WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:04.019 Welcome back to the Deep Dive. Today, we're really 00:00:04.019 --> 00:00:06.200 getting into something core to education, this 00:00:06.200 --> 00:00:09.939 whole idea that learners start as a blank slate. 00:00:10.199 --> 00:00:12.599 Yeah, it's a huge one, a foundational assumption, 00:00:12.740 --> 00:00:15.759 really. And one that, well, science is showing 00:00:15.759 --> 00:00:18.079 us is pretty flawed, right? Simply flawed. I 00:00:18.079 --> 00:00:20.760 mean, for ages, our schooling, even corporate 00:00:20.760 --> 00:00:23.079 training, it was all kind of built on this idea 00:00:23.079 --> 00:00:25.589 about the brain that... Well, it just doesn't 00:00:25.589 --> 00:00:27.989 hold up anymore. OK, so our mission today, let's 00:00:27.989 --> 00:00:30.769 be clear. We want to unpack what cognitive science 00:00:30.769 --> 00:00:33.329 actually tells us about real learning, the kind 00:00:33.329 --> 00:00:35.570 that sticks and that you can actually use later. 00:00:35.750 --> 00:00:38.009 Right. Moving past what we might call the standard 00:00:38.009 --> 00:00:40.210 model. Definitely. And finding out what truly 00:00:40.210 --> 00:00:42.369 works. And maybe the big takeaway, if you remember 00:00:42.369 --> 00:00:44.909 one thing, is probably this. The way we used 00:00:44.909 --> 00:00:47.770 to test learning. Using brain science now, we 00:00:47.770 --> 00:00:51.659 see it was, well, it was missing the point. big 00:00:51.659 --> 00:00:54.159 time. How so? We were basically checking short 00:00:54.159 --> 00:00:57.259 -term memory, like inventory. Not really if you 00:00:57.259 --> 00:00:59.539 could use the knowledge in a new situation. Okay, 00:00:59.679 --> 00:01:01.759 okay. So let's dig into that standard model first 00:01:01.759 --> 00:01:03.560 to see where we're coming from. What was it really 00:01:03.560 --> 00:01:06.659 about? Well, the standard model, you know, dominant 00:01:06.659 --> 00:01:09.180 through most of the 20th century, it really rested 00:01:09.180 --> 00:01:14.459 on this belief. Learners arrive empty. blank 00:01:14.459 --> 00:01:17.439 slates. It wasn't malicious or anything. It was 00:01:17.439 --> 00:01:19.640 just the psychological thinking of the time. 00:01:19.780 --> 00:01:23.079 And if they're blank slates, that makes the teacher's 00:01:23.079 --> 00:01:25.239 job seem simpler, I guess. Exactly. The main 00:01:25.239 --> 00:01:28.200 job was just transfer, get the information across, 00:01:28.620 --> 00:01:30.540 cover the curriculum. Just pour it in. Pretty 00:01:30.540 --> 00:01:33.260 much. Get the facts into their heads. Delivery 00:01:33.260 --> 00:01:36.659 was key. Not necessarily engagement or what the 00:01:36.659 --> 00:01:38.700 student already knew. Yeah, that part's critical. 00:01:38.920 --> 00:01:41.569 It ignored prior knowledge. Or how someone might 00:01:41.569 --> 00:01:44.569 interpret things differently. Largely, yes. How 00:01:44.569 --> 00:01:47.349 culture might shape understanding, what connections 00:01:47.349 --> 00:01:49.390 they already had. Yeah. That wasn't really part 00:01:49.390 --> 00:01:51.489 of the equation. I totally remember that feeling 00:01:51.489 --> 00:01:54.510 from school. You just sat there, waiting to be 00:01:54.510 --> 00:01:57.209 filled up. Right. Passive. And if it didn't stick, 00:01:57.310 --> 00:01:58.950 well, it felt like it was your fault, you know? 00:01:59.010 --> 00:02:01.370 The system didn't question the method, just the 00:02:01.370 --> 00:02:03.870 student. That passive approach led straight to 00:02:03.870 --> 00:02:07.150 how we tested. The proof was just, did you hold 00:02:07.150 --> 00:02:09.490 on to the fact? The inventory check you mentioned. 