# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Your brain likes to generalize. It makes generalizations out of individual examples, similar to fitting together the pieces of a puzzle. This is more or less how concepts are formed-by grouping together things, ideas and events with shared characteristics so you can classify them. It's an efficient way to give meaning to your world.

For example, when you first saw a comic strip you most likely didn't know the concept of "comics." But over time, you learned that certain styles of line drawings formatted in a sequence were referred to as comics. Once you formed this concept, it became easier to classify other examples of line drawings as comics or non-comics.

Examples or instances seem to be crucial for helping a learner form accurate concepts. Otherwise, according to educational researchers, the learner can overgeneralize, under-generalize or form misconceptions. Here are six ways to help learners acquire concepts.

Rule #1: Use examples in which the irrelevant attributes vary widely.

As LX designers, we can help by providing the right types of examples. Just any old examples won't do. The attributes of the examples should vary widely, particularly on irrelevant characteristics, so learners get the right idea.

In a course on sexual harassment, if your examples only demonstrate a person harassing an individual of the opposite sex, a learner might erroneously generalize that sexual harassment cannot occur between people of the same gender. This, of course, is not true.

By varying the less relevant attributes of your examples, learners get a more refined understanding of a concept. If examples of a concept don't vary widely on irrelevant attributes, learners may form generalizations that are too limited (2).

Rule #2: Progress from simple to difficult examples.

It's also important to start with simple examples at first, but then be sure to progress to more complex ones later. Research shows that if a learner only sees simple instances of a concept, he or she will be less likely to classify the more difficult instances. This causes under-generalization (3).

Imagine a radiologist learning about bone fractures. If the radiologist only learns how to identify the most obvious instances, in which the fragments separate completely, he or she will undergeneralize about fractures. Upon coming upon a fracture in which the bone fragments are still partially joined, the radiologist could make a false diagnosis.

Rule #3: Present instances of a concept in rapid sequence or allow all instances to be viewed simultaneously.

Display examples close together in time. This enables them to be active in working memory all at once, facilitating the process of generalization. If there is a time gap between the presentation of examples, the learner might not generalize from them. So present examples in rapid sequence or leave several on the screen at one time (1).

Rule#4: Use matched examples and non-examples for concepts with related attributes.

Your brain also likes to discriminate. Discrimination restricts the range of examples used to form a concept, which can be promoted by presenting nonexamples. Nonexamples are an instance that is specifically not an example of the concept being learned. Nonexamples should vary in one attribute from the example with which it is paired.

Some research points to the fact that concepts with clearly distinguishable attributes (like texture versus color) are better taught with examples only. The learner only needs to generalize in order to acquire the concepts. But concepts that have common attributes, such as the statistical concepts of mean, median and mode, require discrimination skills and thus need matched examples and nonexamples (4). Matched examples and non-examples should be present in working memory simultaneously.

Back on the comics theme mentioned earlier, it's difficult to fully define the concept of comics. So a paired example and nonexample can help, because discrimination is required. The pair below demonstrates that the intent of the artist is one attribute for defining comics. The example on the left was intended to be read as a comic book. Roy Lichtenstein's comic-based painting on the right was intended as an artwork that provided commentary on the mass media.

Rule #5: Provide opportunities for learners to generate their own examples of a concept.

If you're working in a setting that allows learners to communicate with you and each other, ask them to generate their own examples of a concept. Promoting reflection and response in this way will reinforce well-formed concepts and correct misunderstandings. It may also illuminate the blurry areas, because not all concepts can be neatly defined.

In the sexual harassment course mentioned earlier, a learner might come up with an example that asking a co-worker for a date is harassment. Others in the discussion would probably respond that this is not harassment, but that repeatedly asking the same co-worker for a date after multiple refusals could be considered harassment. This feedback corrects the misconception.

Rule #6: Expose learners to a wide range of examples and nonexamples and allow them to discover the concept.

We have been discovering concepts on our own since childhood. It's a natural occurrence for a pattern-seeking brain. It's not surprising then that an effective way to learn concepts is to discover them from interacting with a set of examples and non-examples.

Using this inquiry strategy in eLearning isn't quite as easy as in a live classroom, but it can be done. It involves presenting multiple examples to the learner and inquiring about shared characteristics of the examples. Through exploration and discovery (interactive activities), learners can acquire the concept. Then use questions and context-sensitive feedback, to correct any misconceptions.

In a synchronous setting, concept formation can emerge from structured online discussions. Research seems to point to the fact that discovery learning is most effective when learners already have a developed knowledge base.
References:

1. Gagne, Ellen. The Cognitive Psychology of School Learning.

2. Merrill, M. D., & Tennyson, R. D. (1977). Concept teaching.An instructional design guide. Educational Technology.

3. Merrill, M. D., & Tennyson,R . D. (1978). Concept classification and classification errors as a function of relationships between examples and non-examples. Improving Human Performance, 7, 351-364.

4. Tennyson, R.D. and Cocchiarella, M.J. (1986). An Empirically Based Instructional Design Theory for Teaching Concepts. Review of Educational Research, Vol. 56, No. 1.

Get smarter about online learning with articles, tips and resources delivered to your Inbox once a month.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Six Ways to Use Examples And Nonexamples To Teach Concepts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Your brain likes to generalize. It makes generalizations out of individual examples, similar to fitting together the pieces of a puzzle. This is more or less how concepts are formed-by grouping together things, ideas and events with shared characteristics so you can classify them. It's an efficient way to give meaning to your world.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
One of the most powerful ideas I've engaged with recently is using a diagram to visualise a shared model of the learning process; using it to get a feel for how learning works in general but also to identify reasons for why it can sometimes not happen. This is the diagram I have in my Rosenshine Principles book, courtesy of Oliver Caviglioli:

I've found it massively helpful as a focus during CPD as we've explored a range of interlocking, overlapping ideas:

Willingham's 'memory is the residue of thought' and various ideas in the classic 'Why do students forget everything I say?' chapter.

Rosenshine's Principles: the value of practice, the use of daily review to activate prior learning; weekly and monthly review to enact retrieval practice; the need to break learning down into small steps.

Nuthall's observations from Hidden Lives of Learners: the importance of prior knowledge; his 'three times rule'

Shimamura's MARGE: A: Attend - the need to secure attention and the challenge of mind-wandering; R: teachers' opportunities to build relational models for areas of knowledge; G-E: the generate-evaluate cycle whereby learners bring ideas into working memory (learning is generative), evaluate for accuracy, add to or adjust their schema and then reconsolidate.

The near inevitability of forgetting, the role of retrieval, the need to connect new learning to prior knowledge and a whole host of other issues can be explored in some depth where we have a shared focus for framing the discussion:

( NB: The coloured labels here represent the discussion and thinking we might have around the diagram. They're not meant to complicate the simple diagram itself. I would hesitate to share the labels until I'd had the discussion first in any CPD scenario.)

It always frustrates me when people see a simplified model and jump to the assumption that the thinking is simplistic. Of course it's not. As I've explored before - schema-building is a rich and complex business; 'remembering' and 'learning' as labels encompass nearly anything we can be said to have learned. They're broad terms, not reductive and confining. I also find it frustrating - and fruitless - when people simply suggest that, 'it's a bit more complicated than that' - almost as a kind of free pass not to have to pose an alternative.

If someone suggests, rather pejoratively, that school has been reduced to 'memorising knowledge', I think there's a discussion to be had where, if we re-frame knowledge and memory as broad terms - actually, building schema (formed of knowledge, beliefs, memories, preferences.... of many kinds) in our memory (hence memorised?) is actually good enough as a concept to deal with quite a lot of the things we want to achieve in the field of education. If someone doesn't agree with that, then I'd want them to present a better model - not just tell me this one doesn't work. That way we have competing models to reference and debate, rather than the nebulousness of 'there's more to it than that'.

In a teacher CPD context, the most important reason for exploring a model is that, if the model is any good, it can help to explain things we observe and help suggest solutions to problems. In my experience the model above does exactly that - time and time again. For example, students don't learn what you're trying to teach for all kinds of reasons. It helps to understand why:

Attention deficits: they don't absorb ideas from lesson interactions because their attention is not given to the specific learning points in question; it might be elsewhere. You can't just learn stuff because of a discussion other people are having in the same room. Solution: strategies around securing attention, using narrative structures, inclusive questioning, attention-focusing stimuli.

Memory overload: working memory is finite; often students are dealing with too many ideas and pieces of information; they can't process it all and things don't make sense or stick . Solution: break concepts and tasks into smaller practisable steps and elements.

Lack of prior knowledge:the big hidden variable across the class: students will often not have a schema for the concepts being taught sufficiently well developed to make sense of or retain the new knowledge. Solution: develop a broad curriculum packed with knowledge and experiences across multiple interlocking domains that allow students to fill in knowledge gaps and broaden their schema. Check students' prior knowledge as a routine element of teaching rather than making assumptions.

Insufficient fluency of recall: very often a learning issue is simply a question of practice. Students haven't yet had or taken the opportunity to practise retrieving and applying their knowledge with enough frequency, intensity or variety to have developed the fluency and confidence expected or needed to move to the next stage. Solution: increase the range, intensity and frequency of practice tasks so that students gain confidence and fluency.

Task completion is poor proxy for learning: we can do all kinds of things immediately after being shown or simply by accessing information presented to us, without it forming part of long-term memory or leading to any fluency of recall for use at a later date. Solution: engage in more checking for understanding and more generative activity with supports removed; space practice so that long-term memory and recall are strengthened away from the illusion of knowing through recency.

That's just a sub-set of all kinds of issues that the model deals with. It makes sense of the problems that occur in very many lesson scenarios and provides solutions.

Of course there's a layer of this that is very much related to the everyday business of school subjects: maths, writing, history, creativity in art; understanding science .... There's another layer of how we think and how teaching affects us related to social and emotional development and, very possibly, a more elaborate model could show these things both as separate and then interacting to add further clarity to our understanding. Motivation and our complex responses to feedback would come into this as would other deeper existential elements of who we are: self-image and sense of purpose, for example. It would become a stretch to force everything into a deliberately simple learning and remembering, schema-building cycle.

