this episode of principal Center radio is brought to you by the project-based Learning Network Dr Amy Bader the director is a professional curriculum writer and the leading expert on standards-based pbl she trains teachers how to write highquality pbl units in the project-based learning curriculum developer certification program and she teaches leaders how to implement successful pbl initiatives in the project-based learning instructional leader program learn more at principal center.com pbl welcome to principal Center radio helping you build capacity for instructional leadership here is your host director of the principal Center Dr Justin Bader welcome everyone to principal
Center radio I'm your host Justin Bader and I'm honored to Welcome to the program Dr Carl hendrik Carl is professor at academica University of applied sciences in Amsterdam the Netherlands where he translates research findings into practical teaching strategies he taught English at the secondary level for 18 years and holds a PhD in education from Kings College London and is the author of three books including how Learning Happens seminal Works in educational psychology and what they mean in practice and now our future presentation Carl welcome to principal Center radio thank you for having me I've been
uh looking forward to speaking with you for quite some time because I know you have your finger on the pulse not only of the the research that affects education but the failure in education to learn from that research and the the many ways in which often we get it wrong we get some Basics wrong about how learning actually happens and I was very excited to see your book endorsed by Daniel Willingham the cognitive psychologist who's very well known in American Education circles as well as Dylan William talk to us a little bit about what you
saw happening in the field that prompted you and your co-author Paul kersner to write the book well it's a strange thing if you go to any University you'll find an education department that is fil with philosophers sociologists but very little in the way of cognitive science so you'll see this kind of divide between the psychology department and the education department and you know whatever about the philosophy of education and and sociology and and there may be important things to look at but what was really of concern to me as a teacher at the time was
well you know what of the key takeaways I'd want to know about uh how learning happens or what John sweller calls cognitive architecture specifically relating to things like memory how the brain processes stores retrieves information I found you know the longer I was going ahead and teaching that these things were really important and I was curious as to why I'd never heard of them and then I thought well I you know I'll do some further research in the field and I did a master's degree in modern literature so I did it on TS Elliot Joyce
stuff like that but then I decided to do a PhD in education and I again didn't encounter any of this and it it was really off my own bat that I encountered starting I think with probably Dan Willingham as you mentioned but then reading specifically about research probably beginning around the 1950s with George Miller to do with things like the limitations of working memory and I remember thinking God this is really important why is this not included in teacher education why is this not a part of teacher training and uh that kind of began my
journey probably 10 years ago so I then became really interested in well how do we democratize This research how do we get this into the hands of teachers and how can they use this so that was kind of the start of my journey probably 10 years ago yeah very interesting and I would Echo much of what you said about reading Dan willingham's work another turning point for me was reading Natalie wexler's book the knowledge Gap where she talks about how we've really downplayed knowledge which to me it like makes total sense that we would downplay
memory that we would not really value an understanding of how memory works and how we acquire new information take us into a little bit of what you think Educators need to understand about memory that we're simply not taught because I would say the same thing that I went through all of my education you know all the way through without ever learning any of this as part of education courses and I did take some psychology courses and and got some of that there but yeah it's absolutely not part of what we expect teachers to acquire in
the process of becoming teachers so yeah help us understand what we need to just at a high level about memory and kind of how the architecture of the brain works in that regard there's really three major paradigms about learning that we have one is behaviorism which is this idea that we can measure learning through external observable behaviors we can condition it really not interested in any internal models of the Mind the second one is constructivism which is a belief that each individual constructs their own knowledge their understanding of knowledge this has its roots in r
so but it really gets moving in the turn of the century in the US with dwey and then p in Europe and then specifically around the 1950s where Educators really got hold of the work of votsi and Bruner and out of that tradition then becomes this broader tradition of minimally guided instruction the idea that you learn things best for yourself when you discovered for yourself or you know things are not taught to you and that's kind of the default position you know if you see any Hollywood movies you'll see that you know the kind of
authoritative teachers a bad figure if you just look inside yourself if you just kind of figure things out for yourself that's best the third major Paradigm is cognitivism which I suppose the the real roots of that is eing house in the 1880s but really in the 50s with people like George Miller whose famous paper the magical number plus or minus seven plus or minus two measures the limitations of working memory built on that then you get these models of the Mind badly in hitch they really come up with this idea of working memory as opposed
