Great questions in this post Chris. The key point is that teachers should try to find the fastest way to teach a concept, which means the very fewest chunks. This is so different from the typical teacher mindset and CPD. Models at standard, good and excellent are great places to start. So are turning your content, where possible, into stories. And obviously, the more is in long term memory, the better those schemas will work for new knowledge - so retrieval is key. Small steps, as in real life, just make everyone take much longer to get there.
Thanks Dominic. Agree we need to question the blanket advice about chunk size. Is smaller always better? It depends on the learner, the class, the material and crucially – as you say – what’s already in long-term memory.
How long it takes to reach the destination matters, but for me it’s also about the journey. Curiosity is a way to help students along that path, and it just so happens that being curious helps new material stick, according to some of the best recent research. Love your idea of using stories, too. Narrative is a great way to spark students’ curiosity about new material.
I also wondered if you'd come across two (more useful?) concepts coined under the crazily elastic construct of scaffolding in education: hard scaffold and soft scaffold. Look them up. I think these concepts help to clarify what what we're talking about in discussions about 'scaffolding' - which I usually find annoyingly vague!
Another great addition, thanks Kylie! Agree that ‘scaffolding’ as a broad term is often unhelpful. Again, added as a footnote. If you’ve ever considered a role as an (unfortunately unpaid) editor/proofreader, let me know!
I enjoyed reading this, Chris. Thanks. It might interest you to know that chunking in cognitive psychology actually means something different to what it's now widely interpreted to mean in education: mentally grouping details together into LARGER more meaningful clusters of information 😊 https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/psychology/chunking-psychology/
Thanks for pointing this out, Kylie. It seems to connect well with the idea of element interactivity. It’s really interesting to see how the original concepts are transformed when they’re applied to classroom practice – I wonder whether this happens in other domains too. Added as a footnote…
I've always assumed it was an inaccurate understanding of chunking that just caught on! But that's probably a form of unconscious bias - privileging my own disciplinary knowledge (as a psych academic in teacher education). It actually erks me sometimes but I have stopped correcting my students. I tell myself this new conceptualisation of chunking still serves a purpose 😌 I agree with you though! Things like cognitive load and (so called) chunking do seem to be hyped up disproportionately relative to other equally or more important considerations in the psychology of learning.
Exactly - models are useful, but when one is privileged we lose sight of other ways of thinking about learning. And 'good teaching' can become narrowed to fit in with the constraints of a particular model.
Great questions in this post Chris. The key point is that teachers should try to find the fastest way to teach a concept, which means the very fewest chunks. This is so different from the typical teacher mindset and CPD. Models at standard, good and excellent are great places to start. So are turning your content, where possible, into stories. And obviously, the more is in long term memory, the better those schemas will work for new knowledge - so retrieval is key. Small steps, as in real life, just make everyone take much longer to get there.
Thanks Dominic. Agree we need to question the blanket advice about chunk size. Is smaller always better? It depends on the learner, the class, the material and crucially – as you say – what’s already in long-term memory.
How long it takes to reach the destination matters, but for me it’s also about the journey. Curiosity is a way to help students along that path, and it just so happens that being curious helps new material stick, according to some of the best recent research. Love your idea of using stories, too. Narrative is a great way to spark students’ curiosity about new material.
I also wondered if you'd come across two (more useful?) concepts coined under the crazily elastic construct of scaffolding in education: hard scaffold and soft scaffold. Look them up. I think these concepts help to clarify what what we're talking about in discussions about 'scaffolding' - which I usually find annoyingly vague!
Another great addition, thanks Kylie! Agree that ‘scaffolding’ as a broad term is often unhelpful. Again, added as a footnote. If you’ve ever considered a role as an (unfortunately unpaid) editor/proofreader, let me know!
Ha. I'd be honoured ☺️
Watch out - I might take you up on it 😄
I enjoyed reading this, Chris. Thanks. It might interest you to know that chunking in cognitive psychology actually means something different to what it's now widely interpreted to mean in education: mentally grouping details together into LARGER more meaningful clusters of information 😊 https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/psychology/chunking-psychology/
Thanks for pointing this out, Kylie. It seems to connect well with the idea of element interactivity. It’s really interesting to see how the original concepts are transformed when they’re applied to classroom practice – I wonder whether this happens in other domains too. Added as a footnote…
I've always assumed it was an inaccurate understanding of chunking that just caught on! But that's probably a form of unconscious bias - privileging my own disciplinary knowledge (as a psych academic in teacher education). It actually erks me sometimes but I have stopped correcting my students. I tell myself this new conceptualisation of chunking still serves a purpose 😌 I agree with you though! Things like cognitive load and (so called) chunking do seem to be hyped up disproportionately relative to other equally or more important considerations in the psychology of learning.
Exactly - models are useful, but when one is privileged we lose sight of other ways of thinking about learning. And 'good teaching' can become narrowed to fit in with the constraints of a particular model.