review: Why Students Don't Like School

Graduate Project

Read a professional book of your choice related to literacy in the content area. This book cannot be something you’ve read before.  Write an essay evaluating the book with the following components: Describe three ideas you value and discuss how you would use them in a classroom; what do you wish the book would have answered or described? How does this book relate to theories of education and your teaching philosophy.

The first idea proposed in Daniel Willingham’s book, Why Don’t Students Like School, is that the human mind is not cognitively efficient. In other words, we don’t think very well! As well-adapted as the brain is for sensing stimuli and locomotion, it is underequipped for effective thinking.  The thought process is slow, arduous and error-prone. Our visual system can process a scene instantly, entirely, and accurately, even while our brain is simultaneously engaged in processing other sensory input. But thinking is slow and convoluted and requires intense focus and concentration. It takes time to derive a solution to a problem that we have not encountered before. Often, the solution we end up with is not correct, if we end up with a solution at all. Fortunately, our brains effectively compensate for weak thinking skills by relying on memorized information and coping strategies. This is why we associate everything with a learning curve; once the original work of devising a solution is done (such as finding your way around a new city), the thought process becomes almost effortless (with enough practice, you can drive through the same city while talking on the phone and drinking coffee). 

Despite this innate cognitive handicap, there is still hope for educators. It turns out the gratification of successful mental problem solving can be sufficiently motivating to overcome the inherent obstacles to original thinking.

“Thus, we will seek out opportunities to think, but we are selective in doing so; we choose problems that pose some challenge but that seem likely to be solvable, because these are the problems that lead to feelings of pleasure and satisfaction. For problems to be solved, the thinker needs adequate information from the environment, room in working memory, and the required facts and procedures in long-term memory.”

Approaches to support learning that recognize and help overcome cognitive inefficiency include: working within a student’s working memory (i.e. maintaining a manageable instructional pace, using the blackboard to store information), engaging students’ curiosity with challenging but solvable problems, and assigning work to students that respects their individual ability levels. In a science classroom, this might mean allowing students to choose from assignment options that address a study topic at different reading levels. For instance, students could write laboratory reports customized according to reading ability by referring to textbooks and materials written either at/above/or below grade level.

2.       Another idea that Willingham presents is that “factual knowledge must precede skill.” To some extent, this is an indictment of the currently popular educational sentiment that imagination and creativity are more facilitative of learning than acquiring factual information. But Willingham cites research that overwhelmingly shows learning efficiency is correlated with background knowledge. Background knowledge is especially beneficial for reading comprehension because it provides necessary vocabulary, while critical thinking skills and memory are also improved. For example, working memory is conserved by the ability to “chunk” information (mentally combine related concepts), which depends on background knowledge.

Emphasizing background knowledge acquisition in teaching is necessary, but also requires flexibility. For example, determining, “What factual information should students be taught?” will depend on who is asking the question. Although different teachers will have their own perspective and bias, Willingham suggests that “for reading, students must know whatever information writers assume they know and hence leave out.” For the core disciplines, math, science, history, etc., knowledge of the “unifying” or fundamental concepts is critical to support future learning.

The NC standards for each discipline were implemented to address these “core” concepts; additional provision of specific background knowledge to accommodate individual teacher preference and lesson planning may be necessary. For instance, a lesson on dietary requirements should include definitions of terms like “calorie” and “nutrient.”

3.       Finally, Willingham presents evidence that refutes the popular “learning styles” theory of matching instruction to cognitive learning style, common acceptance of the theory not withstanding. Basically, although some students do have strong abilities or talents in a certain area, research does not support the idea that they learn more effectively when instructed in a matching style. Willingham explains: “the different abilities (or intelligences, if you like) are not interchangeable. Mathematical concepts have to be learned mathematically, and skill in music won’t help. Writing a poem about the arc that a golf club should take will not help your swing. These abilities are not completely insulated from one another, but they are separate enough that you can’t take one skill you’re good at and leverage it to bolster a weakness.”

Willingham does support using appropriate modalities to teach relevant concepts, for instance, learning about a foreign country could involve the students listening to a country’s national anthem, wearing symbolic clothing and drawing a map of the geographical features. While these activities may not specifically benefit the students with the targeted abilities, the content will be enhanced and the change in instructional methods will help keep the students’ attention.

           

I think the intent of Willingham’s book was to explain how people think, and not necessarily to provide teaching examples or methods. However, a wonderful companion to the book would be a practical curriculum manual to implement the concepts.

I believe the reason I enjoyed the book as much as I did was because the author was unsentimental about mainstream educational theory. If it was supported by research, worked or was sensible, he supported it. If not, he was straightforward about dispelling any misconceptions. I have been skeptical of the learning styles theory of instruction since I heard about it, and the author reinforced my belief that teaching to match learning styles doesn’t translate to better comprehension as measured by conventional testing. I am also a staunch supporter of emphasizing background knowledge and content to facilitate learning, so it was gratifying to read research that validated this view.

Willingham, Daniel T. (2009-06-10). Why Don't Students Like School: A Cognitive Scientist Answers Questions About How the Mind Works and What It Means for the Classroom (Kindle Locations 401-404). Wiley. Kindle Edition.