00:02:09.590 --> 00:02:12.000 Exactly. Is the info I gave you last week still 00:02:12.000 --> 00:02:14.780 there? A quick check if you passed the test. 00:02:14.860 --> 00:02:17.400 You move on. Teacher feels they did their job. 00:02:17.580 --> 00:02:21.520 Yep, move on. And then what happens three weeks 00:02:21.520 --> 00:02:23.719 later when the knowledge is gone? Ah, then you 00:02:23.719 --> 00:02:26.319 get the classic teacher complaint. I taught it, 00:02:26.599 --> 00:02:29.139 but they didn't learn it. Right. And the blame 00:02:29.139 --> 00:02:31.560 falls on the student's memory or maybe their 00:02:31.560 --> 00:02:34.759 effort, not the teaching method itself. And applying 00:02:34.759 --> 00:02:37.620 the knowledge. That came much later, if at all. 00:02:37.719 --> 00:02:40.180 almost always at the very end. Finish the chapter, 00:02:40.419 --> 00:02:42.620 finish the course, then maybe try a problem. 00:02:43.199 --> 00:02:45.979 Learning first, doing later, if ever. Which puts 00:02:45.979 --> 00:02:48.419 huge pressure on that final application moment 00:02:48.419 --> 00:02:50.840 if you didn't memorize perfectly. You're stuck, 00:02:50.960 --> 00:02:53.500 you can't solve the problem. So yeah, this whole 00:02:53.500 --> 00:02:55.740 passive ingestion thing, it really explains why 00:02:55.740 --> 00:02:58.979 learning often felt like, well, like a chore. 00:02:59.210 --> 00:03:02.090 Not really engaging your mind. Absolutely. Efficient 00:03:02.090 --> 00:03:04.990 for covering material, maybe, but not for creating 00:03:04.990 --> 00:03:07.610 real usable understanding. Deeply inefficient 00:03:07.610 --> 00:03:09.729 for that, yes. Okay, so let's pivot. Because 00:03:09.729 --> 00:03:11.389 the science really turns this whole thing on 00:03:11.389 --> 00:03:13.650 its head. You mentioned brain science earlier. 00:03:13.930 --> 00:03:16.610 New technologies. Big time. The last few decades, 00:03:16.810 --> 00:03:18.990 especially with things like fMRI, functional 00:03:18.990 --> 00:03:23.009 MRI, we've moved learning from just theory and 00:03:23.009 --> 00:03:26.349 observation into actual science. We can see the 00:03:26.349 --> 00:03:29.620 brain working. While learning? We can literally 00:03:29.620 --> 00:03:32.639 watch it. See the patterns of activity change 00:03:32.639 --> 00:03:34.879 as someone learns something new. We can see the 00:03:34.879 --> 00:03:36.560 difference between just memorizing and actually 00:03:36.560 --> 00:03:39.080 understanding. It directly challenges those old 00:03:39.080 --> 00:03:41.860 assumptions. So what did seeing the brain in 00:03:41.860 --> 00:03:44.580 action tell us definitively about the blank slate? 00:03:44.740 --> 00:03:47.319 It basically demolished it. unequivocally. Yeah. 00:03:47.319 --> 00:03:49.740 Students are not blank slates, not even close. 00:03:49.780 --> 00:03:52.020 The brain isn't a filing cabinet waiting to be 00:03:52.020 --> 00:03:54.259 filled. Absolutely not. It's more like a dense, 00:03:54.439 --> 00:03:57.599 interconnected web. Everyone arrives with existing 00:03:57.599 --> 00:04:00.960 knowledge, beliefs, neural pathways, a whole 00:04:00.960 --> 00:04:04.159 schema. And learning isn't filling it. It's about 00:04:04.159 --> 00:04:07.060 actively rewiring it, connecting the new stuff 00:04:07.060 --> 00:04:09.360 into that existing web. That changes everything 00:04:09.360 --> 00:04:12.259 for education. OK, so if the brain is dynamic, 00:04:12.599 --> 00:04:16.060 constantly connecting. That pulls the rug out 00:04:16.060 --> 00:04:17.899 from under traditional tests, doesn't it? It 00:04:17.899 --> 00:04:20.860 really does. If the goal isn't just passive storage, 00:04:21.220 --> 00:04:24.139 then testing for recall is, well, it's testing 00:04:24.139 --> 00:04:26.899 the wrong thing. Exactly right. Our old tests 00:04:26.899 --> 00:04:30.120 were almost all about recall. Could you dump 00:04:30.120 --> 00:04:32.819 the facts back out? Often, right after you heard 00:04:32.819 --> 00:04:35.420 them. Right. Cramming for the test. But the second 00:04:35.420 --> 00:04:37.860 you realize real knowledge means integrating 00:04:37.860 --> 00:04:40.519 it, being able to transfer it to new situations, 00:04:41.100 --> 00:04:43.279 The test has to change. Can you give an example? 00:04:43.500 --> 00:04:45.879 Sure. Like, if someone can recite Newton's laws 00:04:45.879 --> 00:04:48.199 perfectly, word for word, but they can't use 00:04:48.199 --> 00:04:50.800 them to figure out, say, roughly where a kickball 00:04:50.800 --> 00:04:53.800 will land on a windy day. Have they learned physics? 00:04:54.180 --> 00:04:56.120 According to cognitive science, probably not. 00:04:56.240 --> 00:04:58.240 No. They've learned the words, the sequence, 00:04:58.639 --> 00:05:01.459 not the concept in a usable way. So the failure 00:05:01.459 --> 00:05:03.800 of the old model wasn't just ineffective teaching. 00:05:04.139 --> 00:05:06.639 It was measuring the wrong outcome entirely, 00:05:07.100 --> 00:05:10.000 measuring memory, not mastery. It measured the 00:05:10.000 --> 00:05:11.839 easiest thing to measure, which just happened 00:05:11.839 --> 00:05:13.939 to be the least useful kind of learning. We need 00:05:13.939 --> 00:05:16.980 to shift. Focus on assessing if someone can use 00:05:16.980 --> 00:05:20.399 information in unfamiliar situations. That's 00:05:20.399 --> 00:05:22.779 the real goal. Transferable knowledge. That distinction 00:05:22.779 --> 00:05:26.120 is crucial. So if passive learning and memorization 00:05:26.120 --> 00:05:28.839 aren't the path to that transferable knowledge, 00:05:29.800 --> 00:05:33.480 what does work? What does the science point to? 00:05:33.879 --> 00:05:36.439 Okay, so cognitive science highlights a couple 00:05:36.439 --> 00:05:39.459 of key things that really booth that brain rewiring 00:05:39.459 --> 00:05:42.839 process. First one, getting learners to grapple 00:05:42.839 --> 00:05:45.660 with complex problems. Okay. And here's the kicker, 00:05:45.920 --> 00:05:48.139 often before they have all the information, or 00:05:48.139 --> 00:05:50.079 even when they only partly grasp the principles. 00:05:50.300 --> 00:05:52.660 Wait a second, that feels backwards, doesn't 00:05:52.660 --> 00:05:54.420 it? Like if I'm teaching math, shouldn't I give 00:05:54.420 --> 00:05:56.519 them all the rules first, then the problems? 00:05:56.639 --> 00:05:59.379 Giving them hard problems early sounds... frustrating, 00:05:59.720 --> 00:06:01.920 maybe even demoralizing. It sounds that way and 00:06:01.920 --> 00:06:03.699 it goes against that standard model instinct 00:06:03.699 --> 00:06:06.360 for sure. But that initial struggle, wrestling 00:06:06.360 --> 00:06:08.500 with a problem you can't quite solve yet, it 00:06:08.500 --> 00:06:10.879 serves a vital purpose. It builds the schema. 00:06:11.180 --> 00:06:14.079 It makes the brain realize what it doesn't know 00:06:14.079 --> 00:06:16.560 and why it needs the information that's coming. 00:06:16.819 --> 00:06:20.360 It creates mental hooks. Ah, so when the actual 00:06:20.360 --> 00:06:23.509 facts or rules arrive? They slot right in. They 00:06:23.509 --> 00:06:25.569 have context, they have relevance, they stick 00:06:25.569 --> 00:06:28.649 longer, and crucially, they're much more transferable 00:06:28.649 --> 00:06:31.610 later on. So the initial confusion isn't failure, 00:06:32.029 --> 00:06:35.930 it's the brain building the scaffolding needed 00:06:35.930 --> 00:06:39.370 for the new info. You got it. The problem creates 00:06:39.370 --> 00:06:42.069 the purpose for the facts. The second big factor 00:06:42.069 --> 00:06:44.910 is social interaction. Talking with others, peers. 