![]() ![]() ![]() Furthermore, we shall argue that the current Learning Pyramids are ill suited for research as well as for educational practices. ![]() We shall also argue that it is unlikely that the Learning Pyramids originated from empirical studies, because they predate by decades the entire field of experimental retention studies. We shall present the findings from a search for the original source of these models, and demonstrate that primitive versions were published in the early 1850s. We shall use this as a blanket term for all these different models. There are several versions of this notion, and those that go by the name of “Learning Pyramid” are probably among the best known. This article addresses a similar myth of learning psychology that has circulated widely among educators as well as educational researchers: a family of models that ranks the retention effects from various presentation and perception modalities. Some of these myths even reach academic status (Kirschner, Citation2017). It is not uncommon among educators to believe that we use only 10 per cent of the brain, and have different learning styles (for these and other learning myths see Geake, Citation2008 Goswami, Citation2006 Howard-Jones, Citation2014 Kirschner & Merriënboer, Citation2013 Rato, Abreu, & Castro-Caldas, Citation2013). Uncorroborated and even refuted claims about educational psychology and educational neuroscience appear repeatedly in educational studies, practices and debates. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |