Chapter 1
Myths: What Are They and How Can We Challenge Them? Downloaded by EAST CAROLINA UNIV on April 23, 2015 | http://pubs.acs.org Publication Date (Web): September 26, 2011 | doi: 10.1021/bk-2011-1074.ch001
Diane M. Bunce* Chemistry Department, The Catholic University of America, Washington, DC 20064 *E-mail:
[email protected] Myths are cultural artifacts that result from our beliefs of how teaching and learning take place and interact with each other. Myths easily become “accepted truths” because they provide simple answers that are consistent with our beliefs about the teaching and learning processes. In order to challenge myths, we must be aware of the beliefs we hold and strive to provide targeted data to challenge these simple answers to multi-faceted questions. Myths can only be dispelled with convincing data and experiments that confront myths must therefore have clear research questions, suitable methodologies, and appropriate data collection and analysis. Such research must also have a firm theoretical framework so that the research results can be used to address our overarching beliefs about teaching and learning.
Introduction Comments are often made by teachers, administrators and students alike regarding what constitutes good teaching, what problems exist in specific courses, and why learning is difficult in these courses. These comments are repeated so often that we as a community start to believe them, regardless of whether there are data available to support such beliefs. This can be the origin of unchallenged, but commonly accepted, myths. The myths seem to provide believable answers to our questions. These answers are satisfying because they are consistent with what we believe to be true about the processes of teaching and learning.
© 2011 American Chemical Society In Investigating Classroom Myths through Research on Teaching and Learning; Bunce, D.; ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2011.
Downloaded by EAST CAROLINA UNIV on April 23, 2015 | http://pubs.acs.org Publication Date (Web): September 26, 2011 | doi: 10.1021/bk-2011-1074.ch001
So what are our beliefs about teaching and learning? What paradigm are they based on? To illustrate the connection between our beliefs and how these belief systems influence the myths we find satisfying, let’s consider two examples. These examples deal with how learning and teaching interact and the teacher’s role in the classroom. If we believe that a teacher’s role as expert is to provide knowledge to students, then the myth that may seem most satisfying to explain why some students don’t learn in our courses is that the students are not trying hard enough. On the other hand, if we know that they are working hard, then a secondary explanation might be that they were not prepared well enough to handle the rigors of the course we are teaching. Our belief in how teaching should take place shapes our answers to the question of why students are not learning. If, however, we believe that students must integrate the knowledge they hold in long term memory with the new knowledge to which they are being exposed, then we might not believe that lecture or a teacher’s presentation of knowledge is the most effective way to teach. In this situation, the answer to the question of why some students are not learning might not be that students are not trying or are not prepared. Instead, a more satisfying answer may be that the instructional method (presentation of knowledge by an expert) doesn’t match how learning takes place. In both of these examples, the problem is the same—some students are not learning. The answer or myth we accept to explain this dilemma is based upon our belief that either the students are not trying or the instructional method is not adequate. Both myths are equally unsupported by data. They are myths because they are cultural artifacts arising from our belief system. They are not answers based upon research into the problem. One of the dangers of myths is that they provide easy answers that may or may not be accurate. If we accept these myths because they are consistent with our beliefs about teaching and learning, we may not see the need to investigate the reasons for the problem and thus miss an opportunity to supply data to address the question and help us formulate an objective and proven explanation of the problem. Myths are dangerous not only because they provide easy answers to problems in teaching and learning but also because they can become lodged in our collective psyche as simplistic answers to complicated problems. If we are not skeptical of these easy answers, then our research may be designed incorrectly because it may be based on a false foundation. This could result in incorrect questions being asked and inaccurate conclusions being reached.
What If? What if we decided to challenge some well established myths? We would need data. This data should come from research that was tightly designed and executed. Such research, like all research, should be skeptical of easy answers to complicated questions. The research methodology should account for important variables in teaching and learning, and control those that cannot be measured directly. The data analysis should be a deep evaluation of the variables themselves, and would need to go beyond reporting of percentages and calculations of simple t-tests. 2 In Investigating Classroom Myths through Research on Teaching and Learning; Bunce, D.; ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2011.