to short-term memory you have other figures like toling episodic memory and then in the 1980s we get John sweller and John sweller comes up with cognitive Lo Theory John sweller really has been working in this field for for probably 50 years and the basic premise is very simple we have evolved to acquire information in two ways one we can learn it from uh other people and that's really our superpower as mamalian species no other species do that we can acquire extraordinary amounts of complex information from other people in other words if we're told it or
shown it the second ways we can figure things out for ourselves and that's really inefficient and really a poor way of trying to learn specifically complex things so L Theory tells us that really based on that and based on the limitations of working memory in the relative as far as we know it infinite store of long-term memory more stuff you have in your long-term memory the more creative you can be the more your your working memory is freed up and the best way to do that is fully guided instruction at least in the initial stages
so if you want to learn stuff or if you want kids to learn stuff particularly if it's stuff they don't want to learn like quadratic equations or Shakespeare the most kind of evidenced way of doing that is to show them is to tell them is to explain to them very clearly and then in the latter stages when they have built up a store in their long-term memory then they can do uh independent practice in education for whatever reason we have that backwards the idea that you can discover things for yourself that teachers talking to students
as a bad thing and I would say that that belief is the default position in many areas of education today it's changing in different territories but certainly it's what Richard Mayer would call the dominant view of how learning happens and it's fundamentally wrong it's interesting as you ran through that list of about half a dozen names you know all of our listeners will be familiar with Dewey and perhaps p and voty and I haven't heard the name voty in a couple of years but I I remember hearing it constantly throughout my my entire education but
I don't think I had heard you know prior to your book of any of the the authors that you mentioned whose work we'll get into today about how the brain actually learns and if I'm understanding what you're saying correctly it's not false that we do learn on our own we can figure things out we have that capacity and and certainly understanding you know human development and how people learn on their own you know might be worth knowing but as you said it's grossly inefficient compared to what we have learned from cognitive science and you said
cognitivism do I have that word right yeah let's get into that a little bit more because there's some very interesting research around working memory and kind of an interesting backstory to phone numbers take us into that if you would well George Miller was tasked by the L Labs I think in the ' 50s he was asked what's the optimum number of digits that you would have in a phone number so he did a series of experiments quite weird experiments actually you would think that you would simply get people to you know well how many things
can you remember but he did a series of experiments around things like musical notes musical tones color hues and what he was trying to get out was how many novel units of information we can hold in our working memory at any given moment ebing house did a series of experiments on himself in the 1880s where he looked at sort of nonsense syllables thre letter words now it on the one hand it was a really good idea because he was isolating what he could remember not remember if you ask someone to remember the the word cat
it's so confounded or so influenced by what you already know that he wanted to kind of isolate those things and see well how long could he remember them what he didn't realize was that's not really how memory works we don't remember things verbatim memory is not a tape recorder it's not a file drawer where you pull things out and again this was my journey was really getting to grips with this memory is really reconstructive and in the book I wrote a chapter on Frederick Bartlett and his work showed that we really understand things through what
we already know memory is semantic in nature every time we recall or retrieve something we relay down that memory and that's kind of where the Learning Happens which is why retrieval is such a powerful learning event so Miller did these experiments and he sort of found out the optimum number is five plus or minus two sometimes seven sometimes lower and that was the number then that became the standard however many digits it was in in the 1950s yeah yeah so when we transition from the you know Transylvania 65000 format to the modern in the US
we have the three-digit area code and then a 7-digit phone number that comes from that research on the working memory so Carl talk to us a little bit more about how working memory plays into how we teach because certainly the whole constructivist perspective and the idea that you know making meaning is what matters downplays the role of memory in the first place and we've been taught you know that higher order thinking is better memory and certainly memory izing is bad but memory you know just does not play a very important role in the leading theories
that are circulating in the education profession take us into more that a little bit more well you know as my colleague Paul Krishna would say constructivism is is best thought of as a an epistemology or philosophy not so much a pedagogy and that's really where the confusion occurs I think it's true in the broadest sense that we do construct meaning ourselves so that's consistent with what we know about memory that we encounter novel information or knowledge and it must link it must stick to something that's already there actually Dan William is a wonderful phrase for
this understanding is remembering in Disguise this idea that when you have this feeling of oh right so it's like this that's really us drawing together different strands of our memory so that's you know the more stuff we have in in our long-term memory the more we can understand the world and the incredible thing is that working memory the limitations of working memory are obviated by what's in our long-term memory right now I'm speaking to not even really thinking about what I'm saying it's all automated I'm using an incredible amount of words phrases language letters meaning