But the point isn't to have a universal model for all things, burying itself under the weight of complexities it seeks to simplify. The point is to develop useful versatile models that give us insights and offer solutions - within whatever boundaries are needed to maintain their validity and usefulness.

On a very practical level, I can only say that, since introducing the schema-building model into my work, I've found it massively powerful and, given how many areas of teaching and learning it helps with and how much mileage for improvement there is within those areas, I'm not sure I'll need a different one any time soon.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A model for the learning process. And why it helps to have one.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
One of the most powerful ideas I've engaged with recently is using a diagram to visualise a shared model of the learning process; using it to get a feel for how learning works in general but also to identify reasons for why it can sometimes not happen.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
EfratFurst - Teaching with Learning in Mind

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Visual models will help us analyze the abstract the concept of 'understanding' and to explore its components. What can be applied in the classroom? and how can we help students when they don't understand?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This episode we're speaking with Michael Pershan. Michael is an incredibly passionate, informed, and prolific maths teacher and blogger in the US. When it comes to education research, Michael has a hunger for the truth that I really admire. This curiosity has led Michael down a multitude of educational rabbit holes that have resulted in him being perhaps the best read classroom teacher that I know. But equally as importantly, Michael is fun, he brings a wonderful youthfulness to his educational explorations, and his tweets always bring a smile to my face through their mix of incisiveness and humour.

Here is an example of Michaels characteristic tweets.

Tweet 1: Thank god there aren't upper and lowercase numbers.

Tweet 2: For $1, 000, 000, I will share my money making secret.

Tweet 3: Robots will make terrific teachers as soon as people want to live up to the expectations of robots.

I don't know how Michael comes up with this gold, but he does, over and over again! These three tweets, for example, were all written by Michael within the space of three days!

The reason why Michael is on the ERRR podcast today is that he's just come out with an absolutely superb book entitled, Teaching Math with Examples.
If you appreciate the ERRR podcast and you'd like to support its continuing production, please sign on as a patron at www.patreon.com/errr and support the show for as little as $1 per month, or the average donation of $5 per month.
If you're a maths teacher, and if you think that you teach with worked examples, as I did, then this book will blow your mind. Even after writing a book on Cognitive Load Theory, and scouring the research on Worked Examples, the insights offered in Michael's book still offered fresh and valuable insights and, as I say at the end of the podcast, This is the publication that has had the single biggest impact on my mathematics teaching practice to date.

I can't recommend Michaels book highly enough. And I hope that you enjoy hearing us discuss some of the finer points therein, within this episode.

Is this just one for the maths teachers? It may seem that way, but I would argue that there are many ideas shared within that apply to all teaching. One of the fantastic things that Michael does in his book, and in this interview, is bring teaching strategies back to the principles that underlie them. Within our discussion, Michael particularly talks about the principles that underlie learning from examples, self-explanation, and feedback. These ideas apply irrespective of the domain in which you teach.
Links/resources mentioned in the show
This episode of the ERRR Podcast is brought to you by John Catt Educational. Use this link along with the code provided within the podcast to get 30% off all books from John Catt Educational! https://www.johncattbookshop.com/books/errr
Listen to all past episodes of the ERRR podcast here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ERRR #051. Michael Pershan on Worked Examples | Ollie Lovell

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This episode we're speaking with Michael Pershan. Michael is an incredibly passionate, informed, and prolific maths teacher and blogger in the US. When it comes to education research, Michael has a hunger for the truth that I really admire.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This episode of the Mr Barton Maths Podcast is kindly supported by Arc Maths.

You can find more information about their app for helping students remember those crucial maths skills - and register for a free trial - at arceducation.co.uk/for-schools/

***

Hello, and welcome to another episode of the Mr Barton Maths Podcast, with me Craig Barton.

This time around I was delighted to welcome back to the show, Ollie Lovell.

Ollie is a maths teacher from sunny Australia. He is also a head of department, blogger, research ravager, pioneering podcaster, and now best-selling author

Now this marks Ollie's third appearance on the show. He was first on back in 2018 where we discussed a whole manner of things, including planning lessons and running a maths department. Then Ollie returned to the show last year as part of my Teaching from Home series. This time around I wanted to dive deep into Cognitive Load Theory following the publication of Ollie best-selling book - Cognitive Load Theory in action. But I didn't just want to re-tread old ground, so we chatted about the following things, and plenty more besides:

What has Ollie been up to since we last spoke - and that includes a new job and a new business venture (Dendro)

If someone had never heard of Cognitive Load Theory, how would Ollie explain it to them in one sentence?

Why should teachers care about it?

What are the implications of Cognitive Load Theory for online learning?

Did Ollie change his mind about anything whilst researching the book?

And then we get to 4 things I still don't fully understand about Cognitive Load Theory - the role of working out, what is cognitive overload, element interactivity, and goal-free problems

This is a great episode to launch 2021 with. Ollie is super enthusiast and super insightful. I learned so much from this interview, and I really hope you will too.

On Twitter, Ollie is @ollie_lovell
Ollie's website is ollielovell.com where you can also sign up for his weekly Twitter takeaways
You can check-out Ollie podcast, The Education Research Reading Room Ollie's book, Cognitive Load Theory in Action is available from Amazon, or you can get a 40% discount by ordering from John Catt and using the code mrbarton40 at the check out page.

Here is the image about Goal Free Problems from Ollie's book:

***

My usual plugs:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ollie Lovell: Cognitive Load Theory in Action - Mr Barton Maths Blog

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This episode of the Mr Barton Maths Podcast is kindly supported by Arc Maths. You can find more information about their app for helping students remember those crucial maths skills - and register for a free trial - at arceducation.co.uk/for-schools/ *** Hello, and welcome to another episode of the Mr Barton Maths Podcast, with me Craig Barton.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It seems ages since we started referring to life in these "uncertain times". For months now, our routines have been disrupted and we've been forced to adapt. Anecdotally, one major consequence is a state of mental fatigue. It feels hard to concentrate for any length of time, as if we're in a collective state of near-constant distraction.

"It felt like I had a mental block preventing me from focusing on the page," says writer and book lover Sophie Vershbow, who captured the mood early in the pandemic when her tweet about "not being able to concentrate enough to read a book" was liked more than 2,000 times. She's not alone; do a quick search and you'll find an avalanche of articles on people who can't concentrate, the prevalence of 'brain fog' and different ways to 'hack your concentration'.

Of course, much of this subjective feeling of mental distraction comes down to the practicalities of life now. For many people, most notably working parents, the sudden switch to home working has meant an intensification of work/life conflict; it's tricky to focus on a spreadsheet as your kids wrestle for the TV remote control. But it feels like there's more to it than that. Even when work is finished for the day and the kids are in bed, it's hard to find any focus to escape into a novel or box-set.

There's a psychological theory, originally applied in the context of learning, that might help explain why living in the age of Covid-19 may have turned our minds to soup. It's called Cognitive Load Theory (CLT), and it was first developed by the Australian educational psychologist John Sweller. Put simply, CLT characterises our minds as information processing systems. When we're working on a problem, especially an unfamiliar one, we depend on our "working memory", which is very limited both in its capacity and the length of time it holds information. The less familiar you are with a task, the more you depend on your working memory to help juggle the relevant information; in contrast, when you're an expert, most of what you need to know is stored in long-term memory and you can complete the task on auto-pilot.
New tasks, new stress levels
Cognitive Load Theory provides a useful framework for understanding the different ways the pandemic could be playing havoc with your mental function.

First, by forcing you into new routines, it's robbed you of the ability to do things on auto. Take a work meeting; before, you would just have turned up and joined in the discussion, but now if you're working remotely you have to fire up your video-conferencing software, worry about your WiFi, adjust your communication to the time lag and so forth. The same applies to domestic challenges too, like ordering your groceries online instead of shopping in person. These adaptations force you out of auto-pilot and draw on your limited working memory capacity. In the jargon of CLT, the intrinsic "cognitive load" of much of what you do has increased. You're spending more of your life having to think deliberately and consciously, more like a novice than expert, which is exhausting in itself.

Many of us have had to adjust rapidly to new ways of working and new technologies

Second, research based in CLT has shown how emotions can interfere with information processing. When you're anxious, for example, this is known to reduce working memory capacity, thus making it more difficult to work through any mental problem that requires conscious problem-solving (think of how exam nerves scramble your brain, making it tricky to work through maths questions or compose a coherent sentence; or how the stress of your driving test made it much harder to multitask than in your lessons).

Third, CLT refers to " extraneous cognitive load " - the demand on your working memory capacity imposed by distractions that are not directly relevant to what it is you're trying to do. This could be a basic secondary task in the background, such as trying to listen to the news bulletin while you're working, or it could be background distracting thoughts, such as figuring out how to pick your kids up from school when your boss has scheduled a video meeting for the same time.

What's happening now is that disruptions to life caused by the pandemic are forcing you to draw on your limited working memory capacity more often, at a time when - if you're more stressed and your anxiety levels are raised, or you're juggling multiple tasks and commitments - you have diminished working memory capacity. It's the worst of both worlds, and another reason why you're feeling mentally drained.

Ordinarily in a time of upheaval, we can adjust quickly and the cognitive load becomes more manageable again. What's striking about life in the era of Covid-19 is that the situation keeps changing - governments around the world are constantly rolling out new, more complex restrictions. Travel rules, self-isolation instructions, symptom watch-lists, new smartphone apps - barely a day goes by without a new development for us to register and respond to.

