Knowledge-Based Education vs. Process-Based Education 79
Epstein Suite indexes the text; the original document lives at its official source. We don't host the original file — view it on the official release to read it in full.
View the original on the official releaseDocument text
Text is machine OCR and may contain errors. Confirm against the original source above.
Knowledge-Based Education vs. Process-Based Education 79
idea that one needs background knowledge in order to read, which is
both true and a product of various works in cognitive science.
Hirsch was made to look like a fool so often that he resorted to hir-
ing a cognitive science professor at Virginia, who has written a book
justifying the same nonsense with more cognitive science facts.”
There is plenty of work in cognitive science that shows that back-
ground knowledge helps people interpret the world around them, and
thus reading, for example, is facilitated by having knowledge about
the world about which you are reading. This idea, however, does not
imply that ramming facts down a kid’s throat is the way for them to
acquire that background knowledge. Knowledge acquisition is a natu-
ral result of engaging in cognitive processes that are being employed
to satisfy a truly held goal.
If you are trying to find your way around a city, you will learn the
streets of that city and develop what is called a cognitive map. If you
try to memorize those same streets, it simply won’t work. Real knowl-
edge is acquired as a natural part of an employed cognitive process in
service of a goal. But Hirsch and Willingham know nothing about cog-
nitive processes. They only know, and talk about, how best to acquire
more facts. Politicians listen to them and there are more tests to make
sure those facts have been acquired. No one remembers Algebra II or
much about the Founding Fathers because that stuff is mostly facts
acquired independent of any real goals that will employ those facts.
Knowledge is not the real issue in education or in mental life. The
real issue is developing facility with doing various cognitive processes.
Knowledge comes along for free with practice of these processes in
specific domains.
There is no evidence whatsoever that accumulation of facts and
background knowledge are the same thing. In fact, there is plenty of
evidence to the contrary. Facts learned out of context, and apart from
actual real-world experience that is repeated over and over, are not
retained.
Why don’t kids like school? Because we teach them knowledge
that they know they won’t need. How do they know this? They know
that their parents don’t know this stuff—that is how. Many kids don’t
like math much and it is clear why. They find it boring and irrelevant
to anything they care about doing. If we think math is so important,
then why not teach it within a meaningful context, where it actually
is used? There is plenty of evidence that shows that teaching math
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023825
Have a question about what this document contains?
Ask the documents