary experience to make preferences. Bloom sees evaluation as the highest level of cognitive complexity. I see it as next to the highest. It is important to be able to judge, but it is more important to be able to adapt and make changes. This is the essence of survival! I think of the fourth level as preferring because judgments/evaluations are subjective in nature. Preferring is subjective also, but it alludes to the fact that these judgments are unique to unique learners.
Change is made possible by proceeding through the other four steps. Change can be made by not following this hierarchy; however, it is then more a shift in thinking without the support of appropriate cognitive processing. Shifts in thinking usually breed mistakes whereas, change supported by responding, connecting, performing and preferring breeds appropriate change which I will call “Cognitive Adaptation.” Cognitive adaptation resulting from complex thinking is our ultimate goal.
With that said, teaching and learning – especially in a “conceptual age” needs to focus on these concepts with an emphasis on connecting and performing. Blooms Taxonomy is great for the “information age.” A Brain-Based Taxonomy is better for a “conceptual age.”
Bloom's Taxonomy: Evaluation, Synthesis, Analysis, Application, Comprehension, Knowledge
Brain-Based Taxonomy: Changing, Preferring, Performing, Connecting, Responding
Note: Brain-Based Taxonomy places analysis within the connecting cognitive process and synthesis within the changing cognitive process. Change is considered to be at a higher level than evaluation. Evaluation is seen as part of preferring.
Let me know what your thoughts are. Again, I would love to obtain some varied points of view.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Teaching Reading with the Brain in Mind
All teachers are, first and foremost, reading teachers! I didn’t understand this concept when I first began teaching back in 1968. While I have used numerous reading programs over the years and have worked with many talented teachers, there was, however, one very disturbing constant - some students would succeed and others would fail. In fact, for many students, reading became the most difficult task they would ever encounter in school.
As educators, we know that students must learn to read well so that they can, in turn, read to learn well. Without basic reading comprehension skills students will be challenged in all facets of learning - from their ability to solve basic problems to creating, storing and applying knowledge. That’s why it’s extremely important that all teachers see themselves as reading teachers, whether they teach math, social studies, science or any other discipline.
In short, all teachers must be prepared to provide their students with useful strategies that will enable them to comprehend the subject content.
Why is learning to read so difficult for so many of our children? Why are reading scores not improving on the national level? What can we do to improve the situation? The answers to these questions can be found in research being conducted on the human brain.
I’m amazed that the connection between the human brain and the learning process is given such little credit. Think about it; we say we learn things by heart. But while the heart is a pump, the brain is the organ for learning (L. Hart, 1983).
Roughly the size of two fists put together, the human brain weighs approximately three pounds and has the texture of a ripe avocado. Yet it’s capable of almost an infinite
number of connections. Forming a kind of super network, brain cells communicate with each other via biological charges that stimulate chemicals known as neurotransmitters, which work together to produce feelings, emotions, memories and cognition.
Despite its enormous capability, however, the human brain has limitations. These limitations revolve around short-term and working memory and the ability to make sense of the written code.
As educators, we know that students must learn to read well so that they can, in turn, read to learn well. Without basic reading comprehension skills students will be challenged in all facets of learning - from their ability to solve basic problems to creating, storing and applying knowledge. That’s why it’s extremely important that all teachers see themselves as reading teachers, whether they teach math, social studies, science or any other discipline.
In short, all teachers must be prepared to provide their students with useful strategies that will enable them to comprehend the subject content.
Why is learning to read so difficult for so many of our children? Why are reading scores not improving on the national level? What can we do to improve the situation? The answers to these questions can be found in research being conducted on the human brain.
I’m amazed that the connection between the human brain and the learning process is given such little credit. Think about it; we say we learn things by heart. But while the heart is a pump, the brain is the organ for learning (L. Hart, 1983).
Roughly the size of two fists put together, the human brain weighs approximately three pounds and has the texture of a ripe avocado. Yet it’s capable of almost an infinite
number of connections. Forming a kind of super network, brain cells communicate with each other via biological charges that stimulate chemicals known as neurotransmitters, which work together to produce feelings, emotions, memories and cognition.
Despite its enormous capability, however, the human brain has limitations. These limitations revolve around short-term and working memory and the ability to make sense of the written code.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
