Happy new year! Found this via Dominique Sluijsmans:
The basic idea has been repeated since Dunlosky et al. (2013): highlighting is bad if you want to use it as a study method. This new meta-analysis by Ponce et al. makes another sound as it distinguishes between student- and teacher-generated highlighting on the one hand and highlighting for memorization versus comprehension on the other.… Read More How highlighting sometimes can work
This is a must-hear podcast about learning how to read – or better how not to learn how to read. There’s an idea about how children learn to read that’s held sway in schools for more than a generation — even though it was proven wrong by cognitive scientists decades ago. Teaching methods based on… Read More Check this podcast about why a lot of children can’t read: Sold a Story
This is the kind of study that leaves you a bit baffled: Can one brain hemisphere perform the functions of the typical two hemispheres? Typically, in adults, there are right and left hemispheric biases for face and word recognition, respectively, a division of labor that emerges over development. Here, face and word recognition were examined… Read More “Word and face recognition can be adequately supported with half a brain”
A guest post by Jeroen Janssen from Universiteit Utrecht: According to mindset theory, pupils who have a growth mindset perform better than those with a fixed mindset. Students with a growth mindset believe that their qualities and abilities are not fixed but can improve through practice and effort, for example. This theory has led to… Read More New meta-analysis has strong critiques on studies on mindset interventions (Jeroen Janssen)
Over the past few days, I’ve read some interesting stuff online that I think could be of interest to you. Stuart Ritchie wrote an excellent post on Substack about Growth Mindset, much in line with what we wrote in our More Urban Myths about Learning and Education-book. But he also talks about the decline effect:… Read More Nice to know and read: growth mindset, MI and non-significant
This new study aims to predict which people will change their minds about contentious scientific issues when presented with evidence-based information. Quite relevant lately… From the press release: A study in Science Advances presents a framework to accurately predict if a person will change their opinion about a certain topic. The approach estimates the amount of dissonance,… Read More Who can you convince with scientific evidence? And who not?
One could describe science as organized scepticism or systematic doubt. So maybe it will not come as a surprise that overconfidence can be linked to anti-scientific views. But because you never can be sure without research and data, a new study examined this claim. From the press release: Historically, the scientific community has relied on… Read More Probably no surprise here: overconfidence bolsters anti-scientific views
One of the handy things one has as a scientist is that there are tools that warn you if one of your works has been cited. This helps you to discover new studies that build further on what you are doing. This is how I discovered this new mixed-methods study by John Rogers and Anise… Read More “Are University Faculty to Blame for the Prevalence of Educational Myths?”
My friend and co-author Casper Hulshof sent me this one: So pleased to have had my article published toady (and thanks to @Keith_Turvey for the stimulating discussion leading to it). Perhaps we shouldn't be so quick to completely dismiss 'old' theories or myths but instead see what they can still offer. #LearningStyles pic.twitter.com/0LvJWZZYe5 — Sir… Read More Funny on Friday April 1st: this is the best joke I received today and it’s about learning styles!