00:06:45.170 --> 00:06:47.569 Yes. talking about the problems, kicking ideas 00:06:47.569 --> 00:06:50.350 around, trying to explain your thinking to someone 00:06:50.350 --> 00:06:52.870 else. That's not wasted time. It's essential 00:06:52.870 --> 00:06:55.850 cognitive work. How so? When you have to articulate 00:06:55.850 --> 00:06:57.490 something that's maybe fuzzy in your own head, 00:06:57.769 --> 00:07:00.110 you're forced to organize it, to clarify it, 00:07:00.230 --> 00:07:02.149 to structure the knowledge for yourself in order 00:07:02.149 --> 00:07:04.639 to explain it. And the research shows these two 00:07:04.639 --> 00:07:06.879 things together, tough problems, talking about 00:07:06.879 --> 00:07:09.220 them, lead to better results. Much better. You 00:07:09.220 --> 00:07:11.459 get the information transfer, sure. People remember 00:07:11.459 --> 00:07:14.519 things longer, more accurately. That satisfies 00:07:14.519 --> 00:07:17.339 the old way of thinking. But the real win, the 00:07:17.339 --> 00:07:20.600 power part, is the transferability. The ability 00:07:20.600 --> 00:07:23.879 to use that knowledge in totally new, unfamiliar 00:07:23.879 --> 00:07:26.480 contexts down the road. That makes sense. If 00:07:26.480 --> 00:07:28.980 you learned history by debating causes of wars, 00:07:29.139 --> 00:07:31.879 not just memorizing dates, you're better equipped 00:07:31.879 --> 00:07:34.899 to analyze a new conflict later. Precisely. You 00:07:34.899 --> 00:07:36.379 learned how to think about those systems, not 00:07:36.379 --> 00:07:39.680 just what happened. This shift from learning 00:07:39.680 --> 00:07:43.040 being this purely internal solo activity to something 00:07:43.040 --> 00:07:46.699 active, social, messy, it leads to another big 00:07:46.699 --> 00:07:49.120 idea, right? Distributed cognition. Exactly. 00:07:49.480 --> 00:07:51.899 The standard model really pushed learning as 00:07:51.899 --> 00:07:54.120 an independent thing. Your grade showed what 00:07:54.120 --> 00:07:56.800 you knew inside your head with no help. Yeah, 00:07:56.899 --> 00:07:59.399 getting help was often seen as cheating. Collaboration 00:07:59.399 --> 00:08:02.120 was suspect. Because the assumption was competence 00:08:02.120 --> 00:08:04.720 had to be demonstrated completely alone. unaided. 00:08:04.860 --> 00:08:07.079 That's not how humans actually achieve big things, 00:08:07.300 --> 00:08:10.500 is it? Building cities, science, art. It's almost 00:08:10.500 --> 00:08:13.199 always collaborative using tools. That's the 00:08:13.199 --> 00:08:15.379 fundamental reality cognitive science is catching 00:08:15.379 --> 00:08:18.740 up with. We are tool users. We are social. And 00:08:18.740 --> 00:08:20.959 we've effectively downloaded huge parts of our 00:08:20.959 --> 00:08:22.819 thinking into our environment for millennia. 00:08:23.180 --> 00:08:26.279 Downloaded cognition. Like how I rely on my phone's 00:08:26.279 --> 00:08:28.860 calendar. I've basically outsourced my scheduling 00:08:28.860 --> 00:08:33.070 memory. That's a perfect everyday example, or 00:08:33.070 --> 00:08:36.610 think about older tools, books. What are books 00:08:36.610 --> 00:08:39.269 but our collective external memory? Right, we 00:08:39.269 --> 00:08:41.269 don't all have to memorize the entire history 00:08:41.269 --> 00:08:44.090 of medicine. We can look it up. Writing itself 00:08:44.090 --> 00:08:46.350 was a massive step in distributing cognition. 00:08:46.639 --> 00:08:50.539 Pencil and paper let us do complex math far beyond 00:08:50.539 --> 00:08:53.320 what our unaided brain can reliably handle. So 00:08:53.320 --> 00:08:55.620 the environment, the tools, the people around 00:08:55.620 --> 00:08:58.440 us, they aren't distractions. They're actually 00:08:58.440 --> 00:09:01.700 part of our thinking process. Cognitive multipliers. 00:09:01.929 --> 00:09:04.149 That's a great way to put it, multipliers. And 00:09:04.149 --> 00:09:06.389 this leads to what some call the efficiency paradox. 00:09:06.649 --> 00:09:08.970 OK, what's that? When we embrace this distributed 00:09:08.970 --> 00:09:11.190 cognition, when we use tools effectively, whether 00:09:11.190 --> 00:09:13.029 it's a calculator, the internet, a textbook, 00:09:13.509 --> 00:09:15.730 or collaborating with another person, we become 00:09:15.730 --> 00:09:18.330 vastly more powerful thinkers and problem solvers. 