Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Joseph Williams – Bloomsburg Corporate Advisory Council Meeting

790 views

Published on

Talk on how Cognitive Science can be applied to corporate e-learning and instructional design. 30 minutes, at Bloombsburg Corporate Advisory Council Meeting. Covers problem-based learning, explanation, analogy, comparison, retrieval practice, testing effects, mixing effects, teaching Google search.

Published in: Education
  • Keep up the good work Joseph!!

    --Will Thalheimer
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

Joseph Williams – Bloomsburg Corporate Advisory Council Meeting

  1. 1. Using Cognitive Science to improve E-learning Joseph Jay WilliamsJoseph_williams AT berkeley DOT edu www.JosephJayWilliams.com 1
  2. 2. Education Research Landscape• Qualitative analyses• Quantitative studies & policy analysis• Cognitive Science: Experiments to assess different instructional strategies• E-learning <--------> Cognitive Science 2
  3. 3. Preview• Learning: “Adding” vs. “Integrating” information.• Before: Ask questions to get Problem-based learning.• During: Request Explanations & Comparisons.• After: Use assessments as instructional tools via the Testing Effect and Mixing Effect.• Increase motivation via a Growth Theory of intelligence.• www.josephjaywilliams.com/education 3
  4. 4. Learning: Adding information?• Bucket model of the mind• “Instructionism” 4
  5. 5. Learning for Transfer: Integrating information• Adding a new webpage to the internet BEFORE DURING AFTER 5
  6. 6. Before: Start with Questions & Problems• Problem Based Learning (Hmelo-Silver, 2006; Schwartz, 1998) How do you…? Is it possible to…? 6
  7. 7. During: Request explanations• Prompt people to explain “Why?”• Go beyond memorizing, to understand general principles (Williams & Lombrozo, 2010; 2012) Why is that a good solution? Why is it true that…? Why is it a mistake to…? 7
  8. 8. During: Request comparisons• Single example or case study• Compare multiple examples to grasp core principle (Gentner et al, 2003; Star & Rittle-Johnson, 2010) What are the similarities between these? How are they different? 8
  9. 9. After: Use Assessments as Instructional Tools • The “Testing Effect” (Roediger & Karpicke, 2006) Immediate test: Study+Study ~= Study+Test After hours, days, weeks: Study+Study < Study+Test Learners claim: Study+Study > Study+Test 9
  10. 10. After: Efficient Assessments use Mixing Effect • Mixing Effect (Rohrer, 2009) • Ten Benefits of Testing (Roediger et al, 2012) 10
  11. 11. Increasing motivation• Change their beliefs about intelligence (Dweck, 2006; Paunesku, Romero et al, 2012)• Do you agree that… – Your intelligence is something very basic about you that you can’t change very much. (Fixed Theory). – No matter how much intelligence you have, you can always change it quite a bit. (Growth Theory).• Emphasizing Growth theory: Work harder & learn from mistakes.• 2 lessons on Growth Theory boosts student GPA. 11
  12. 12. Review• Learning: “Adding” vs. “Integrating” information.• Before: Ask questions to get Problem-based learning.• During: Request Explanations & Comparisons.• After: Use assessments as instructional tools via the Testing Effect and Mixing Effect.• Increase motivation via a Growth Theory of intelligence.• www.josephjaywilliams.com/education• Joseph_Williams A T berkeley D O T edu 12

×