The cognitive approach to learning overlooks the role of environment in a students capacity to learn something

A cognitive model of learning which suggests that learning is only the commitment of information to long-term memory has gained precedence in schools. But this model only says how information storage might work in the brain—but that’s it. It doesn’t tell us anything about the context of learning, about how culture interacts with learning, or how people learn from each other. In fact, cross-cultural studies have found that one of the things which schooled children do better than those who do not attend school is remembering lists of unrelated information. Schooled children learn how to remember things, even when they don’t make any sense. It’s a skill that is only useful in a school context, where children are tested on information which they may not understand and didn’t choose to learn. Experts have purpose and context in what they learn because they have chosen to learn it.

These theories of learning can’t tell us why one person is fascinated by algebra, while another loves history. They can’t even tell us why one person finds something easy while another works terribly hard and never gets above a ‘C’. To these cognitive scientists and educationalists, people are basically information processing units. Input goes in, they encode it, and then they can output it at a later date. Schools designed on this model focus on making the encoding as effective as possible, in the belief that that is what really matters. So, yes, approaches like this are based on cognitive science, but what their advocates don’t say is that the cognitive science they are referring to is based on experiments, which strip the context from real life. And what is learning, without context? It’s memorizing lists of random words.


References
Metadata

Type:🔴 Tags: Politics / Education / Psychology / Cognitive Science Status:☀️