Sluggish knowledge

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Inertial knowledge is a term from cognitive and learning psychology . It describes knowledge that is theoretically available but cannot be applied in practice. Sluggish knowledge has been understood abstractly , but cannot be transferred to new situations and cannot be used constructively (e.g. to solve a problem). There is a gap between knowing and doing. A well-known example is the inability to call up the vocabulary of a foreign language that was learned for querying in the classroom in a specific communication situation.

Was first described inert knowledge ( Engl. Inert knowledge ) in 1929 by Alfred North Whitehead :

"[T] theoretical ideas should always find important applications within the pupil's curriculum. This is not an easy doctrine to apply, but a very hard one. It contains within itself the problem of keeping knowledge alive, of preventing it from becoming inert, which is the central problem of all education "

- Whitehead 1929

Explanation variants

Renkl offers three possible explanations for this phenomenon

  • Metaprocess explanation: Although the knowledge is available, it is not applied because the metacognition (knowledge of one's own knowledge and one's own thought processes) does not work sufficiently.
  • Structural deficit explanation: The existing knowledge is not structured enough and therefore not available enough to be used (see also knowledge representation ).
  • Explanation of the situation: Knowledge is basically "situated" (contextual), which makes it difficult to transfer it to new situations.

Many indications suggest a fourth explanation: In order to save time and measure accuracy, knowledge, not competence, is often tested. This favors the "cramming" of knowledge, which one also likes to forget again after the exam, so to speak to make room for the next exam knowledge. For this, the somewhat unsightly, but visually powerful concept of bulimia learning was coined.

Causes of sluggish knowledge

The so-called Nuremberg funnel method is identified as a main cause of sluggish knowledge, the occurrence of which is a known teaching problem . a. are:

In principle, learning material can be conveyed.
The teacher knows what the students need to know.
Knowledge can be conveyed with the help of language.
The learners have the task of acquiring the knowledge by storing it in their memory.
The more learning material is taught, the more successful the learning process.

Avoidance of sluggish knowledge

Based on recent findings and a. In cognitive neuroscience and cognitive psychology , it is now assumed that successful learning should take place differently if understanding knowledge is the goal and not just knowing information: “Understanding means building up an interpretation that works in situations. “This challenged the basic assumption of the Nuremberg funnel method that knowledge can be conveyed directly from teacher to student through language. The new paradigm is that knowledge cannot be imparted. Instead it is the task of the teacher to help the student to construct knowledge himself and at the same time to overcome the receptive attitude, which is also seen as the cause of the emergence of sluggish knowledge. This is achieved through the design of situated learning environments, e.g. B. in the form of simulations and business games . In this way, the content to be conveyed is linked to certain everyday situations in order to convey application-oriented knowledge that can then be converted from theory into practice:

"Knowledge that is conveyed in this way through learning by doing does not remain inert knowledge, but can be actively implemented and adapted to changing requirements."

- Zumbach 2002

Current research on sluggish knowledge is mainly carried out by Heinz Mandl at the Ludwig Maximilians University in Munich .

literature

  • Hans Gruber, Heinz Mandl, Alexander Renkl: What do we learn in school and university: Inertial knowledge? (Research Report No. 101). Munich: Ludwig Maximilians University, Chair for Empirical Pedagogy and Educational Psychology, 1999, ISSN  1614-6336
  • A. Krapp, B. Weidenmann: Pedagogical Psychology (Chapter 13, pp. 602–646). Beltz, Weinheim 2001, ISBN 3621274731
  • Gabi Reinmann, Heinz Mandl (ed.): Psychology of knowledge management. Perspectives, theories and methods. Hogrefe, Göttingen 2004, ISBN 978-3-8017-1815-2

swell

  1. ↑ a b Werner Brandl: Learning as a “constructive” process: illusion or reality? , in: schulmagazin 5 to 10, issue 5/1997 ( updated version ( Memento of the original from February 18, 2007 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and remove then this note. ) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.stif2.mhn.de
  2. ^ Alfred North Whitehead: The Aims of Education and Other Essays . New York: The Free Press, 1929.
  3. ↑ According to: Renkl, Alexander: Inertial knowledge: The "inexplicable" gap between knowledge and action (research report no. 41). Munich: Ludwig Maximilians University, Chair for Empirical Pedagogy and Educational Psychology, 1994, ISSN  1614-6336 :
  4. ↑ Alexandra Aregger: “I do with education what others do with furniture”, interview with Christoph Schmitt. Nau , December 19, 2017, accessed February 24, 2018 .
  5. ↑ a b c Frank Thissen: Reinventing learning - constructivist foundations of multimedia didactics , in: Uwe Beck / Winfried Sommer (eds.): LEARNTEC 97th European Congress for Educational Technology and Company Training. Conference proceedings, Karlsruhe 1997, pp. 69–79
  6. ↑ a b Jörg Zumbach: Goal-Based Scenarios , in: Ute Scheffer & Friedrich W. Hesse (Eds.): E-Learning: Using the Revolution of Learning Profitably Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 2002. pp. 67–82, ISBN 3-608-94332-3