The central concerns of the learning sciences all relate to addressing a practical problem: the instructional practices of traditional schooling, or instructionalism, are not effective in preparing students for today’s knowledge economy. Learning scientists address this problem by working to understand the experiences and conditions under which students move from their current state of knowledge to a state of knowledge similar to that of an expert in a particular field. Technology and learning environments play key roles, as learning scientists accomplish this largely by designing and testing environments, curricula, tools, and instructional techniques – often having technology elements – that can help prepare students for effective participation in a knowledge economy.
I base this characterization largely on three statements from Sawyer (2006). First, Sawyer states, “[W]hen learning scientists went into classrooms, they discovered that schools were not teaching the deep knowledge that underlies intelligent performance” (p. 4), indicating that lack of students’ preparation for the knowledge economy is the central problem learning scientists address. Sawyer also states, “One of the most important goals of the learning sciences research is to identify exactly what practices are appropriate for students… and how learning environments can be designed that are age-appropriate without losing the authenticity of professional practice” (p. 5), identifying the design of learning environments as an operationalized goal of learning sciences. Finally, Sawyer states, “[L]earning scientists often conceive of the problem of learning as a problem of transforming novices into experts…” (p. 7), identifying the manner in which learning scientists approach education.
Hi Katie,
I really appreciated your post! It made me make further connections to my own prior teaching experience; in particular the push for Common Core Standards (CCS) that started several years ago. I agree that the focus of learning sciences surroundings making education authentic and relevant to the real world and students’ future professional work. I remember when CCS were initiated and marketed as “college and career readiness.” This concept aligns with the learning sciences, but in practice the standards did not translate to an increase in the integration, evaluation, and reflection that Sawyer (2006) described (p. 4). Instead, pressure and stakes increased as teachers were expected to get students to meet universal standards that ignored their individual needs.
I very much like your clear-eyed definition and evaluation of what the learning sciences encompass Katie. After reading your and Sarah’s posts I too could not help but think of standards; however, as a science teacher I have personal experience with NGSS standards which were released just a few years ago. I see the NGSS standards as much improved over the old science standards. The new standards seem to move away from instructionism, and towards preparing students to be knowledge workers. However, as Sarah mentioned, the danger lies in how these new standards will be assessed, and how these assessments will be tied to teacher evaluation and effectiveness.
Administrators:
Christine Greenhow
Diana
Rand
cainwil1
Ming
Top Posters:
galvins1: 51
richkat3: 50
albertsk: 43
moudgal1: 43
schellma: 41
liraamal: 39
Emilia: 35
zhumengd: 34
Forum Stats:
Groups: 6
Forums: 19
Topics: 97
Posts: 339
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 0
Members: 77
Moderators: 0
Admins: 5
Most Users Ever Online: 58
Currently Online:
1 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)