Week+5+Discussions

Team Prompt: Whether and how Barnett & Ceci’s taxonomy is consistent with or inconsistent with the ways in which Posner & Rothbart (2007) and Dahlin & al. (2008) would characterize transfer.

Heather's notes:


 * Barnett and Ceci’s (2008) and Posner & Rothbart (2007)**


 * Same:**

Can we transfer what we learn? How similar does the learning context have to be to the transfer context? Is this independent of the content we wish to apply? These are a few of the questions that have animated psychologists’ long-standing interest in the topic of transfer. (Barnett and Ceci, 2002). Transfer is an important for understanding learning and performance. The definition and assessment of performance models often turn on whether learned behaviors are permanent and, if so, whether they are applicable in novel contexts. Transfer is that of the impact of formal schooling. Schooling does show some transferable benefits, although the exact nature of the skills transferred is unclear. If schooling has positive effects on measures other than those directly taught, this could be construed as evidence of transfer. Results indicated that being out of school when others of your cohort are in school decreases your IQ. Although non-experimental evidence such as this does not reveal what the particular skills are that are learned in school and transferred to later IQ tests and jobs, it suggests that something enduring is transferred from school-based instruction. Whether that benefit is cognitive, motivational, or simply due to educational credentials is unclear. Individual differences


 * Different:**

They explored how individuals would transfer learning in one context to another context that shared similar characteristics – or more formally how "improvement in one mental function" could influence another related one. **(Barnett and Ceci's)**

Theory implied that transfer of learning depends on the proportion to which the learning task and the transfer task are similar, or where "identical elements are concerned in the influencing and influenced function” (now known as //identical element theory//). **(Barnett and Ceci's)**

Characteristic defines all learning as transfer. New learning builds on previous learning, which implies that teachers can facilitate transfer by activating what students know and by making their thinking visible. This includes addressing student misconceptions and recognizing cultural behaviors that students bring to learning situations. A student-learning centered view of transfer embodies these four characteristics. What is being transfered? **(Barnett and Ceci's)**

The necessity of initial learning for transfer specifies that mere exposure or memorization is not learning; there must be understanding. Learning as understanding takes time, such that expertise with deep, organized knowledge improves transfer. Teaching that emphasizes how to use knowledge or that improves motivation should enhance transfer. Cognition of the brain. **(Posner and Rothbart)**

While knowledge anchored in context is important for initial learning, it is also inflexible without some level of abstraction that goes beyond the context. Practices to improve transfer include having students specify connections across multiple contexts or having them develop general solutions and strategies that would apply beyond a single-context case. **(Posner and Rothbart)**

Learning should be considered an active and dynamic process, not a static product. Instead of one-shot tests that follow learning tasks, students can improve transfer by engaging in assessments that extend beyond current abilities. Improving transfer in this way requires instructor prompts to assist students – such as dynamic assessments – or student development of metacognitive skills without prompting. **(Posner and Rothbart)**