Shyam Barr

Blog

 

PREFACE

This blog discusses topics that exist between the fields cognitive psychology and leadership, teaching and learning. Although I make connections between research and personal experience (my attempt at bridging the age-old ‘theory-practice’ gap), I write for a general audience. It is as Mihaly Csikszenmihalyi stated in the preface of his book FLOW:

“To take this step is somewhat dangerous, because as soon as one strays from the stylised constraints of academic prose, it is easy to become careless or overly enthusiastic about such a topic” (p. xi)

To avoid carelessness, I will endeavour to include references to journal articles, books and alike (as commonly expected in academic writing), but not at the expense of accessibility and ease of reading. This will be a delicate balance and one I will endeavour to achieve.

To end, I chose the word ‘discusses’ in the first sentence of this preface, to highlight that although the blog articles themselves are very much a dialogue between myself and what I read, I encourage you to share your comments and questions, so that we may start a more authentic discussion. 

 
 

Beyond Cognition: Embracing the Multifaceted Nature of the Science of Learning

“The more you know, the more you realise you don’t know.”
— Aristotle

In grappling with the enigma that is the science of learning, I find Aristotle’s words to be particularly resonant. It's a humbling reminder that knowledge is an ever-expanding horizon, especially in the field of the science of learning. 

At present, it's challenging to succinctly define the science of learning, a field that's both vast and intricate. My journey through this labyrinth of knowledge has often left me uneasy, particularly as I encounter the emerging narrative that learning is predominantly cognitive.

This cognitive-centric view emphasises cognitive processes and strategies like retrieval practice, spaced repetition and cognitive load theory. While I appreciate the merits of cognitive science, I caution against its isolated application for the following reasons. 

Concern 1: A pedagogical tunnel vision. 

The science of learning is far from a monolithic field; it's multifaceted, with various influences that reach beyond cognitive aspects. When the discourse in education fixates on a singular cognitive approach, it runs the risk of creating a pedagogical tunnel vision. This narrowed focus can inadvertently marginalise other equally vital facets of learning, such as the motivational, emotional and social components. This reductionist view may also foster misunderstandings about the full spectrum of the science of learning and could inadvertently contribute to the challenges we face, such as the shortage of teachers.

Concern 2: A divided profession.

Our profession stands at a crossroads, potentially divided by narrow interpretations of the science of learning. A fragmented approach to the science of learning can create schisms within our community, already evident in faculty divisions and the reluctance of educators to teach within certain systems or schools. It's crucial to recognise that these divides stem from differing views on what constitutes effective teaching and learning, and to address them, a more inclusive and collaborative conversation about the science of learning is necessary.

Concern 3: A stagnation of innovation.

In the pursuit of a standardised approach to the science of learning, there's a risk that educational innovation could be stifled. When a single method or viewpoint is overly promoted, it can create a conformist culture that disincentivises experimentation and the exploration of new ideas. This could lead to an educational landscape where novel strategies and diverse educational models are undervalued or ignored. Innovation is a critical component of growth in any field, and education is no exception. As we shape the minds of future generations, it is imperative to foster an environment where creative teaching methods and diverse learning theories are not only welcomed but actively encouraged. Only by maintaining this openness can we continue to refine and advance our educational practices to meet the varied needs of all learners.

The multifaceted nature of the science of learning.

I have spent years studying this research field (science of learning, cognitive psychology, self-regulated learning) and find it difficult to comprehend the focussed narrative given the copious evidence that the science of how humans learn is more holistic than only cognitive elements. It is through my exploration of an extensive body of literature about how we learn, and how we self-regulate that learning, that I have developed the following framework:

Figure 1. Self-Regulated Learning knowledge framework

Note: While metacognition is positioned at the top due to its regulatory function, the other categories are not positioned in any particular hierarchy. Additionally, while Emotion appears the smallest and with many question marks, this is only because it is my most recent addition to my framework (noting that the field of self-regulated learning has previously focussed on Motivation, Cognition and Metacognition, with only some frameworks acknowledging Resource Management and Emotion).

My framework is not an exhaustive list of all the variables that influence learning; however, it is my evolving understanding of a complex field that attempts to bring together, and highlight, the various elements that influence learning. Knowledge is constantly changing and our understanding of the world and how it functions continues to evolve. I hold my knowledge and this knowledge framework lightly, recognising that as I learn more, my framework changes.

A call for a deeper collective understanding of the science of learning.

Despite my concerns, my optimism for our profession remains undiminished. In our collective role as learners within a professional learning community, I believe we possess the ingenuity and drive to navigate beyond current quandaries about the science of learning.

Reflecting upon the wisdom of Aristotle, let us heed the call to deepen our collective understanding of the science of learning. By broadening our understanding of the science of learning, we not only recognise but welcome the dynamic nature of knowledge. This recognition is the first step towards remedying the limitations of our own perspectives.

As Aristotle implies, the more we learn, the more we realise the breadth of what can be learned—let this be our inspiration.

Shyam Barr