"Any novel situation imposes cognitive load on our brains, but the fact that Covid-19 had such vast societal disrupting impacts forced us to perhaps absorb new information faster than what we were capable of," says Samuli Laato, a researcher at the University of Turku who has been studying the role of cognitive load in people's unusual purchasing behaviour during the pandemic (such as panic buying) and in the widespread sharing of misinformation. "In general," he explains, "uncertainty always increases cognitive load. Stressors such as health threat, fear of unemployment and fear of consumer market disruptions all caused cognitive load. Furthermore, remote working policies were introduced globally, which required people to adapt to new technologies and a new way of working altogether."
Planning and self-discipline
Thankfully, interpreting the mentally draining effect of pandemic life through the lens of Cognitive Load Theory points to some simple but effective remedial strategies. First off, try to establish new routines and master them, so that you aren't constantly drawing on your working memory capacity for mundane tasks. I recently invested in a mesh WiFi system that's reduced the interference on video calls and took the time to read up on the different functions of the various video call platforms. By getting pandemic-era basics like these down to a tee, you won't have to waste mental capacity on them.

Managing your stress - in whatever way works for you - will help you handle your cognitive load

Second, because we're living through an era of heightened anxiety and uncertainty, it's important to put extra effort into stress management, so that your working memory isn't constantly overloaded by worry. This means eating well, exercising and establishing a predictable bedtime routine, as well as finding time for activities that relax you. As far as your situation allows, work out contingency plans for different aspects of your life - putting realistic preparations in place for feared scenarios can be a great anxiety reliever. Also, give your brain a break from the pandemic updates and doom scrolling. Consider having days (or at least whole afternoons or evenings) where you avoid the news or pandemic talk.

Finally, it is important to take the strain off your working memory by tuning out any "extraneous cognitive load". This means putting greater effort into organising your time and being disciplined about distractions. Aim to set aside realistic but dedicated times of the day for different tasks, whether work or domestic duties. For instance, when you're working, don't have the news on in the background. When you're playing with your kids, don't have your mobile by your side ready to check emails or Twitter. Allow your mind to focus on one thing at a time and you'll be rewarded by feeling less mentally exhausted.

It looks like we're going to be living in this pandemic era for a while yet. While the constant anxiety and abnormality is mentally fatiguing, take comfort from the fact you're not the only one feeling this way. Our brains have a limited processing capacity that's being stretched to its limit right now, but with some careful planning and self-discipline, there are ways to reduce the cognitive load and rediscover your focus.

Dr Christian Jarrett is deputy editor at Psyche magazine. His next book, Be Who You Want: Unlocking the Science of Personality Change, will be published in 2021.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Cognitive Load Theory: Explaining our fight for focus

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It seems ages since we started referring to life in these "uncertain times". For months now, our routines have been disrupted and we've been forced to adapt. Anecdotally, one major consequence is a state of mental fatigue. It feels hard to concentrate for any length of time, as if we're in a collective state of near-constant distraction.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The I Do - We Do - You Do model involves you in following a series of steps starting with you leading instruction and finishing with students working independently. In the I Do stage, you explain what students need to understand or model how to do a process. Then, in the We Do stage, you help your students by providing scaffolds such as prompts or partially completed procedures. Finally, in the You Do stage, your students do the procedure or show their understanding on their own.

Why You Should Use the l Do - We Do - You Do Model

When used well, the I Do - We Do - You Do model:

Suits novice learners (which most students are)

Nurtures self-efficacy

Reduces task anxiety

Students feel less anxious due to the clear modelling and the scaffolded opportunities to practice. These same factors help students to experience independent success, which in turn builds their self-efficacy ¹.

The I Do We Do You Do model is based upon the gradual release of responsibility from teacher to student.

Next, let's explore each stage in more detail.

This is true whether the procedure involves a younger student writing the letter m in cursive or a senior student keeping an historical research journal. Modelling is a powerful tool that draws on Albert Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory. Modelling involves: If you want to increase students' knowledge and understanding of a topic, you need to explain it. Research on the modality and multimedia effects² shows that you should explain things both:
Example

I Do Conceptual Learning

Visually

Example

The examples are faded as you start by completing many of the steps yourself and progressively get your students to more steps with each example.

Examples

We Do Conceptual Learning

The key to conceptual learning is getting your students to think about the material they need to understand. This involves helping them encode and retrieve the material in an organised way. Within the We Do stage of the I Do - We Do - You Do model you provide support through prompting comparative and organised thinking. You can make use of partially completed information and have your students fill in the gaps.

You can help your students encode information by getting them to:

You can help your students retrieve information using 2 strategies:

You can also do this:

Example

You Do Procedural Learning

With You Do activities as the procedural level, you simply have your students complete all of the steps involved in the task themselves.

Some people ask if you should get your students to apply what they have learned to solve problems at this stage. The answer depends on whether you showed them how to so and then did so together in earlier stages.

You Do Conceptual Learning

At the conceptual level, You Do activities involve recalling information without prompts. This can involve:

You Do Conceptual Example

More Than Just A Lesson Structure

Many people think of the I Do We Do You Do model as a way of structuring a single lesson, and it can be. Yet, it can also be much more. The structure can also occur:

When you believe your students will find lesson material to be quite challenging, you can break it up into more manageable chunks. You follow the the I Do - We Do - You Do structure for each chunk and may get a few chunks covered within a single lesson.

By contrast, you can also use the structure over several lessons. Especially as students get older, learning doesn't occur over a single lesson, so you follow the structure over a small series of lessons - with each lesson picking up from where the previous lesson finished.

Beyond the I Do We Do Model

The essence of the I Do We Do You Do model is scaffolding tasks as your gradually release responsibility to your students. Yet, many of the strategies listed above are grounded in research that fits nicely with, but is separate from, the I Do We Do You Do model, particularly:

However, there is one potent strategy that wasn't mentioned. It is a simple but powerful strategy - spaced practice (also known as distributed practice). Below, this is shown as a new stage Do Again (and again, and again).

Beware

You can adapt the model but some adaptations fly in the face of strong research. Be particularly wary of:

The rapid release of responsibility model turns the I Do We Do You Do model on its head and starts with the You Do stage. It is a euphemism for inquiry learning (and its cousins discovery learning and problem-based learning). The research is clear that while experts learn well from such approaches, novice learners do not. Most school students are novices in what they are learning, although they build expertise as they progress. As a result, you should not use inquiry learning with novice learners. Experts are competent in both the material and the processes or procedures involved.

You should also be wary of the we do stage being confused with collaborative learning. Collaboration can extend the model in useful ways, but the essence of the we do stage is teacher + student,not student + student. That said, some productive ways to use collaboration within the I Do We Do You Do model are:

Retrieval Pairs

One example of retrieval pairs would be flash card buddies, where one student holds up a card (or paper) with an explanation of a concept on the side facing their buddy and the name of the concept on the side facing them. Next, their student gives their buddy the first sound of the answer or of each word (prompts). The buddy answers and gets told if they were right or wrong, as well as the correct answer. The process repeats with different concepts and with students reversing roles. You could use a similar process with other retrieval exercises, such as prompted concept mapping. The teacher involvement in this stage is largely about preparing cards or other prompts.

Brain Dump 1-2-4

Students write down everything they can remember from a lesson or topic (brain dump 1). Then students pair up (brain dump 2), discuss each others' brain dumps, then make corrections and additions based on that discussion. They agree on a single, merged brain dump. Pairs then join with another pair (brain dump 4) and repeat the discuss and amend process. Note although there are 4 people in the group they are only discussing 2 merged brain dumps from the previous stage.

1 Person per Step

If your students are learning a multi-step procedure such as 2 digit by 2 digit multiplication you can use the one person per step strategy. 2 digit x 2 digit multiplication has 3 steps:

Multiply the top number by the ones

Multiply the top number by the tens

Add the answers from steps 1 and 2 together

Place you students into groups of 3, then have each person complete one step. Give your students at least 3 problems to solve and have them rotate the step they do each time. For uneven groups, one person may do 2 steps (groups of 2 are better than groups of 4). Note, you should use this strategy after your students have done independent practice as it reduces social loafing.

Footnotes

SHAUN KILLIAN
(MEd., MLead.)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The I Do WE Do YOU Do Model Explained - Evidence-Based Teaching

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The I Do, You Do, We Do model is a simple yet potent way to use explicit instruction to improve your students learning. Discover how you

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
According to TeacherTapp, 72% primary and 45% secondary teachers use mini whiteboards (MWBs.) There are big variations between different subjects in secondaries with 69% of MFL and 57% science teachers claiming to use them but just 28% of English teachers.

Why might this be? Are MFL and science lessons just better suited to using MWBs? Are English lesson much more concerned with the kind of extended writing that best lends itself to exercise books? Judging from the poll responses above, primary teachers appear to be more concerned with checking students' understanding during lessons. Charitably, we might claim that in secondaries - and especially in English departments - we are simply more interested in marking books in order to work out how effective our teaching is. Of course, it could also mean that we have less understanding of the importance of responsive teaching.

Over the past few years, I have become increasingly convinced of the merits of MWBs in English. I see an awful lot of lessons and although most of the lessons I see are great, it's very seldom that these lessons would not have been more effective if MWBs had been deployed. There are lots of missed opportunities and gaps that MWBs - had they been used - could have filled.

Before I get into why I recommend the wider MWB use in English, let's deal with some of the objections. A good place to start is to consider the opportunity cost. Time and resources are finite. If we invest in MWBs might this mean we cannot invest in some other teaching strategy which has great opportunities and fewer costs? We'll evaluate as we go, and I'll let you come to your own conclusions.

Reasons not to use MWBs (in English)

1. They're a faff

2. They result in poor behaviour

3. I tried them once years ago and I didn't find them useful

4. Something else (cold calling, getting children to hold up fingers or coloured card etc.) is better

5. If writing is worth doing, it's worth making it more permanent

6. They make it easy for students to make mistakes and present ideas sloppily

7. They can't capture what we should be most interested in children learning

1. Let's be clear: MWBs are a faff. They're one more item of equipment to buy, maintain, distribute and collect. This is, I'm sure, one of the reasons why they're gathering dust at the back of cupboards in so many English classrooms. If you're going to use MWBs then you really do have to think carefully about where you will store them, how you will get them in front of students and then returned to storage.