00:09:18.409 --> 00:09:20.990 More powerful with the tools than without. Exponentially 00:09:20.990 --> 00:09:24.070 so. The measure of intelligence starts to shift. 00:09:24.240 --> 00:09:27.200 It's not just what's inside your head. It becomes 00:09:27.200 --> 00:09:30.340 how effectively can you leverage all available 00:09:30.340 --> 00:09:33.820 resources, internal and external, to solve this 00:09:33.820 --> 00:09:36.820 challenge. And the flip side, if you only value 00:09:36.820 --> 00:09:39.500 what someone can recall internally without tools 00:09:39.500 --> 00:09:42.759 or context, then you are, maybe unintentionally, 00:09:43.179 --> 00:09:44.980 training them to be less powerful thinkers in 00:09:44.980 --> 00:09:48.580 the real world. Wow. Less powerful. Yeah. Think 00:09:48.580 --> 00:09:51.070 about it. Pure rote memorization, the old way. 00:09:51.409 --> 00:09:53.830 He uses up so much mental energy just storing 00:09:53.830 --> 00:09:55.889 stuff you could instantly access externally. 00:09:56.210 --> 00:09:58.570 Leaving less brain power for the actual thinking, 00:09:59.250 --> 00:10:03.029 analysis, creativity. Exactly. You overload the 00:10:03.029 --> 00:10:04.990 working memory with raw data instead of using 00:10:04.990 --> 00:10:07.529 it for higher order processing. Insisting on 00:10:07.529 --> 00:10:09.570 internalizing everything can actually cripple 00:10:09.570 --> 00:10:11.889 problem solving. The goal isn't to be a slow, 00:10:12.070 --> 00:10:14.110 error -prone, walking database. It's to be an 00:10:14.110 --> 00:10:16.429 agile, effective user of knowledge and tools. 00:10:16.669 --> 00:10:19.169 Precisely. An expert tool user and collaborator. 00:10:19.509 --> 00:10:22.110 What a huge shift. So wrapping this deep dive 00:10:22.110 --> 00:10:25.029 up, we've gone from seeing the mind as this passive 00:10:25.029 --> 00:10:27.649 blank slate. Right. Waiting to be filled. To 00:10:27.649 --> 00:10:31.330 understanding learning as active, social. based 00:10:31.330 --> 00:10:34.470 on tackling real problems and fundamentally distributed. 00:10:34.629 --> 00:10:37.110 It happens both inside our heads and with the 00:10:37.110 --> 00:10:39.370 tools and people around us. It really reframes 00:10:39.370 --> 00:10:41.570 everything. The skills that matter aren't just 00:10:41.570 --> 00:10:43.950 about recall. They're about analysis, synthesis, 00:10:44.230 --> 00:10:47.470 collaboration, knowing how to find and use information 00:10:47.470 --> 00:10:49.929 effectively with all the resources available. 00:10:50.289 --> 00:10:52.389 That's where the focus needs to go. Which brings 00:10:52.389 --> 00:10:54.610 us to a final thought for you, our listener. 00:10:55.009 --> 00:10:57.490 We've heard how tackling complex problems and 00:10:57.490 --> 00:10:59.970 using external tools, books, tech, other people 00:10:59.970 --> 00:11:02.730 makes us way more powerful thinkers. So take 00:11:02.730 --> 00:11:04.629 a second and think about your own life, your 00:11:04.629 --> 00:11:07.809 work. Are there habits or systems you're sticking 00:11:07.809 --> 00:11:10.480 to that feel Well, a bit like that old blank 00:11:10.480 --> 00:11:12.700 slate solo effort model. Are you maybe trying 00:11:12.700 --> 00:11:15.700 to juggle every detail internally, insisting 00:11:15.700 --> 00:11:18.100 on figuring everything out alone when collaboration 00:11:18.100 --> 00:11:20.860 or a simple tool could amplify your efforts? 00:11:21.419 --> 00:11:24.120 What external tools, people, resources, technologies 00:11:24.120 --> 00:11:26.379 might you be underutilizing right now, simply 00:11:26.379 --> 00:11:28.620 out of habit or this outdated feeling that you 00:11:28.620 --> 00:11:30.539 should handle it all yourself? Think about it. 00:11:30.720 --> 00:11:33.779 Embracing those external supports, that distributed 00:11:33.779 --> 00:11:36.399 way of thinking. Could that be the key to unlocking 00:11:36.399 --> 00:11:39.139 your next big insight or solving that really 00:11:39.139 --> 00:11:39.899 tough challenge?