Welcome to the deep dive. You ever wonder why
some ways of teaching just seem to work and others?
Not so much. Yeah, why some things click. Exactly.
So today we're digging into that why understanding
educational theory, the foundations, really matters
if you want effective teaching and learning.
We're looking at an article from hackscience
.education that helps unpack this whole thing.
Right. And the mission, really, is to explore
how theory can shape better education, moving
beyond just, well, guesswork. Exactly. The article
touches on Paul LeFrayer, some specific research.
It's about getting to that aha moment, you know,
understanding the why behind effective methods.
OK, so let's jump in. The article sets up this
tension between Doxa and Logos. Doxa, first,
what's that about? Well, drawing on Aristotle
and Frere, Docs is basically practice that's
just based on opinion, or, you know, we've always
done it this way. Oh, okay. Habit, almost. Kind
of, yeah. And Frere apparently warned this could
lead educators to become, like, bureaucratized,
just repeating these high -sounding mechanical
explanations. Sounds familiar, maybe. That feeling
of just going through the motions. Absolutely.
It's that routine practice without really questioning
the why. So, the article contrasts this with
Logos. Which is? Logos is practice that's actually
informed by coherent theory. It's about understanding
why you're doing what you're doing in the classroom.
So let's educators be more deliberate. Like the
article says, more active designers of coherent
curriculum and instruction. Precisely. Not just
delivering content, but thoughtfully crafting
the learning experience based on some solid ideas
about how learning actually happens. OK, and
underlying that is something called epistemology.
Big word, but important here. Yeah, it sounds
academic, but it's simply about what an educator
believes about knowledge itself. How is it created?
How do people learn? And the article cites research,
NIST and whole shoe from back in 2005. They found
that a teacher's personal beliefs about this
stuff, their epistemology, really influences
their teaching style, their goals, everything.
So like, if you believe knowledge is just poured
into students' heads, you'll lecture a lot. Right.
But if you think knowledge is built through experience,
you might favor, say, hands -on projects or group
work. It all stems from that core belief about
learning. That makes sense. What about teachers
who say they're, you know, theory -free, just
practical? Well, the article makes a really key
point here. It argues that every instructional
strategy, whether you realize it or not, actually
embodies some kind of learning theory. So there's
no escaping it. Pretty much. There are always
underlying assumptions about how students learn
best, even in what seems like a purely practical
choice. And these beliefs, yours personally,
or maybe the whole school's, they really drive
decisions about curriculum and teaching methods.
OK. But is there a risk of, I don't know, getting
bogged down? Could focusing too much on theory
actually make it harder to just, well, teach?
That's a potential concern, yeah. The article
sort of acknowledges that theoretical navel gazing
maybe could hinder delivery. Finding the right
balance is key. But the core argument leans towards
theory being essential. Definitely. The article
strongly suggests that these theoretical foundations
are crucial for designing effective, sufficient
curriculum. Especially now. Why especially now?
Well, because our understanding of learning keeps
evolving, right? And educational goals shift.
So aligning teaching practices with current knowledge,
choosing logos over doxa, becomes more and more
important for creating genuinely effective education.
It's about staying current and intentional, not
just sticking to old habits. Exactly. Think about
a teacher using, say, spaced repetition because
they understand memory theory. That's theory
making practice better. And the source is driving
this thinking in the article you mentioned, Frere's
book. Yeah, Education for Critical Consciousness,
a classic from 74 about empowering learners and
that NIST and Holshure study on epistemological
beliefs. They provide that deeper context. Right.
Good foundations. So wrapping it up, the main
takeaway really is that moving from just opinion
based practice, that doxa, to practice informed
by solid theory logos, that's the path to more
coherent and ultimately more effective education.
It's about being a more thoughtful, informed
educator. Definitely. So here's something for
you, the listener, to think about. Reflect on
your own educational journey, the teachers you
had, the schools you attended. What underlying
theories or assumptions about learning do you
think were operating there? Was it more doxa,
just the way things were done, or could you see
some logos, some clear principles at play? It's
an interesting lens to look through.