Proficiency scales rather than percentage grades

Nor about what.

Only if the tests were cumulative.

I've seen what a difference formative assessment makes to initiative and ownership!

I think that this is tricky in K-12 Math in the current educational system. When factoring in the need to assess many students, mathematical procedural fluency is most easily assessed through written tests, which are easily copied or solved with an answer key. Adding additional tasks such as long written explanations disadvantages those students who may have strong mathematical skill but poor language skill. Although, mathematical communication is also important, it can be done purely symbolically, and this method of communication is usually most like how we use math outside of school. At the same time, we must assess procedural fluency. Without more time spent on Math and more Math integrated into other subjects, my experience is that students don't acquire adequate fluency without motivation to specifically practice those skills for assessment.

Then again, perhaps tests which are protected against copying and cheating, such as through invigilation, are not the tasks referred to here...

I liked this quote because, in the context of school/academics, our learnings usually needed to be recalled in an "intact structure" as proven this is not the easiest task to do. However, the lack or failure of this task does not mean that the "learning" and knowledge are not in the individual memory or that they lack understanding. In the real-world context, the application of knowledge comes in many forms, therefore calling for different forms of recall (ie. providing learners with the means to). This was described perfectly in the word "assembling" of prior knowledge from diverse sources to be applied.

I think that both of these methods of selection pose their unique pros and cons in the context of teaching and the learners knowledge (ie. using timely real-world events/problems in learning to engage the learner in developing skills to solve real world problems [I had to google examples], outside of their learning environment and/or context). However, the field of psychology is well versed, grounded and continues to evolve to the contemporary demands. When it is employed to create appropriate learning designs— the occurrence of issues spurs from a misunderstanding and inaccurate representation of the learners needs. I think that with exclusively tailored study and employment use of research grounded selection is more reliable than instructional phenomena, regardless of its positive outcomes for learners.

Create connections!

I wonder how learning in the digital world has changed the way young people retrieve information. Because the web is built to make connections through hyperlinks, the associations learners create are analagous to - to use computer language - abstract pointers. Where physical books allow us to remember where things are in space, using our body memories to help find information, hyperlinks have no such physical association. How do learners growing up in a digital world mentally organize their information?

I agree. The concept of problem-centered instruction allows students to think and discuss problem points without getting too far off-topic. In addition, this practical approach can greatly motivate learners as they can see the direct impact and practicality of what they are learning in real-life scenarios.

I agree. Adding examples helps students to see what is expected of them. It's something that I also prefer.

This is something I've witnessed first hand during my practicum. The more students seemed to understand the material they were learning, the more motivated they were to pay attention and engage with the material.

I'm not surprised by this. When I was in school, summative assessments seemed to be a priority and little opportunities were given to tie new concepts to life experiences. That may explain why I have a hard time remembering many of the teachings from my youth. I wonder how different my memory would be had these active learning techniques been used.

This reminds me of how certain childhood memories can be triggered by different smells or even songs. I've had moments where I remember things that I thought I had long forgotten; it's a pretty incredible experience!

I'm really glad to see this being highlighted, as it's very important. I find myself struggling to fully grasp new concepts when I am not provided with a demonstration. This is why, in many of my courses, I find myself relying on YouTube to better explain concepts from class (i.e. a diagram, a presentation, etc.).

This is so important for instructors to remember! Simply providing readings or lecture slides and no concrete examples or ways to tie them back to other topics/life examples is extremely unhelpful when trying to learn effectively.

I wonder if this is correlated to what I learned from the "Backwards Brain Bicycle" video in that people are susceptible to the confirmation bias and look for certain (often false) information to confirm their predetermined ideas.

I was taught this all throughout elementary school and always thought that it seemed strange. Although, that might've been because I never identified strongly with any of the styles! However, it's interesting to hear that research has failed to support this idea.

While I agree that more research has to be done before a conclusion is drawn about this, I think the research thus far looks promising. I also think that, personally, I would love to take a course on this. I think it would be beneficial for students to gain a better, more well-rounded understanding of how memory works and how to learn best (also to potentially dispel certain neuromyths).

I LOVE scientific-based information, especially when it comes to study techniques/effective ways to learn, so this is really helpful for me! I'll definitely be implementing these into my study habits in the future.

It's very intriguing to me that a significant portion of our ability to effectively remember things is based off of the connections we make to past experiences and stored knowledge. I always thought this was more of a quirk of human memory rather than the basis of how it works.