2. It's also true that, given the opportunity, some children will draw penises on their MWB. Others might attempt to damage the equipment or each other with the equipment. If there's a poor behaviour culture in your school or classroom, then using MWBs will present additional difficulties. But this is an argument against doing anything that students would rather not do. Most students if allowed to chat, check their phones, sit where they like and eat sweets will be happy. It's much harder to get them to work hard. MWBs do not so much cause bad behaviour as expose it. It's easier to see when children are getting it wrong. This, I'd argue, is an asset. As always, we need to teach the behaviour we want and embed systems and routines that make it easier for students to make better decisions. These first two objections have fairly straightforward solutions and there are a number of useful blogs written on the topic. Here's one from an MFL teacher and another from a science teacher.

3. This objection isn't really an argument against MWBs, it's an argument against ineffective MWB use. I tried them in the early 2000s when the government was pushing them as part of the failed, top-down AfL roll out along with coloured cups, lollypop sticks and all the other associated gimmickry we endured. Like so many others, all I saw was the faff and the opportunities for misbehaviour and - because I had no real understanding of what formative assessment was or why it was useful - abandoned them as soon as they dropped off the lesson observation ticklist. Obviously, I'm not recommending using MWBs the way we (or at least, I) did back in the day.

4. Some folks have advanced the argument that MWBs are OK but not as good as some other mechanism for increasing student participation and exposing students' thinking. The most common candidate against which MWBs are judged wanting is to use 'no hands up' questioning or, as it's now almost universally referred to, 'cold calling'. , but the Twitter gods have provided this handy comparison of MWBs and cold calling:

To be absolutely clear, the idea that there's some sort of either/or dichotomy here is daft. Use both. But be aware that there are some things cold calling is less effective for. As we'll see, if you want to expose thinking and increase participation, MWBs are hard to beat.

5. The next objection feels more subject specific and so requires more consideration. The issue, as some see it, with MWBs is that writing becomes ephemeral and is wiped away as quickly as it is put down. Surely, if it's worth asking students to go to the time and trouble of writing something down, shouldn't we expect them to write it in their exercise books so that they can reflect on it in the future? But, as with the previous objection, this argument seems to create a false dichotomy. No one is arguing that all writing should be on MWBs and that none should be in books. Of course, some writing should be in students' books. But a lot of the writing I routinely see in books is not worth recording. Very often, students are expected to record answers to retrieval questions which now, in the absence of the question, no longer make any sense. It's difficult to argue there's any merit in this beyond allowing senior leaders to check compliance with ill-judged book policies. And then there's the fact that so many English books are filled with low level comprehension tasks to which students routinely provide poor quality responses littered with errors. If we're committed to the permanence of writing, then we should be equally committed to the quality of writing. What students practise they get better at; if they practise writing badly, they get better at bad writing. This means we are obliged to, at a minimum, read through all students' work and check they are not embedding errors. To return to the question of opportunity cost, the costs and benefits of requiring teachers to do this is problematic at best. (That said, I've written before about finding a balance with this kind of 'literacy marking'.) In dealing with this objection, we should also consider the notion that there might be a benefit to transient writing. One of the uses of MWBs is that you can use them as a 'sandbox' where students can experiment and rehearse ideas before committing to them either orally or in a more permanent written form. The ability to rub away discarded ideas can be beneficial in many circumstances. To help us work out whether we'd be better off writing on a MWB or in a book, the rule of thumb I'd suggest here is, if you want students to write it down in their book then you must commit to marking it. If, on the other hand, the writing is being undertaken to support thinking and you've no intention of valuing the outcome, you're probably much better off using a MWB.

6. This takes to our penultimate objection: the suggestion that using MWBs makes it easier to produce sloppy work, littered with errors. Again, as with the faff and behaviour arguments, this is undoubtedly true. However, as we saw when addressing the transience argument, students are as likely to produce untidy error ridden writing in a book or on a MWB. In either case it's up to us to make our expectations clear and support students in. meeting them. The positive advantage of students making mistakes on MWBs is that they are exposed. As I teacher I get to see, immediately, who's misspelled Priestley, who's doodled a penis in the corner and who's written an unintelligible fragment rather than the beautifully crafted sentence I was expecting. Because I get to see these errors at the time, they're made I can respond rapidly to prevent mistakes, misjudgements or misconceptions from becoming more deeply embedded.

7. The last objection, that English is a subject that is concerned with learning that cannot be expressed on MWBs is an unjustified form of exceptionalism. As we've already discussed, there are definitely aspects of English for which MWBs will be less appropriate but that doesn't mean that English is so different from other subjects that there's no value to using them. The question we need to address is whether MWBs in English are useful enough to justify their opportunity cost.

So, what are MWBs useful for in English? Well, here the three main uses to which I put them:

1. They are, in my view, the most effective mechanism I have access to that can ensure all students are both participating in an activity and held to account for the quality of their participation. Because I can both see that all students are writing as well as being able to very rapidly see what they are writing, I can intervene as appropriate in the most responsive manner possible. If you want to check students' recall of a fact or understanding of a concept, asking them to write the essence of it on their MWB is, I'd argue, much more useful than asking them to write it in their book. Equally, if I've asked all students to practise writing a particular sentence form I've just taught them, I could wander round and look at each of their books and spend a few moments with everyone who'd gone wrong to correct them or, in the same time, I could get through three or four examples with the whole class.

2. They expose all students' thinking. If I pose a hinge question which I need to be sure all students understand before moving on I would typically set this as a multiple-choice questions where, ideally, the distractors exposed predictable misconceptions. This allows me to post the question and ask students to write down A, B or C on their MWBs. This enables me to scan the room and see at a glance whether an individual requires some bespoke remediation or that whole sections of the class are dangerously wrongheaded. There are other, arguably better ways of doing this (such as Plickers perhaps) but these come with other costs and fewer advantages.

3. When I pose a question which I intend to cold call students, allowing them time to commit a tentative answer, or at least a few thoughts, on their MWB increases the likelihood that all students will be able to give an answer. I'd recommend doing this in the Think stage of Think - Pair - Share: give students 30 seconds to jot down an idea before then telling their partner. I've found this seems to really support the quality and sophistication of verbal responses.

As I said earlier, I rarely see English lessons which wouldn't benefit from the addition of one or all of these activities. I hope it's also obvious that there are aspects of English for which MWBs are not well suited. Now you have to determine the opportunity cost associate with both deciding to use and not use them. Use the following prompts to guide your thinking:

Is the behaviour culture in your school or in a particular class likely to mean you can get rid of the faff and behaviour concerns quickly and easily?

If you're doing something else that you think is great, would using MWBs force you to stop doing your great thing or might they support it?

Is all the writing you're asking students to produce something you will value and can give the necessary attention to correct and improve?

Would using MWBs make it easier or harder to spot students' mistakes and misconceptions than what you're currently doing?

How else can you hold every student to account for their participation and effort during a lesson?

How fluent are your students' oral responses? How else could you support students' answers to questions and contributions to discussions?

And, depending on your answers to the previous prompts, is your alternative quicker and easier to use than MWBs?

# data[].attributes.headline
'Storytelling in teaching' article (Association for Psychological Science)

# data[].attributes.subject
'Storytelling in teaching' article (Association for Psychological Science)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Association for Psychological Science - APS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"Tell me a fact and I'll learn. Tell me the truth and I'll believe. But tell me a story and it will live in my heart forever."
- Indian Proverb

Once upon a time, long ago and far away (or perhaps not so long ago), teachers did not use fancy PowerPoint presentations, overhead projectors, or even chalkboards. They simply shared their knowledge through stories.

Think back over your years of sitting in classrooms. What are the moments that you most remember? For me, one of those moments was my professor in introduction to psychology spinning the tale of Rosenhan's pseudopatients, perfectly sane individuals who checked into a mental institution and proceeded to act in normal ways. It seemed like an amazing adventure - what was going to happen to these people in the mental hospital? The class was hanging on his every word.

The odds are that your memorable moments, too, have to do with stories - not theories or definitions or dates, but an unfolding narrative, complete with suspense, drama, or humor, or perhaps a personal anecdote shared by a favorite teacher. Of course, a classroom narrative may be linked to a major discovery, study, or figure in psychology, but it is not always the importance of the discovery alone that allows it to stay fresh over the years. Rather, the means of presenting the information can make it exciting and unforgettable.

The power of stories has been recognized for centuries, and even today, in Hollywood and beyond, storytelling is a multi-million dollar business. Stories are a natural mode of thinking; before our formal education begins, we are already learning from Aesop's fables, fairy tales, or family history. Indeed, some researchers have even claimed that all knowledge comes in the form of stories (Schank & Abelson, 1995)! Although this strong claim has been questioned, it is generally agreed that stories are a powerful structure for organizing and transmitting information, and for creating meaning in our lives and environments.

NATURE OF STORIES
What is a story? In essence, a narrative account requires a story that raises unanswered questions or unresolved conflicts; characters may encounter and then resolve a crisis or crises. A story line, with a beginning, middle and end, is identifiable. In Bruner's (1986) words, "[Narrative] deals in human or human-like intention and action and the vicissitudes and consequences that mark their course. It strives to put its timeless miracles into the particulars of experience and to locate the experience in time and place." Stories can bring abstract principles to life by giving them concrete form. We cannot always give students direct experience with psychological concepts, but stories might come close.

A story tends to have more depth than a simple example. A story tells about some event - some particular individuals, and something that happens to them. Stories engage our thinking, our emotions, and can even lead to the creation of mental imagery (Green & Brock, 2000). Individuals listening to stories react to them almost automatically, participating, in a sense, in the action of the narrative (e.g., Polichak & Gerrig, 2002). Bringing all of these systems to bear on the material in your course helps student learning. Students are awake, following along, wanting to find out what happens next and how the story ends. Bruner (1986) has contrasted the paradigmatic (logical, scientific) and narrative modes of thinking, but these modes need not be mutually exclusive in the classroom.

PURPOSE OF STORIES
Stories can serve multiple functions in the classroom, including sparking student interest, aiding the flow of lectures, making material memorable, overcoming student resistance or anxiety, and building rapport between the instructor and the students, or among students themselves.