all relatively effortless but if I was to you know speak in another language a or if I was to talk about something that I didn't understand or know about all of that would be extremely limited it would be kind of narrowed down when we're teaching kids stuff in school that's what their experience is so their working memory is the kind of bottom Leck it's the driver through which learning happens it occurred to me you know how do we leverage that that's really what cognitive load theory is looking at you know how do we get around
that what are the techniques that we can use what are the ways in which we can circumvent those limitations and you know minimally guided instruction techniques such as Discovery learning elements of inquiry learning they're just inconsistent with what we know about how the mind works the limitations of working memory and then you have this extraordinary again these are models and all models are wrong but some are more useful than others schemas of knowledge and knowledge is an extraordinary thing and it's it really is only in education departments or or in C certain circles that it's
seen is not essential or the value of explicit instruction and teaching things well it's so interesting Carl that we have heard so little about working memory and cognitive load Theory you know what we hear a lot about as we become Educators and and work in the field of education is blooms taxonomy and we hear the idea that higher order tasks are good students should be doing more higher order learning and maybe less of the lower level kind of work that memory would focus on and really a downplaying of memory and knowledge and seeing those as
kind of the worst form of learning take us into cognitive load Theory a bit more and what it means for helping students acquire new information efficiently because that question of efficiency I think has to matter right like if we have students learn at on10th the speed they could be learning because we're committed to you know a more constructivist approach like we're going to miss some real opportunities to help students move forward so what does cognitive load theory mean for education so I think you know what we've seen really is the Dead's Poe ification of teaching
where it's sort of seen as this inspirational wonderful thing at a kind of very like superficial level or at a very cursory level and if you ask anyone you know the average person on the street they'll say well you know I kind of learn things best if I do it for myself or I'll I'll you know they might even talk about debunked ideas like learning styles but really the best predictor of performance in any given domain I is the presence or absence of knowledge in that domain so we talk about thinking skills or 21st century
skills but you know what are you going to think with and and what what you're going to think with is knowledge about that particular topic that particular domain otherwise we're into a kind of a something Supernatural where you just kind of like magically you know come up with some great thing and that's maybe true of a very small percentage of people who just have an innate ability to autodidacts or you know very small percentage of people the vast majority of people really need explicit instruction in a given domain and then particular practice cognitive load theory
is based on a number of things one of them is David gir's work on evolutionary psychology he makes a distinction between two types of knowledge biologically primary knowledge biologically secondary biologically primary knowledge are things we've kind of evolved to do so you know teamwork talking is a good example I have three-year-old twins and a six-year-old and you know just watching them learn to talk and as any parent will experience it's extraordinary how they just kind of you hear them use phrases and you go well what you know how did you know to pick that up
they just have this innate ability to do it but then I noticed with my Elder story that when it came to learning how to read it was a completely different thing and she did not pick that up and she needed very specific and explicit forms of instruction to learn letters you know reading is a relatively new thing in our evolutionary history talking is not so biologically secondary knowledge then are things like reading uh you know academic knowledge expertise and those things you only acquire them through explicit instruction from an expert so we're really talking about
the stuff that we want kids to learn in school now cognitive load theory has a number of effects and the interesting thing about cogn cognitive load theory is that a lot of research from cognitive science is done in a laboratory so there's it's a there's a broad extrapolation of how that would work in a classroom and and criticism of it is fair because what works in the laboratory with undergraduate students is is not always was going to work with you know sixth graders in a Friday afternoon but a lot of the work in cognitive L3
is done in classrooms it's done in the field and what we find is that there are a number of effects associated with the theory for example the work example effect which is um you know a very basic thing and I think which most teachers know which is you show students fully work through or partly work through examples the teacher does it themsel shows them how to do it you do it kind of together or partial thing and then the student does it which is how we teach math right everybody's experienced that in math but maybe
not any other subject huh well that's the thing yeah and certainly in the humanities in English for example English is often has some of the worst I'm an English teacher has some of the worst examples of instruction maybe you know some of the answers or some of what we want students to learn is a little bit more ambiguous and a little bit more philosophical nature and that's fine but you can't really Discovery learn your way through aell or Hamlet or you can do it but it will look pretty awful and so cognitive load Theory then
says that well at a very simple way clear explicit instruction in the early stages of a given domain and then a gradual handing over scaffolding and then independent practice this as you know Paul Ry said in the book The Paradox about Independent Learning is that Independent Learning is a bad way to become an independent learner so we all want students to be autonomous working independently it's just that within the field of cognitive science there's a we have a very different way about how to get there and the way to get there is often counterintuitive that's