Downloaded by EAST CAROLINA UNIV on April 23, 2015 | http://pubs.acs.org Publication Date (Web): September 26, 2011 | doi: 10.1021/bk-2011-1074.ch001
Investigating such research questions might require unique methodologies that include more than the usual pre/post achievement measures and survey instruments or use these instruments in new ways. Tools used in such experiments would need to precisely measure the variables of interest and may involve novel approaches or techniques to accomplish this effectively. And lastly, an adequate amount of data should be collected to allow accurate conclusions to be drawn. Lack of sufficient data could result in a false interpretation thus creating a new myth. Myth-challenging research may need to start small, investigating myths that directly impact our classroom experience. Subsequent research could move to more global questions related to how learning takes place in general. By examining what we currently believe, and challenging ourselves to ask questions that confront these beliefs, we could develop research questions that have the potential to substantially increase our understanding of teaching and learning. The end result could be data that challenge the myths, causing us to confront our beliefs of how people learn and the role of teaching in that process. There is also a place for educational and cognitive psychological theories in this research. Without theories to help explain and provide the framework for such research, the resulting investigations might result in a “million points of light” about teaching and learning that do not coalesce to help us understand the bigger picture. Theory-based research helps build on what was learned in previous research and extends our multi-faceted understanding of the teaching and learning interaction in a more documented fashion. A more in-depth discussion of the importance of using a theoretical framework to guide research is found in the Nuts and Bolts of Chemical Education Research symposium volume (1). Results from individual experiments that might not make sense on their own can be tied to the theoretical framework and start to fill in the puzzle of our understanding
Purpose of This Book The purpose of this book is to provide examples of research that address a wide array of cultural beliefs about teaching and learning manifested as easy answers (myths) to common problems. The myths range from how long students pay attention in class to which chemistry topics are more difficult to learn than others. The methods employed in these investigations include familiar tools such as surveys and achievement measures as well as newer electronic means of collecting data such as the use of clickers. It is not always necessary to formulate complicated experiments to investigate myths. Sometimes it involves asking the right question at the right time of the right person. However not all myths are incorrect. The book highlights some of these investigative approaches, both conventional and unconventional.
How To Use This Book This book can be used in several ways. First, the book can be used to provide data to challenge some commonly believed myths about teaching and learning. Some of the research presented proves, disproves or increases our understanding of 3 In Investigating Classroom Myths through Research on Teaching and Learning; Bunce, D.; ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2011.
Downloaded by EAST CAROLINA UNIV on April 23, 2015 | http://pubs.acs.org Publication Date (Web): September 26, 2011 | doi: 10.1021/bk-2011-1074.ch001
commonly held myths. Second, the chapters of this book can be seen as examples of chemical education research collected in one place so that the breadth and depth of such investigations can be compared. Some investigations look at myths in detail while others focus more broadly on several interacting variables. Both types of research add to our understanding of different kinds of myths. Third, the book showcases a range of research questions and methodologies used to investigate them. This range emphasizes the importance of matching the methodologies used to the research questions asked. Lastly, the book offers examples of research that applies the chemical education research principles presented in the previous Nuts and Bolts of Chemical Education Research (2) symposium series volume, including the importance of constructing a good research question, choosing an appropriate theoretical framework and drawing conclusions based upon the data collected. The book is organized into three sections that include the following:
Table 1. Book Organization Section I
Chapters 2-5
Research dealing with myths or beliefs that teachers experience in the courses they teach.
Section II
Chapters 6-9
Research that investigates more global myths that deal with types of courses, longitudinal change, or larger institutional units.
Section III
Chapters 10-12
Research addressing the use of new statistical or research methodologies and tools to investigate familiar questions
The end result of using this book is to see how carefully crafted research questions and well designed studies can add to our understanding of how learning takes place and the role of teaching in that process.
References 1.
2.
Abraham, M. R. Importance of a Theoretical Framework for Research. In Nuts and Bolts of Chemical Education Research; Bunce, D. M., Cole, R. S., Eds.; ACS Symposium Series 976; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2008; pp 47−66. Bunce, D. M.,Cole, R. S., Eds. Nuts and Bolts of Chemical Education Research; ACS Symposium Series 976; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2008.
4 In Investigating Classroom Myths through Research on Teaching and Learning; Bunce, D.; ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2011.
