Generating and Testing Hypotheses

The reading on “Generating and Testing Hypotheses” relates to constuctivism in that the student who is going to generate a hypothesis must understand certain facts before he can even hypothesize, and therefore must search out these facts in an active manner. After attempting to organize and understand these facts, he must then construct his hypothesis, and formulate a way to test it. All of this is very active and student-centered learning. And an artifact, in the form of an experiment, or a survey, or a report, can be presented to a class, or placed on display, or published on a blog.

At a deeper level, the generation of a hypothesis draws from a student’s current schema, or overall view of the world, whereas the testing of the hypothesis may very well cause a student to feel what Orey referred to as disequilibration (a term coined, along with the following few, by Seymore Popper) – a feeling of discomfort because of a new fact that doesn’t fit into the student’s world view. This discomfort can be relieved either by assimilation of the new fact into the student’s current schema, or by a process called accommodation, where the student actually adjusts his world view to accommodate the new fact. All of these processes are just what is meant by constructivism, which in the words of Orey is “a theory of knowledge stating that each individual actively constructs his own meaning [of the world].”

My field of physics (and I suppose any field of study for that matter) actually grows by the generation and testing of hypotheses. And the history of physics is rife with examples the battles between assimilation and accommodation among the scientists of all eras, with the discovery of new facts that did not fit into the neat schemas of the times.

Cognitive learning theory: Concept-mapping and digital media

Having seen Dr. Orey’s lecture, and listened to his comments on the “dual coding hypothesis” (which basically hypothesizes that when you see an image of something, not only does your brain store that image but it also formulates a language-oriented label for that image in another portion of your brain, thus creating more than one network path to that memory) I see how important it is to include graphics in my PowerPoints. Since the internet is a virtually infinite source of graphic images, animations, photographs, virtual tours, sounds, and videos of just about any subject, it is easy to incorporate these into my lectures, which might otherwise be even more boring.

Concept-mapping, which I have never used before, appears to be a good way for students to take a complicated group of interrelated facts and form them into a personally coherent, structured system that may be easier for them to retrieve from memory than any system I might present to them. The map they produce is a way for them to graphically build connections (which fits into the network model of cognitive learning theory). Their map may contain more information than their short-term memory is capable of assimilating, thus assisting them in building their networks and connections at a higher level than without this technological tool.

Behaviorism: Alive and kicking on the web

I enjoyed testing out each of the behaviorism-based online drilling programs referenced in this week’s resources. All of these technological tools make use of practice and reinforcement. They represent the same “programmed instruction” developed by B. F. Skinner and the behaviorists in the 60s, but use contemporary technology. In total, they illustrate the wide range of capabilities offered by the web for drill and practice. WebMATH and English Grammar 101 were both very basic, but, I think, utilitarian. Their score-keeping capabilities made for quick feedback. The DC Physics site was more basic, and didn’t evaluate your responses as did the math and the grammar programs, though it supplied you with the correct answers. My favorite site, because of the graphics and the sound, was the Social Studies Tutor. It was also the most difficult to use because of the more advanced topics it tried to teach. The map skills were basic and the tutorials for these were clear. But the section on “Recognizing Bias,” for example, gave hints that were not too helpful, simply because of the complexity of the skill. The section on “Analyzing Images” was also subject to various interpretations. For practice and drill, then, I think simple programs are best. I was intrigued by Pitler’s use of the spreadsheet to show students how their achievement is directly related to their effort. Not only does it illustrate to students the importance of effort, but it also illustrates the use of the spreadsheet (if you don’t give students a template, and you have each kid make his own sheet). This is a very cheap, creative, and productive way to make an old program do a new thing.