the thing about learning is that it's highly highly counterintuitive the things that we think would work don't and this is why I think we we would call it a science because you know pre The Germ theory of disease there was this sense well you know if you have something bad in your blood you need to do some blood letting or maybe there's an external Supernatural force that we need to ask to help us or maybe there's bad spirits or XY Z what and then we discovered there was a germ theory of disease and you had
the counterintuitive thing of well you know if you are kind of vaccinated or inoculated for something by getting a small amount of that thing that's you know effective and I think the same is true of learning in the sense that things are counterintuitive so Robert bork's work on desirable difficulties shows us that for example learning in the early stages can often feel like you're not learning so things that lead to long-term learning often don't feel like learning and paradoxically things which do feel like you're learning stuff are often very shortlived and and don't work now
we accept that in in in so many different other fields so everybody knows if you want to lose weight if you want to get healthy you need a little bit of short-term pain you need to go to the gym you need to do things that you instinctively don't want to do you need to when you kind of start training and you start running everything in your body is screaming no this is terrible get back on the sofa you want to eat the chips you want to eat the the cake you don't want to eat the
salad you don't want to eat the lentils but we know through evidence and through science that actually these things are although they feel bad in the short term they're much better for long-term gain but yet we don't seem to have understood this about learning that you know things in the short term and and we can maybe talk a little bit about what those things are but you experience this period of what Bor calls kind of an illusion of confidence so you have this feeling of oh I know this I'm you know so if you're kind
of talking about a topic in a group or if you're reading it and highlighting it or whatever you can have this feeling of oh I'm learning this I know this is fine but really you don't and conversely when you're forced to repeat it or retrieve it or learn it it can feel like oh I'm confused but actually the opposite is true so learning is counterintuitive cognitive load Theory takes this into account it has tested a lot of these things and you know probably the biggest piece of Education research ever done was done in the US
in the 60s uh project follow through the results were completely unambiguous and they were com and it was done over about 11e period and the results were that direct instruction was the most effective way of getting from students from a Tob in a particular domain of knowledge and weirdly it had a better effect on things like self-efficacy and their belief about themselves so that was another counterintuitive thing about the finding much more effective in Discovery learning inquiry learning minimally guided instruction but for whatever reason we've not adopted that and I think it's to the great
detriment of many students one thing you say in the book I believe is that novices are not many experts what does that mean well there's a belief I think in certain circles that children are sort of like many adults tried to avoid social media I use it to sort of Flesh through ideas and connect with people that I like but as you know Justin you say something on social media and the next thing you're in this hellscape of idiocy you know I see things like a recent one was why should we have kids sitting in
rows after all you know in no workplace in the world would you sit in rows and the thinking there is well in order to prepare kids for the workplace we should treat them like you know adults well if that were true then should we also treat them about alcohol about driving cars about adult relationships and all the other inappropriate things um no so things that we would be deem appropriate for kids such as certain foods uh bedtime certain behaviors that belief comes from this idea well kids are many uh adults so they're kind of pre-formed
and it really comes I think from rouso and his idea that that kids are innately good and then you just need to get out of the way as an adult you just need to allow them to discover that goodness within themselves um again I think this is you know it's another idea that's pretty dominant within society and again you know deeply deeply flawed it's not that children are good or bad but children will flourish in an environment where there are boundaries yes where there's love where there's regard where they're cared for where they're really looked
after and respected but you know as any parent will know without rules and boundaries kids will often not be good with others but it's not good for themselves and again the Paradox of learning is that sometimes through constraints comes creativity and comes this sense of expiration and fun so yeah I I think that idea that kids are little small adults and we should kind of you know pull that out of them it's nonsense as kind of as a society of responsible adults we need to provide the best environment in which kids can flourish and unfortunately
in many schools that's one where there is an absence of rules and where the very worst behaved kids are the most rewarded and the students who are the best behaved are often the ones who who suffer the most um which is a shame the desks and Rose discourse has been an interesting lens for that because we tend to think you know on the basis of really nothing more than Vibes that rows are bad that sitting kids around a cluster of desks where they're all facing one another they're not facing the teacher they're spending a lot
of time doing things in groups having discussions doing kind of less structured tasks not getting explicit instruction you know Vibes wise that has felt better to us at least in you know kind of American Progressive education circles but from the studies in your book that that you review and I I do want to talk about the structure of the book it sounds like that is not the best way to produce learning and not the best way to produce The Vibes that we want right we want kids to enjoy the school day we hear phrases like