Stories Create Interest
As an instructor, you can capitalize on the inherent narrative structure of research as the quest for knowledge. Science is the process of solving mysteries; in fact, writers of journal articles are often advised to make their findings into "a good story." Psychologists often start out by confronting an intriguing problem. For example, why are bicycle riders faster when they are racing against another person than going around the track by themselves? Researchers also encounter and overcome various obstacles in their quest to understand a phenomenon. For example, when researchers tried to replicate social facilitation effects, sometimes the presence of others improved performance, and other times it harmed performance. Why would that be? Take advantage of the suspense that this chain of events can create. Telling the story of how researchers became interested in a particular issue, without immediately providing the resolution, will motivate your class to think of their own approaches to solving the problem. They can share in the sense of discovery. Understanding the process of solving a research problem can generate excitement, as well as an increased appreciation for the "detective work" involved in psychology.

Characters are an important element of any tale, and indeed, stories can also make material concrete and memorable by putting a human (or animal) face on theories and issues. Students may remember the peril of H. M., the patient who could not form new memories, long after they have forgotten other details of brain anatomy or memory research. They may have a vivid mental image of Harry Harlow's orphaned monkeys interacting with cloth or wire "mothers." If they remember the concrete elements of the story, they may then be able to reconstruct the abstract lessons illustrated by the story. Furthermore, listeners may identify with the protagonists of your stories, and thus might be better able to relate course material to their own lives. Making the material personally relevant can lead to increased thinking about the material and a greater ability to apply the new knowledge.

Similarly, giving some background about the researchers who developed particular theories can help engage student interest by humanizing the research process, and may even provide role models for students who may be interested in pursing research themselves. (This approach can be used to excellent effect in history of psychology courses.) Stories can convey the passion, enthusiasm, and curiosity of the researchers. Sometimes psychological research can seem divorced from the real world, but in the process of developing his theories about compliance, Cialdini actually went through training programs to becomes a salesman of encyclopedias, dance lessons, and the like. He also went "on the inside" as a particiapnt-observer to study advertising, public relations, and fundraising agencies to learn about their techniques. Students studying social influence love to hear about Cialdini immersing himself in the world of compliance professionals.

Stories Provide a Structure for Remembering Course Material
Coherence is the hallmark of a good narrative. Remembering a list of isolated concepts and definitions is difficult, but recalling the flow of a research story may be easier for students. As mentioned above, stories may also help create vivid mental images, another cue for recall. Because stories provide natural connections between events and concepts, mentioning one part of the story may help evoke the other parts of the story, just as hearing one bar of a familiar tune may bring the entire song to mind.

Stories Are a Familiar and Accessible Form of Sharing Information
Some students may be intimidated by abstract concepts, or may doubt their ability to master or understand the material. A story may provide a non-threatening way to ease students into learning. A narrative opening may seem simple and straightforward, allowing students to relax and grasp a concrete example before moving into more technical details of a theory or finding. Sometimes stories can even be about the learning process; tales of previous students who struggled but then succeeded might serve as inspiration for current students. (It probably goes without saying that telling stories that mock or disparage previous students may do more harm than good.)

Telling a Story From Experience Can Create a More Personal Student-Teacher Connection
This rapport can lead to a positive classroom climate. Perhaps you are a clinical psychologist who has seen a patient with a particularly compelling presentation of the disorder you're discussing in class. Or maybe you're a social psychologist who has had your own brush with bystander intervention and diffusion of responsibility. Sharing these experiences gives the class a new tone, and makes the subject come alive. As long as every class session isn't another chapter from your autobiography, students enjoy seeing a glimpse of the human side of their professors. As an added benefit, in discussion classes, providing this kind of opening may inspire reciprocity and help create an atmosphere where students are more willing to share their opinions and experiences.

FINDING AND SELECTING STORIES
There are a wealth of sources for teachable stories - current events, history, television programs, classic literature or drama, and personal experience (your own and others). Some instructors find it useful to have a folder or notebook for teaching stories; make a habit of clipping relevant newspaper stories, or making notes about events that are perfect illustrations of some psychological concept that appears in your course. These don't have to be current events to capture student interest: A colleague uses a scene from the book Killer Angels (Shaara, 1974), about the Battle of Gettysburg, to demonstrate the power of perception over reality. In the book, the Confederate General Longstreet is portrayed as sitting calmly before the battle. A foreign journalist infers that he is composing himself, thinking of strategy and so forth. In reality, he is weeping, knowing his men will die because he asks them to, knowing what the day will bring.

And remember, research results need to be true, but stories do not. Do not be afraid to use stories from fiction, especially well-known fiction. For instance, the children's story "The Emperor's New Clothes" demonstrates social influence principles; the interactions between Iago, Othello, and Desdemona in Shakespeare's play Othello provide a powerful illustration of the importance of perceptions over objective reality.

Textbooks may also be sources of stories; some books use stories to introduce or frame chapters, while others (such as Aronson's Social Animal) intersperse narratives throughout. Readers may want to consider books with "inside stories." Such stories have been collected by Brannigan and Merrens (1995) in their Research Adventures series. Other recommendations for sources of stories include:

A History of Geropsychology in Autobiography. (Birren & Schroots, (2000)

Case Studies in Abnormal Behavior (6th ed.) (Meyer, 2003)

Classic Studies in Psychology (Schwartz, 1986).

Disordered Personalities in Literature (Harwell, 1980)

Forty Studies that Changed Psychology: Explorations into the History of Psychological Research (4th Ed.) (Hock, 2002)

Pioneers of Psychology (3rd ed.) (Fancher, 1996)

Portraits of Pioneers in Psychology (Kimble, Wertheimer, & White, 1991)

The Story of Psychology (Hunt, 1993)

Think about common experiences that your students have likely had - stories about leaving home, dealing with roommates, handling relationships, and the like may be especially relevant to a college-age audience.

The case study method, frequently used in business schools, is a popular means of introducing stories into the classroom. Cases typically set up a problem by giving background information about a situation (for example, the history of a company), and end with a current dilemma faced by an individual or organization. They are often designed to illustrate a particular point or demonstrate certain analytic procedures. Students are encouraged to generate possible solutions and consider the consequences of those solutions. This method encourages active learning, and in essence, puts students in the role of writing the ending to the story.

A related method (which can be more or less narrative in form) is role-playing, where students actively create or take part in a mini-drama in the classroom. McKeachie (1999) gives the example of students taking the perspective of Freud or Skinner in responding to a treatment situation. Role-playing is another means of merging the power of stories with the benefits of active learning.

Stories may also be integrated with technology. You may be able to locate computer-based or interactive stories that relate to your course content. (If you are programming-savvy or have time on your hands, you may even be able to develop these kinds of applications.) Teaching Web sites can also be rich sources of stories. And you don't always have to be the storyteller; films and Web sites may also be effective means of delivering psychology's stories.

TELLING STORIES IN CLASS
The lecture itself may be structured as a narrative, or a story can simply be an illustration of a key point. Taking advantage of the natural drama of research stories can help the pacing and flow of your lectures. Imagine yourself as a storyteller, perhaps with your students gathered around a campfire. Rather than marching through the material, fact by fact, you can add storytelling flourishes. Let the suspense build - pause for a moment before revealing the results of the study, to draw in students' attention. Stories can also be a natural way to introduce humor into your lecture.

One way to learn about how to tell a story is to listen to master storytellers at work. National Public Radio provides some wonderful examples: Garrison Keillor, for instance, enthralls thousands of people each week with his tales of Lake Wobegon. You may also know people in your own life - relatives, friends, and colleagues - who can spin a marvelous tale. Take note of how they involve their audience, and use those techniques as you develop your own style. Do they pause at key places? What information do they give early on to draw listeners in, and how do they maintain suspense? Do they bring characters to life with vivid descriptions or unique voices? Just as you develop your own style of teaching, so too can you develop your own style of storytelling that draws on role models, but fits your own personality.

As with any example, a story should be a clear illustration of the principle you're trying to demonstrate. Because listeners have their own interpretations of the point of stories, it is your responsibility as an instructor to make the message of the story clear, and draw links between the story and the abstract principles it demonstrates. Beginning students, especially, may not be able to make these connections on their own, or they may remember peripheral aspects of the story rather than the main point. Students should be aware that classroom stories are part of the learning experience, not a tangent from it. Keep the story clean and to the point. Furthermore, if a story doesn't quite match the concept you are trying to demonstrate, you may be better off omitting it. At exam time, students who remember a story from class should not be misled by its conclusions.

When is the best time to tell a story for it to have the maximum impact? Schank (1990) suggest that stories should come after surprises, or expectation failures. When individuals have recognized flaws in their existing models of the world, they are open to correcting those models. Individuals are especially open to learning when the expectation failure and story are relevant to their goals. For example, suppose you had just come back from teaching a particularly frustrating day of class, where students' minds were wandering and you couldn't seem to engage the class. If at that moment, your colleague told you about how she had transformed her classroom environment by starting each lecture with a story that presented a real-world problem or mystery, and working through it over the course of the class session, you might be especially open to learning from that tale. For your students, framing stories with relevant problems (succeeding at a job, getting along with roommates) may help make them more likely to be attended to and recalled.

Along the same lines, stories can be told from different points of view. Think about perspective when you're designing your lecture. You could describe an experiment from the researcher's point of view, but you might instead begin by telling the story of what a participant in that study experienced instead, to draw students into the situation. Imagine, for example, being a participant in the Asch conformity studies, with rising levels of confusion and doubt as your fellow participants continue to give wrong answers to a line judgment task. Stories can encourage empathy, and putting themselves in participants' shoes can sometimes help students understand the power of experimental situations. Varying the presentation of research to focus on a researcher versus a participant perspective can also help add spice to your lectures.