I learned about this concept in my Introduction to Mind and Brain course at UVic (PSYC 251), which I absolutely loved. I learned a lot in that course and it made me realize that I have a profound interest in the brain and how it works. However, I don't remember a lot of what I learned in that class now because I crammed for most of the exams! I wonder how much I would remember if I had used the study techniques mentioned at the end of this article.

The term "neuroplasticity" always reminds me of a Tedx Talk I watched many years ago about the concept. I had never heard of it before, so I was absolutely floored at the idea that our brains are constantly changing. In fact, I still think it's interesting! I'd never heard of the term neurogenesis before reading this article, but hopefully there's a Tedx Talk I can watch on that too!

The differences between these two definitions is really interesting to me, as I always thought that the formal definition of learning would look something like the latter. I was under the impression that the first definition would be more of an application of learning (like the action of using knowledge that was learned and applying it to different situations if that makes sense).

I'm wondering why I hadn't heard of these study tips before? They seem like a good idea so I think I'll have to try them out.

I know from learning about how to teach reading, that semantics has to do with meaning

Last year I completed a project about how doodling is a great way to retain information because instead of just listening and writing notes, you are engaging your visual, auditory, kinesthetic, and reading and writing processes!

Wow. My whole education journey so far I have been learning to cater to certain learning styles of students. This idea that students need to learn in visual, auditory, and kinaesthetic forms makes a lot of sense. I imagine that the more students learn in all these forms, the better they will be in receiving information in these forms. From now on, I plan to incorporate each of these forms into every lesson to ensure my students are fully absorbing the information I am giving them.

These points make me recall my experience with exchange classes two years ago. Education at the Dutch university where I studied was centred around the concept of problem-based learning (PBL). Lectures were actually not mandatory. Tutorials, on the other hand, were. We met in groups of around 20 two times a week and worked through reflection and application questions together while supervised by a grad student. We also selected one or two people for each class to be discussion leaders or facilitators. They kept track of time, made sure we did not go off on a tangent, and posed additional questions to the group. The purpose behind such an interactive approach was to promote collective and individual critical thinking as well as connection with peers. It was quite difficult to adjust to, at first, because I was so used to a more passive didactic method. However, once I have discovered the benefits of consistent constructive feedback from classmates, I felt that discussion was often more effective than lecturing when it came to retaining information because it pushed me to actively participate in making course material meaningful.

I completed a Multiple Intelligence test for another course, and found it interesting to see where I 'learned best'. Upon reading this, I am not so sure if that is how it works. While I do think having this understanding of oneself is interesting, I can see the limitations is holds. I wonder if this links to the neuromyth of most effective learning being in a student's preferred style? They may be more engaged, but may not necessarily learn the most effectively.

I just realized how much Art courses depend on this formula. No one would learn anything if all we did was watch the instructor paint for an hour and then have him turn around and ask us to copy it perfectly. But in math and English, that seems to be exactly what's expected. Really interesting to see how certain fields of study either follow or distance themselves from these steps.

Use this section to ensure that your blueprint and subsequent learning resources are designed with these first principles in mind.

I mean, let's look at the silver lining here: it might be good to stop climate change...

unless the machines are hell bent on expansionist mass production of other machines without regard for the environment. Maybe it would be worse.

But if they have sentience, and view us as a threat, or simply a lesser life form and a plague to this planet, then maybe they have enough insight to want to preserve the natural state of the world, sans Homo Sapien.

So far my experience in university, aside from a few smaller classes, is that a professor giving a lecture in a big hall is not a lot different from this. The delivery in a large lecture leaves a lot to be desired. I actually prefer watching videos of lectures, and only going to office hours to get more insight if that's necessary. Even office hours are rushed though!

It would great to have general artificial intelligence professors, like a super advanced futuristic version of Knewton. I think there's potential in this technology IMHO.

1. Adaptability
2. Empathy
3. Perseverance

The author explains that we will be able to use what we learned from this chapter to develop a framework for decision making about use of technology and teaching in a digital age with a set of criteria and values.

That sucks :(

Canadian researcher Donald Hebb was a pioneer in the area of brain plasticity...researcher Frank Rosenblatt in the US used Hebb's researched to base his work on the "perception" algorithm which is the basic elementary form of modern neural networks in artificial intelligence.

I never realized that "retrieval practice" was required for the most effective kind of learning. Nobody ever taught me that, even in university until a few years in. I learned the concept from a book called "Mind For Numbers" by Dr. Barbera Oakley. This is truly the best kind of learning. Practice testing!