Reading about the Wonkfest earlier this week reminded me of the constant search for methods to “measure” “learning”.<\/p>\n
Robert Bjork says that learning and performance are distinct.\u00a0 Performance\u00a0is measurable but learning must be inferred from performance. Performance is easily observable whereas learning is not.<\/p>\n
Frequently, learning occurs but short term performance doesn\u2019t, and visa versa!<\/p>\n
According to Dylan Wiliam learning is:\u00a0\u201ca liminal process, at the boundary between control and chaos\u201d*<\/em>.\u00a0 But present performance is not a reliable indicator of learning. A student might appear to be making rapid progress without any real learning occurring.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n So these are some of the problems, but what can we do about it?<\/p>\n Robert Bjork provides some good advice:<\/p>\n “When you introduce things like variability, spacing, reducing the feedback, interleaving things to be learned rather than blocking the things to be learned; that appears to slow down the learning process and poses challenges but enhances long term retention and transfer.”<\/p>\n <\/p><\/blockquote>\n For more food for thought watch this video from Darren Mead:<\/p>\n