In some types of courses, particularly smaller seminars, it may be appropriate to have students share stories from their own lives, and indeed, students may spontaneously do this even in larger courses. This is another form of active learning, and students may be even more attentive to a story told by their peers. An instructor's role might then be to link aspects of these narratives to theories or principles in the psychological literature. (Students may become frustrated with a course that appears to consist only of sharing individual experiences, without links to theory or research.) If individuals are likely to be sharing stories that may be sensitive - for example, struggles with psychological disorders, experiences with stereotyping or prejudice, - ground rules about respect for others, not discussing personal revelations outside the classroom, and the like should be established early.

Can there be a downside to using stories in the classroom? One issue that psychology instructors sometimes face, especially in introductory and social psychology courses, is helping students to understand that personal experience isn't everything, and that psychological questions can be tested scientifically and evaluated with data. Your use of stories should be integrated with reference to empirical evidence, so that students do not come away with the impression that a single story, even an especially vivid and compelling one, should be understood as proof for a particular position.

You may also want to solicit student feedback on your stories, especially if you are telling a particular story for the first time, or if you are new at introducing storytelling into your teaching. You might ask students to list stories that they found to be interesting and useful, and alternatively, note whether any stories seemed to wander or create confusion. At the end of class or after telling a story, you might take a minute or so to ask students to summarize the point of a story you told, to make sure that your message has been conveyed.

Stories can serve another function that goes beyond the classroom. Shared narrative can be a force in creating community. Stories tie current students to traditions and people from the past. If an important event or discovery took place on your campus or in your town, let students know about it. Tell stories that embody the values of your discipline and your campus. Share your teaching stories with colleagues.

And may you and your students live happily ever after.

REFERENCES AND RECOMMENDED READING

Aronson, E. (1995). The social animal (7th ed.). New York: W. H. Freeman.

Birren, J. E., & Schroots, J. J. F. (Eds.). (2000). A history of geropsychology in autobiography. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Brannigan, G.G., & Merrens, M.R. (1995). The social psychologists: Research adventures. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Bruner, J. S. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Fancher, R. E. (1996). Pioneers of psychology (3rd ed.). New York: Norton.

Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 401-421.

Green, M. C., Strange, J. J. & Brock, T. C. (Eds.) (2002). Narrative impact: Social and cognitive foundations. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Harwell, C. W. (1980). Disordered personalities in literature. New York: Longman.

Hock, R. R. (2002). Forty studies that changed psychology: Explorations into the history of psychological research (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Hunt, M. (1993). The story of psychology. New York: Anchor Books.

Kimble, G. A., Wertheimer, M., & White, C. L. (Eds.). (1991). Portraits of pioneeers in psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

McKeachie, W.J. (1999). Teaching tips (10th ed.). Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath & Company.

Meyer, R. G. (2003). Case studies in abnormal behavior (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Polichak, J.W., & Gerrig, R.J. (2002). Get up and win: Participatory responses to narrative. In Green, M. C., Strange, J. J. & Brock, T. C. (Eds.), Narrative impact: Social and cognitive foundations, (pp. 71-96). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Schank, R.C. (1990). Tell me a story. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.

Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P. (1995). Knowledge and memory: The real story. In R. S. Wyer, Jr. (Ed.), Advances in social cognition (Vol. VIII, pp. 1-85). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Schwartz, S. (1986). Classic studies in psychology. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing.

Shaara, M. (1974). The Killer Angels. New York: Ballentine Books.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"Tell me a fact and I'll learn. Tell me the truth and I'll believe. But tell me a story and it will live in my heart forever."- Indian ProverbOnce upon a time, long ago and ...

# data[].attributes.headline
'The privileged status of story' article

# data[].attributes.subject
'The privileged status of story' article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
How does the mind work-and especially how does it learn? Teachers' instructional decisions are based on a mix of theories from teacher education, trial and error, craft knowledge, and gut instinct. Such gut knowledge often serves us well, but is there anything sturdier to rely on?

Cognitive science is an interdisciplinary field of researchers from psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, philosophy, computer science, and anthropology who seek to understand the mind. In this regular American Educator column, we consider findings from this field that are strong and clear enough to merit classroom application.

By Daniel T. Willingham

Question: I have read that the mind treats stories differently than other types of information. It seems obvious that people like listening to stories, but it's not obvious how to use that in the classroom. Is it really true that stories are somehow "special" and, if so, how can teachers capitalize on that fact?

Answer: Research from the last 30 years shows that stories are indeed special. Stories are easy to comprehend and easy to remember, and that's true not just because people pay close attention to stories; there is something inherent in the story format that makes them easy to understand and remember. Teachers can consider using the basic elements of story structure to organize lessons and introduce complicated material, even if they don't plan to tell a story in class.

* * *

Everybody loves a good story. Even small children who have difficulty focusing in class will sit with rapt attention in the presence of a good storyteller. But stories are not just fun. There are important cognitive consequences of the story format. Psychologists have therefore referred to stories as "psychologically privileged," meaning that our minds treat stories differently than other types of material. People find stories interesting, easy to understand, and easy to remember. To understand why these benefits accrue, it is necessary to understand the underlying format of stories.

* * *

Definitions of story vary, but a useful starting point is to consider how professional storytellers-that is, playwrights, screenwriters, and novelists-define story. There is relative agreement on some basic features, sometimes called "The Four Cs." ¹ The first C is Causality. Events in stories are related because one event causes or initiates another. For example, "The King died and then the Queen died" presents two events chronologically, but "The King died and the Queen died of grief" links the events with causal information. The second C is Conflict. In every story, a central character has a goal and obstacles that prevent the goal from being met. "Scarlett O'Hara loved Ashley Wilkes, so she married him" has causality, but it's not much of story (and would make a five-minute movie). A story moves forward as the character takes action to remove the obstacle. In Gone With the Wind, the first obstacle Scarlett faces is that Ashley doesn't love her. The third C is Complications. If a story were just a series of episodes in which the character hammers away at her goal, it would be dull. Rather, the character's efforts to remove the obstacle typically create complications-new problems that she must try to solve. When Scarlett learns that Ashley doesn't love her, she tries to make him jealous by agreeing to marry Charles Hamilton, an action that, indeed, poses new complications for her. The fourth C is Character. Strong, interesting characters are essential to good stories, and screenwriters agree that the key to creating interesting characters is to allow the audience to observe them in action. F. Scott Fitzgerald went so far as to write, "Action is character." ² Rather than tell us that Scarlett O'Hara is popular and a coquette, the first time we meet her we observe two men fawning over her.

Stories Are More Interesting

We might guess that stories are interesting because they often touch on themes that people find intrinsically interesting: romance, sex, death, and the like-all found in Gone With the Wind. That's true enough, but there's more to it. People find material presented in a story format more engaging than if it is presented in expository text no matter what the topic. In one study (Britton et al., 1983), the experimenters asked subjects to read passages. As they read, they were to listen for a tone that sounded unpredictably and only occasionally. Upon hearing it, they were to press a button as quickly as possible. The idea was that if subjects were more absorbed in what they were reading, they would be slower to press the button. The results showed that subjects responded more slowly to the tones when reading stories than when reading expository passages. This result was replicated across many different passages using different tasks (other than the button press) to probe attention.

The reason that stories are engaging may be inherent in their structure. Story structure naturally leads the listener (or reader) to make inferences that are neither terribly easy, nor impossibly difficult. New information that is a little bit puzzling, but which we can understand, is deemed more interesting than new information that is either very easy or very difficult to understand. For example, people enjoy working crossword puzzles, anagrams, and the like, but only if they are moderately difficult. They are tedious if too easy, and frustrating if too hard.

Sung-il Kim (1999) tested the idea that a story's interest is derived from readers' need to make medium-level inferences. Kim had subjects read short passages and then rate them for interest. In some passages the penultimate sentence provided a reason for the final action taken, but other passages omitted the reason. For example, one passage (below) described a woman preparing soup and then serving it to her husband.

A newlywed bride had made clam chowder coup for dinner and was waiting for her husband to come home. Although she was not an experienced cook she had put everything into making the soup. Finally, her husband came home, sat down to dinner, and tried some of the soup. (He was totally unappreciative of her efforts an deven lost his temper about ow bad it tasted.) The poor woman swore she would never cook for her husband again.

Example of materials from Kim (1999).

The penultimate sentence is in parenthesis to indicate that some saw the sentence and some didn't. Subjects found the passage more interesting if the reason for the ending was not explicitly in the passage. Similar effects have been reported for more educational materials (e.g., historical passages, see Frick, 1992).

Stories Are Easier to Comprehend

Stories are also easier to comprehend than other forms of text. In one study (Graesser et al, 1994), the experimenters had their subjects read several different types of texts. Texts varied in the familiarity of their content and in their format; some were stories (e.g., one that is very familiar, Princess and the Pea, and one that is not, Bodisat) and some were expository texts (e.g., concerning earthquakes or harvester ants). Each text was read on a computer screen, one sentence at a time; subjects pressed the space bar when they were ready to read the next sentence, so the experimenters were able to measure reading time. The experimenters had analyzed each sentence on a number of dimensions including number of words, grammatical complexity, number of propositions (a linguistic measure of ideas), position in the text, topic familiarity, and narrativity. The experimenters then calculated which of these text characteristics were associated with fast reading times, and which with slow. They found that most of these dimensions had some impact on reading time (e.g., subjects were somewhat slower to read sentences that had more words), but narrativity* had the largest effect by far. Stories were read much faster than expository texts. The researchers take the faster reading speed to indicate greater ease of comprehension.

One key reason that stories are easy to comprehend is because we know the format, and that gives us a reasonable idea of what to expect. When an event is described in a story, we expect that the event will be causally related to a prior event in the story. The listener uses his or her knowledge of story structure to relate the present event to what has already happened. For example, Scarlett agreeing to marry Charles initially seems senseless, as it has been established that she thinks he's a fool. But the viewer knows that there must be a causal link to prior events, and knows that the link is likely related to the main character's goal. Indeed, Scarlett's acceptance of Charles's proposal makes sense given her goal of marrying Ashley and his rejection of her.