drill and kill to kind of downplay explicit instruction we hear you know Vibes like constructivism you know seem to create the kind of experience that we want but you're saying they don't really create the learning that we want and that is not the experience that we want students to get right I would really encourage any of your listeners to go and Google Sig freed Angelman his lessons in the 1960s so the originator of direct instruction which most people think is just lecturing nothing could be further from the truth go and look at Zig freed englman
his lessons in the 1960s where he's teaching his whole thing was how do we teach disenfranchised disadvantaged kids often in inner city environments how do we get them good at maths and reading and if you look at those lessons they are unbelievably engaging unbelievably fun the kids are so happy they have this feeling like they're learning things he's constantly asking questions one of the great misconceptions about direct instruction and the variant explicit direct instruction from Hollingsworth and Yara and they're even more sort of extreme about this I would say that it will come as a
big surprise to many people to learn that in explicit direct instruction the guidance is that you should not go longer than two minutes without checking in on the students in other words the teacher shouldn't talk for longer than two minutes minutes before they check for understanding and there's very clear ways of doing that so you want this constant interaction and engagement between uh the teacher and the student and it's just overwhelmingly powerful and so what you get is you get on particularly on standardized tests you get these dramatic scores where there is explicit direct instruction
and then what the kind of and again I I don't like the way many educations have hijacked the word Progressive for me direct instruction is Progressive if we mean by Progressive something that is emancipatory that helps the most needy members of our society then that method is explicit direct instruction it is not uh inquiry learning where you see inquiry learning is often with the most privileged end of our culture I have visited many schools around the world including in the US I've been to places like Philips xter Academy where they have harness learning in classrooms
of 12 students where they have uh extremely knowledgeable able students zero teacher instruction and the kids just talk for you know an hour and that's great if you have very able students you know who's parents are lawyers and doctors and philosophers and all the rest of it and there's classrooms you know you can afford to have 12 in a classroom but for the vast majority of kids that's just not how Learning Happens so desks and rows again another weird thing many kids are introverts you know many kids don't really like the clamor the noise they
want to read they want to read a book they want to read their own thoughts they want to reflect and think about what they've learned they want to listen to the teacher and they're deprived that because as you say just Vibes this idea well you know if they're sitting in groups and they're kind of talking then that's how Learning Happens certainly you know in the first five years of my career it was the idea you know when we talk about constructivism it's really this idea that learning is dialogic which it is of course but it
doesn't mean that kids learn through talking through each other I was always struck by a brilliant book called uh the hidden lives of Learners by Graeme nuttle he did research where he showed that 80% of what kids learn they learned from each other which sounds great until you learn that 80% of that is wrong so all these kids sitting in groups and tables and talking to each other it's often a very kind of superficial form of learning so again like you say desks and rows it's seen as a Draconian thing direct instruction is as a
Draconian thing but nothing could be further from the truth it's a powerful an explicit direct instruction classroom is a dynamic fun engag in place to be but again it has been very much sidelined in contemporary education very well said wonder if we could talk just briefly about the structure of the book and then where it ends up every chapter and there are quite a few chapters 30 or so is organized around a specific paper probably frankly that none of us have ever heard of before and you very quickly explain you know why you should read
this article what it's about what it says and then what it means for teaching and and learning help us think about these papers like how did you come across them and like why have we never heard of so many of these papers Paul Krishner who I wrote the book with he's an incredible man on in many ways he is incredibly knowledgeable by cognitive science he's been working in the field for 40 years he's originally from New York moved to the Netherlands and um we had worked on a few things before and he asked me to
write this book with him and and the idea was that we would take research and and make it available to teachers so we kind of had this idea of well what are the greatest hits you know like what's the like the Rolling Stone top 100 albums what's the education version of that and we kind of spoke to a few people and we thought well we want to take this from the field of Education psychology cognitive science and you know Paul had a pretty good idea of what that was but we spoke to a few people
and we kind of made this list we had about 50 papers originally and they were their papers or their chapters and books now some of them are as you say known Within some s but the vast majority of them as you say are not known we kind of thought well what would we want teachers to know about how the brain learns like what do the seminal works so we went back and we looked at research and papers and we thought okay we'll post the abstract from the work and then we'll write a little kind of
introduction to why you should read this then we'll break down what's in the chapter and then we'll kind of try to link it to the classroom in terms of what teachers need to know and just this year actually we you know when we wrote the book and then we wrote a follow-up book but really the how Learning Happens book was an attempt to bridge the gap but in subsequent years we kind of realized that there's still so much work to do to translate that into different classrooms so we came up with this online course that