Stories Are Easier to Remember

The structure of stories also contributes to the ease of remembering them, and many studies show that stories are indeed easy to remember. In one study (Graesser et al., 1994), subjects listened to the same set of stories and expository texts used in the study described above. Their memory was later tested. Again, familiarity had some impact on memory, but the main effect was for the narrativity of the passages. Subjects remember about 50 percent more from the stories than from the expository passages.

Most researchers believe that it is the causal connections that make stories easy to remember (e.g., Meyers & Duffy, 1990). Janice Keenan and her associates had subjects read different versions of a brief paragraph. The last sentence was always the same, but the penultimate sentence varied so that its causal relationship to the final sentence was more or less obvious. The sample below shows how the penultimate sentence varied in one of the passages.

1 (strongest
causal relationship)

Joey's big brother punched him again and again. The next day his body was covered with bruises.

69

2

Racing down the hill, Joey fell off his bike. The next day his body was
covered with bruises.

83

3

Joey's crazy mother became furiously angry with him. The next day his body was covered with bruises.

75

4 (weakest
causal relationship)

Joey went to a neighbor's house to
play. The next day his body was
covered with bruises.

50

Sample materials from Keenan et al. (1987). Level is a ranking of
the relatedness of the cause described in the first sentence and the
effect described in the second sentence. The rankings were
based on subject ratings.

Memory was tested about 35 minutes after reading. Recall was poor if the sentences were very closely related or very unrelated. Memory was best if the subject had to make an inference to connect the sentences, provided it was not too difficult to find the connection.

Part of this memory effect likely occurs as subjects are reading or hearing the story; when the second sentence is moderately related, they think more carefully about how the sentences are connected. As discussed in a previous column (see "Students Remember ... What They Think About," in the Summer 2003 issue of American Educator), thinking about meaning is helpful to memory. Indeed, if subjects are asked to elaborate on the sentences and find a connection between them, the memory advantage for the moderately related sentences disappears (Duffy, Shinjo, & Myers, 1990). Thus, it appears that the moderate connection encourages subjects to think about the sentences, whereas the very strong or very weak connection does not.

The story format brings a memory benefit not only when you hear it, but also when you later try to remember it. Causal connections provide an effective web of associations. If you remember the goal of the main character, that is an entrée to remembering how the character tried to achieve that goal, which leads to memory for successive events. For example, if you had difficulty remembering what happened to Charles Hamilton, you might use your knowledge of story structure to guess that Scarlett could not have remained married to him, which would prompt you to remember that he died.

Our Minds Seek Causal Connections

The story format has psychological significance-better comprehension and better memory-because we know what to expect in a story. These expectations are driven by a mental representation for story structure. In most (but not all) cultures, stories entail causality and goals, and so that's what listeners expect when they hear a story. This expectation is so strong that the listener will use them when remembering the story, even if the story lacked these elements. Take a moment to read the Native American folktale below. In a landmark study, Frederic Bartlett (1932) asked English schoolboys to read this folktale, in which some events happen with no apparent causal connection to prior events. When subjects were asked to recall the folktales weeks later, they added and dropped elements for which there were no apparent causal connections in an unconscious effort to make the story better fit their idea of a story. In particular, subjects had difficulty understanding why some characters were ghosts and difficulty understanding why the Indian dies at the end, and those two facts were especially subject to change in their memory. For example, some subjects omitted the fact that the warriors were ghosts, and one subject later remembered that "Ghost" was a clan name for another group of Indians. Many subjects inserted language indicating causality for the death at the end, for example, relating that he had seemed all right, but became ill the next morning and then died.

War of the Ghosts

One night two young men from Egulac went down to the river to hunt seals, and while they were there it became foggy and calm. Then they heard war-cries, and they thought: "Maybe this is a war-party." They escaped to the shore, and hid behind a log. Now canoes came up, and they heard the noise of paddles, and one saw a canoe coming up to them. There were five men in the canoe, and they said:

"What do you think? We wish to take you along. We are going up the river to make war on the people."

One of the young men said, "I have no arrows."

"Arrows are in the canoe," they said.

"I will not go along. I might be killed. My relative do not know where I have gone. But you," he said, turning to the other, "may go with them."

So one of the young men went, but the other returned home.

And the warriors went on up the river to a town on the other side of Kalama. The people came down to the water and they began to fight, and many were killed. But presently the young man hard one of the warriors say, "Quick, let us go home: that Indian has been hit." Now he thought: "Oh, they are ghosts." He did not feel sick, but they said he had been shot.

So the canoes went back to Egulac and the young man went ashore to his house and made a fire. And he told everybody and said: "Behold I accompanied the ghosts, and we went to fight. Many of our fellws were killed, and many of those who attacked us were killed. They said I was hit, and I did not feel sick."

He told it all, and then he became quiet. When the sun rose he fell down. Something balck came out of his mouth. his face became contorted. The people jumped up and cried.

He was dead.

Causality is so powerful a cue to recall that subjects will use it even in expository prose, if it's available. In one study (Gentner, 1976), subjects who listened to passages from a history textbook later recalled the events described not in the order that they heard them, but in the order of causation.

Stories and Story Structure in the Classroom

Stories are interesting, easy to comprehend, and easy to remember; and even preschoolers have some appreciation of story structure (Wenner, 2004). Exactly what has led our minds to handle stories in such a privileged way is not well understood, but it has been suggested that understanding the actions and characters in a story calls on the same processes we use in trying to understand the actions and intentions of people in the real world (Bower, 1978). We evolved as a social species, and so we may have special cognitive apparatus to deal with social situations that are co-opted in thinking about stories.

How can teachers capitalize on the privileged status of stories? There are two groups of applications. First, obviously enough, one can tell more stories. Second, where stories are inappropriate, it may still be useful to inject elements from the story format into lessons. Both approaches are discussed here.

Tell more stories in class.

Since stories are interesting, easy to remember, and easy to understand, they are an ideal introduction to a new unit. The teacher can introduce new material in a way that is both non-threatening and interesting. Further, students may acquire some of the basic vocabulary of the content area and be better prepared to delve more deeply into the subject matter. If you think of stories as a particularly "easy to swallow" way of teaching content, you'll think of a lot of ideal times for using stories: after lunch, at the end of a complex discussion when a simple recap is needed, and during the last few minutes of the school day. A teacher might know of a story that complements the lesson's educational point, but does so in a way that is less taxing, more fun, and more interesting. For one such story, see "Mayday at 41,000 Feet: Watch Those Units!" from the Winter 2003-2004 issue of American Educator. Such a story can also make an ideal break on a day when students are frazzled-and is more attractive than other alternatives (such as undemanding busy work).

Have students read stories outside of class.

Books are available that use a narrative structure to convey complicated content. Most notable are biographies of great figures in science, mathematics, history, and the arts. Biographies make personal the material that teachers want students to master. Biographies of scientists frequently read like detective stories, as they hunt for the solution to a scientific problem. Great scientists and mathematicians also set an excellent example for students through their passion and dedication. Students will gain an important personal perspective when they read an autobiography of an ordinary person who lived through a historical event that they are studying. Anne Frank: The Diary of a Young Girl is a classic example, but there are many other fine works in this vein. Other books integrate educational material into the stories themselves, such as Flatland by Edwin Abbott, or The Man Who Counted by Malba Tahan.

Tell stories to older students.

Teachers may think that storytelling is inappropriate for older students. Once children get to sixth grade or so, they may think that stories smack of preschool. Of course, older children do enjoy stories; they attend movies, they read books. The problem is that listening to stories read aloud in class sounds like (and indeed is) what young children do. The solution is simple enough. The importance of age-appropriate language is obvious, and teachers might also consider not signaling to students that a story is being told. Such signals might include reading aloud from a book, using a dramatic voice, and insisting that the story be told as a whole, uninterrupted. Rather, the teacher might begin the story without announcing it as a story-tell it in everyday language, work from notes, and allow discussion while the story is being told.

When "story" is intrinsic to the subject matter, make use of the story format to structure lessons.

History is a natural story; it has the four Cs -causality, conflicts, complications, and character-built in. Yet, history textbooks rarely use a narrative structure. For teachers, an important way to make use of story in history is through the generous use of trade books that treat history as biography, historical fiction, or a narrative.

Use the four Cs to structure lessons.

There are ways to use the four Cs as the framework for developing lesson plans. For example, a typical lesson on the Spanish-American War emphasizes President Cleveland's and then President McKinley's reluctance to do anything about the Cuban revolution against the Spanish, despite the considerable economic stake that the U.S. had in the country. Successive events (the publishing of an insulting letter by the Spanish Minister and the sinking of the Maine), lead to a U.S. ultimatum that is rejected by the Spanish, whereupon the U.S. declares war. Considering the four Cs might lead to a different framework. The strong character in this drama is Spain, because it is Spain's actions that move the story forward. Thus, a teacher might begin with the background of how Spain first came to control Cuba and the failed revolt of 1868-1878. The central conflict of the story is how the Spanish should deal with the revolt: put it down or try to accommodate the Cubans. The first complication is the increasing involvement of the U.S. in this conflict, which offers a third option-allow the U.S. to mediate. At each step, the teacher would ensure that the causal link between one event and the next was clear to students. Story format can inform the structuring of a lesson plan, even if the lesson does not include a story per se.

Use the most important C-conflict.

Screenwriters know that the most important of the four Cs is the conflict. If the audience is not compelled by the problem that the main characters face, they will never be interested in the story. Movies seldom begin with the main conflict that will drive the plot. That conflict is typically introduced about 20 minutes into the movie. For example, the main conflict in Star Wars is whether Luke will succeed in destroying the death star, but the movie begins with the empire's attack on a rebel ship and the escape of the two droids. All James Bond movies begin with an action sequence, but it is always related to some other case. Agent 007's main mission for the movie is introduced about 20 minutes into the film. Screenwriters use the first 20 minutes-about 20 percent of the running time-to pique the audience's interest in the characters and their situation. Teachers might consider using 10 or 15 minutes of class time to generate interest in a problem (i.e., conflict), the solution of which is the material to be learned.

* * *

Cognitive science research confirms that stories are indeed powerful. This research shows us where this power comes from and suggests how teachers might harness it. Stories have a particular format, and each of us has a representation of that format in memory. Teachers may use this power both by the judicious use of storytelling in the classroom, and by using the structure of stories to organize a lesson.

Daniel T. Willingham is professor of cognitive psychology and neuroscience at the University of Virginia and author of Cognition: The Thinking Animal. His research focuses on the role of consciousness in learning. He thanks Bill Brewer and Randy Fletcher for useful conversations in preparing this article.

*"Narrativity" was determined by asking readers to rate whether they believed that a given piece of writing seemed like a "story." ( back to article)

Endnotes

1. The definitions vary somewhat, and some contain five or six Cs rather than four, but there is considerable overlap in the definitions (Field, 1994; Hull, 1983; McKee, 1997).

2. The Notebooks of F. Scott Fitzgerald, ed. Matthew J. Bruccoli. New York and London: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich/Bruccoli Clark, 1978, p. 332.

References

Bartlett, F. C. (1932/1995). Remembering. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Bower, G. H. (1978). Experiments on story comprehension and recall. Discourse Processes, 1, 211-231.

Britton, B. K., Graesser, A. C., Glynn, S. M., Hamilton, T., & Penland, M. (1983). Discourse Processes, 6, 39-57.

Duffy, S. A., Shinjo, M., & Myers, J. L. (1990). The effect of encoding task on memory for sentence pairs varying in causal relatedness. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 27-42.

Eggen, P. & Kauchak, D. (2001). Educational Psychology, 5th ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Frick, R. W. (1992). Interestingness. British Journal of Psychology, 83, 113-128.

Gentner, D. R. (1976). The structure and recall of narrative prose. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15, 411-418.

Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing Inferences During Narrative Text Comprehension. Psychological Review, 101, 371-395.

Keenan, J.M., Baillet, S.D., & Brown, P. (1987). The effect of causal cohesion on comprehension and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23, 115-126.

Kim, S-i. (1999). Causal bridging inference: A cause of story interestingness. British Journal of Psychology, 90, 57-71.

Meyers, J. L. & Duffy, S. A. (1990). Causal inferences and text memory. In A. C. Graesser, & G. H. Bower (Eds.), Inferences and text comprehension. New York: Academic Press.

Wenner, J. A. (2004). Preschoolers' comprehension of goal structure in narratives. Memory, 12, 193-202.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How does the mind work-and especially how does it learn? Teachers' instructional decisions are based on a mix of theories from teacher education, trial and error, craft knowledge, and gut instinct. Such gut knowledge often serves us well, but is there anything sturdier to rely on?

# data[].attributes.body
Elaboration theory
Explanations
Modelling

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Overview

Elaboration Theory is an instructional design theory that is more than just zooming out and then zooming in. It requires teachers to follow a structure that assists schema development.

The epitome is about presenting the "to-be-learned" information in an accessible way so that learners can build connections between their pre-existing knowledge and the new concept. Giving them the 'big picture' at the start can allow them to understand an abstract concept.

Elaboration Theory reminds us of the complex nature of learning. To learn a new concept/idea/topic is a generative process that requires many stages of elaboration and retrieval practice.

The Dunning-Kruger effect has got me again! Previously, I thought that Elaboration Theory was fairly simple and straight-forward - you start off with an overview of the 'big picture' and then hone in on smaller concepts and build on from there. To an extent, this is true, but as I dove into Paul A. Kirschner and Carl Hendrick's brilliant book, " How Learning Happens: Seminal Works in Educational Psychology and What They Mean in Practice, I found that there were intricate details that were essential to understand.

In search of a better way to organize instruction: The elaboration theory, Reigeluth, 1979

What is Elaboration Theory?

"A person starts with a wide-angle view, which allows one to see the major parts of the picture and the major relationships among those parts but without any detail.

The person then zooms in on a part of the picture. Assume that, instead of being continuous, the zoom operates in steps of discrete levels. Zooming in one level on a given part of the picture allows the person to see the major subparts. After having studied those subparts and their interrelationships, the person could then zoom back out to the wide-angle view to review the context of this part within the whole picture."
Reigeluth, 1979

Zooming Out on Elaboration Theory

I will attempt to follow the Elaboration Theory model in explaining what it is! I will also add in my key takeaways and how it fits in with my understanding of the science of learning. The first step is to epitomise (simplest representative) the idea.

How Learning Happens: Seminal Works in Educational Psychology and What They Mean in Practice, page 161

The Epitome

The epitome level has been described as the most important and the connection that I made was the need to turn an abstract concept into something more concrete. As teachers, we often suffer from the Curse of Knowledge and go straight into teaching something that is still foreign to the learner. One of the reasons why using concrete manipulatives in mathematics has been proven to be so effective is because if we go straight into using symbols, students don't understand what the symbols actually represent (Carbonneau et al, 2013).

It also gave me a deeper understanding on why the Game Sense approach works in Physical Education. This approach starts off with a modified game that is interchanged with times of reflection and inquiry.

Synthesiser or Expanded Epitome

Kirschner and Hendrick, 2020 described a synthesiser as something to integrate what has already been learned with the bigger picture for example, analogies or diagrams.

Using analogies also ties in with Daniel Willingham's advice from " Why don't students like school?" on using the power of stories to help students understand and remember the concept that you are trying to teach. If the concept that we are trying to teach does not have anything physical for us to use or show, analogies and stories help us link the abstract concept to things that the students already know.

Using knowledge organisers and mapping are methods supported by research (Fiorella and Mayer, 2016; Wellerman and Harg, 1991) as being effective tools to use as advanced organisers.

It is all about building connections for the students which will in turn increase their motivation due to them understanding what they are trying to learn and how it fits into the 'big picture'. They will also be able to pay attention to new information better due to building up their schemas. We need knowledge to gain knowledge.

Summariser

Reigeluth and Stein have set three specific parts of a summariser:

The way I interpreted the summariser is that it:

follows the explicit teaching strategy of modelled, guided and practice.

is a way of performing formative assessment by checking for understanding

can also be used as a method for retrieval practice.

Using the Elaboration Theory Model

The following two diagrams are taken out of, "In search of a better way to organize instruction: The elaboration theory," (Reigeluth, 1979) and give an overview of some key considerations that need to be taken before following the model. Firstly, what sort of continuum will you follow?

The general-to-detailed continuum refers primarily to a continuum formed by subdividing things (concepts or procedures)or by lumping things (concepts or procedures)together.

The simple-to-complex continuum refers primarily to a continuum formed by adding or removing things (principles or procedures).

The abstract-to-concrete continuum refers to tangibility, and there are two major types of tangibility.

This diagram shows the procedure to follow when designing the structure of your learning sequence.

Elaboration Theory in Action

Here are some examples of how teachers are using their knowledge of Elaboration Theory in the classroom.

A possible activity with new y12s is to take a single chemical reaction and use this as a basis to explore chemistry they learned at GCSE (particularly re. Paper 1). They then decide on a reaction and generate their own version. Used judiciously, it's possible with y11 too. pic.twitter.com/JQRugKH6ib
- Simon Flynn (@flynn_simon) December 28, 2020

Tom Sherrington has also written about it in his blog post Curriculum Notes #2: Big picture first: then zoom in.

Final takeaways

Zooming in on Elaboration Theory has given me more food for thought when designing units of work. It has given me a deeper understanding on why we need to "Zoom out" at the start, in order to build the connections with students pre-existing knowledge. Previously, I was unsure of whether or not to go into showing the 'final product' at the beginning of a program as I thought it could place extraneous load on the working memory of my students. However, this has cleared up that in-fact we are placing an extraneous load on them, if we don't 'Zoom out' because often the new concept is still an abstract one for the students.

Overview

Elaboration Theory is an instructional design theory that is more than just zooming out and then zooming in. It requires teachers to follow a structure that assists schema development.

The epitome is about presenting the "to-be-learned" information in an accessible way so that learners can build connections between their pre-existing knowledge and the new concept. Giving them the 'big picture' at the start can allow them to understand an abstract concept.

Elaboration Theory reminds us of the complex nature of learning. To learn a new concept/idea/topic is a generative process that requires many stages of elaboration and retrieval practice.

References
Carbonneau, K. J., Marley, S. C., & Selig, J. P. (2013). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of teaching mathematics with concrete manipulatives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 380-400. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031084

Fiorella, L., Mayer, R.E. Eight Ways to Promote Generative Learning. Educ Psychol Rev 28, 717-741 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9348-9

Kirschner, P.A. and Hendrick, C. 2020, "How Learning Happens: Seminal Works in Educational Psychology and What They Mean in Practice," Published March 3, 2020 by Routledge

Lovell, O. 2020. "Sweller's Cognitive Load Theory in Action." John Catt Educational

Reigeluth, Charles. (1979). In search of a better way to organize instruction: The elaboration theory (05). Journal of Instructional Development. 2. 8-15. 10.1007/BF02984374.

Reigeluth, C.M. Elaborating the elaboration theory. ETR&D 40, 80-86 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02296844

Willerman, M. and Mac Harg, R.A. (1991), The concept map as an advance organizer. J. Res. Sci. Teach., 28: 705-711. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660280807

Willingham, D.T. 2021. "Why Don't Students Like School? A Cognitive Scientist Answers Questions About How the Mind Works and What It Means for the Classroom. Second Edition." John Wiley & Sons Inc

Zuccolo, A., Spittle, M., & Pill, S. (2014). Game Sense Research in Coaching: Findings and Reflection s. University of Sydney Papers in Human Movement, Health and Coach Education (HMHCE), 3(Special Game Sense Edition), 15-30.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Zooming out to Zoom in on Elaboration Theory - Learning with Mr. Lee

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Elaboration Theory is an instructional design theory that is more than just zooming out and then zooming in. It requires teachers to follow a structure that assists schema development. This post looks at how teachers can best use Elaboration Theory to help the learner build connections in their knowledge base.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The science of why you have great ideas in the shower

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It has nothing to do with getting clean—and everything to do with your state of mind.