uh is going to be launching it's been pilot tested in the US right now but we're going to launch it in the new year and we're going to update that regularly and the idea is to really think about those original papers and that original research and you know what if you're a fifth grade teacher what if you're a high school teacher what if you teach history what all the different permutations how would you harness This research what would be the thing that would be helpful to do and really to help teachers have a a pretty
good mental model of how Learning Happens so that they can make a decision this is about really the empowerment of teachers like the the when I look at myself and I just go back to that guy in the first couple of years of teaching who really didn't know any of this and was just flailing around blindly and just kind of going with what he had learned in you know through education theorists and what would I want that person to know and what we're talking about is probabilities we're talking about the Best Bets this is the
best available evidence we have about how Learning Happens about our learning sticks and the ways in which teachers can what are the levers we can pull as Educators to help students learn things so that was an idea for the book and this year Justin I've been fortunate to travel around talking to many teachers and many environments and what strikes me and also to the work that you do is how few teachers know this and also the thirst for this you know many teachers will say wow you know I was Dan Willingham I was at a
conference with Dan Willingham and and he was you know he he was telling me how he's just constantly surprised at how many teachers go i' never heard this before you know why had I had I not known this so that's the mission and and that's the task and I'm happy be ungrateful to be doing the work yeah and ironically and and frustratingly the part that I think most of us will be the most familiar with is actually the chapter toward the end on myths you have a chapter called the 10 deadly sins in education and
then the lethal mutations The Dirty Dozen that's mostly what we're taught the rest of this book is new information to us talk to us a little bit about the myths and the lethal mutations that have somehow become much more widely known and thought of as than the rest of the book you know this is about an inch thick book full of foundational studies take us into those myths and why they're so pervasive well probably the most egregious example is learning styles you know if you walk out in the street now and ask anyone you know
would you say you're a visual learner or you know they'd go oh you know yeah I I guess I learn best through you know the idea is that with learning styles is not that we have learning preferences which may or may not be true for example you may learn best some people like to listen to audiobooks some people like to see things visually the theory claims that if you attenuate instruction or if you plan your lessons to meet the style or the learning preference of the student that they will learn it better in other words
if you're a visual learner then I need to plan what I'm teaching you to be Visual and many of us were explicitly required to do that as part of our teacher training and you know lesson plans that we had to turn in absolutely required long after this idea had been debunked in the research long long after Justin long after and you know incredibly inefficient I mean I I remember effectively writing planning three lessons for one lesson one for the auditory Learners one for the visual Learners one for the kinesthetic Learners you know the Learners who
have to learn by moving around really no evidence for this whatsoever there is evidence that if information is presented in kind of two channels so visual so if if you're teaching math for example having a you know a circle with the different fractions and the shape there strong evidence for that again think about how stupid it is if you let's say someone's an auditory learner and you want to teach them about the continent of Europe should you do an audio book of a map you know it's just absolutely ridiculous it's a property of the material
much more than a property of the learner exactly there's many such myths the idea that you were right brain and left brain and again you know weirdly a lot of these things they have a little grain of Truth in them so it it seems like it could be right but of course it's not these ideas ideas like them are really really bad for or things like Equity things like inclusion things like the type of words that many Progressive Educators feel that they own which I think is you know a shame so we just we wrote
this chapter which is you know here's things to avoid but I would say actually the worst example of all of this is the idea that you you learn things best through you know discovering things for yourself that's maybe the worst myth of all you know there's things that are for example the idea that only 10% of communication is verbal you know just absolute nonsense Bloom's taxonomy in fact Bloom himself later said that triangle it's nothing to do with me he never uh you know he never said anything to do with that so there's all these
myths about learning and and again it's the lwh hanging fruit and I think as a profession we are many decades behind other fields engineering medicine so on so forth and until we are a you know truly professionalized profession I think that we're unfortunately letting down many kids and many Educators and teachers as well who are doing things and planning lessons that are just you know who who are doing extremely difficult work in in difficult circumstances and not having the effect so I'm I'm proud to be uh part of of a group of people who are
seeking to help that like yourself and uh you know a lot more work to be done I greatly appreciate your contributions I'm buying your other book today and hope we can talk about that sometime but the book is how Learning Happens seminal Works in educational psychology and what they mean in practice Carl Hendrick thank you so much for joining me on principal Center radio it's been a pleasure thank you Justin thanks for listening to principal Center radio for more great episodes subscribe on our website at principal center.com radio [Music]
