Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/How People Learn


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Withdrawn. (non-admin closure)  M h hossein   talk 05:55, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

How People Learn

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:NBOOK or WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 19:39, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:43, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:43, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:21, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Notability (books) says: "A book is notable if it verifiably meets, through reliable sources, at least one of the following criteria:The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists, and reviews. This excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book." Here are reviews and other sources:    </li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> </ol>

<ol> <li> The article notes: "Acknowledging the need for an integrative statement about the science of learning, the National Research Council of the US National Academy of Sciences convened a Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning. This committee, consisting of prominent researchers from di- verse disciplines, spent 2 years tackling two deceptively simple questions: how do people learn, and how should teachers teach? Their answer to these questions takes the form of a book, How People Learn: brain, mind, experience and school. How People Learn is an important book, which may, in time, become a classic. One of the committee’s accomplishments is that it has created a highly readable synthesis across different  elds of study. The authors have transcended the coded vocabulary that so often characterizes insular com- munities of scholars. Periodic lapses in conceptual and structural organization can be attributed to the fact that the book is the product of a committee whose members are from diverse disciplinary homes. ... How People Learn is an important document. It is a consensus statement of what is known about the nature of learning. Equally important, it is a political statement that much is known about learning and that this knowledge has implications for the way that educational experiences can be organized. We commend How People Learn to everyone who is engaged in the work of education, broadly construed. Fortunately, for most readers, the document is accessible within seconds at: http://www.nap.edu/catalog/ 9853.html. The contents of the entire book has been placed on the Internet at the web site of the National Academy Press. We believe that the accessibility of How People Learn, and the power of the ideas it contains, can make the book a conceptual centerpiece for educators. In serving this function, it can establish a real connection between the cultivation of minds and an understanding of the way those minds work."</li> <li> The article notes: "This book evaluates and presents evidence of changes in conceptions of learning that have occurred over the past 30 years, including those processes involved in helping learners reach deep understanding, to determine leads to effective teaching, and those conditions that lead to supportive environments for teaching and learning. The book is divided into four sections. Section 1 includes understanding, preexisting knowledge, and active learning. The authors propose that curricula and textbooks often emphasize memorization of facts rather than the development of understanding. They acknowledge the importance of facts for thinking and problem solving but suggest that evidence from the study of expertise indicates that “usable knowledge” is different from lists of disconnected facts. Experts’ knowledge is organized around important concepts that support their understanding and transfer of knowledge. The authors suggest that memorizing the properties of veins and arteries without acquiring an understanding of why they have particular properties provides students with little basis for problem solving. ... During my review of this book, I have referred to examples relevant to medical education, which support my own observations and experience with the cognitive processes involved in medical student learning and the impact of both traditional and problem-based learning curriculum on these processes during my 12 years as a medical educator. However, I would shortchange this book if I did not state that its content is applicable to the science of learning across all developmental levels and domains of learning. It is my belief that the book provides all educators with an excellent framework for understanding conceptual changes in the science of learning, including ways in which these changes have increased our understanding of the processes involved in student learning and the design of learning environments. In addition, I believe that this book attests to the work of the committee members in compiling it and will stand as a lasting memory of the dedication and work of Ann L. Brown, whose research contributed a great deal to our understanding of the science of learnin."</li> <li> The article notes: "This spring, the National Research Council is scheduled to release the report of its How People Learn II panel. The original How People Learn report[1], published in 1999, was a landmark report that chronicled and explained the way our understanding of learning changed during the twentieth century — from an understanding dominated by behaviorist theories of learning to an understanding built on cognitive psychology; a change significant enough to have earned the title “cognitive revolution.” The impetus for How People Learn was concern among scholars of the new science of learning that the advances taking place in knowledge about learning were not informing educational practice. The NRC’s original panel was made up of luminaries in the fields of cognitive psychology, cognitive science, developmental psychology, and social psychology, who had made major contributions to theoretical work and empirical studies in their fields. One contemporary review of the original report observed that “this publication alone could drive decisions of reformers for the next decade in the most productive ways.”"</li> <li> The review notes: "A two-year project by the National Research Council, this book summarizes recent developments in cognitive science research and proposes recommendations for schools. The authors argue that a 'new science of learning' is essential in our increasingly complex, information-overloaded society where coverage of the sheer magnitude of knowledge is an impossibility. They propose that an educational system for the 21st century must produce learners who read and think critically, express themselves clearly and persuasively, are able to solve complex problems, and become self-sustaining, lifelong learners. Given this premise, the authors explore (and extensively document) several major areas of research that have direct application for educational practice: expert performance, transfer of learning, learning in early childhood, the brain and learning, learning environments, effective teaching, and new technologies. ... The book's illustrations of classroom practice increase the understanding of how the research can be applied, making it relevant for practitioners as well as for policymakers, preservice educators, and school administrators."</li> <li> The article notes: "How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School was conceived and written by the Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning of the National Research Council. This committee at the time of writing was composed of several of the most senior scholars involved in teaching and learning, including the three editors of this volume (John Bransford, Ann Brown, and Rodney Cocking), as well as fourteen other equally notable scientists, such as Rochel Gelman, Robert Glaser, Roy Pea, and Barbara Rogoff, to choose but a few. It was born of the Committee’s collective concern about how slowly important new research findings on learning, brain development, and teaching are being translated into educational practice in schools. ... Bringing together a high level of theoretical and empirical work in developmental psychology, cognitive psychology, neuroscience, educational psychology, and other fields, the authors demonstrate a remarkable convergence of know- ledge in some areas, such as the tremendous importance of early experience in development. They also identify areas where our collective knowledge to date is shaky or nonexistent, suggesting caution with respect to many of the products on the market that are loosely based on emergent findings."</li> <li> The article notes: "I admit it — my participation on listservs mostly consists of lurking. I rarely initiate questions, offer suggestions or share useful resources with other members. And before I bought How People Learn, I had never felt compelled to act on someone’s advice. But one particular listserv posting did such a great job of describing transfer — the ability to extend learning from one context into another — beyond my usual outdoor and adventure education perspective, I wanted to find out what else the National Research Council had to say. How People Learn links studies on the science of learning to educational practices. Chapter 3, “Learning and Transfer,” describes how learning occurs and highlights four features that facilitate students’ abilities to adapt to new problems and settings. While I doubt the editors intended to describe effective outdoor experiential education (OEE) programs, they provided a wonderful resource for explaining the outdoor experiential learning process to supporters, who are convinced OEE is a good thing, and to skeptics, who have yet to appreciate the educational value of going outdoors. ... The other chapters of How People Learn are equally relevant to those working in the field of OEE. Reading this book will improve both your practice and your ability to convey to others why outdoor education works."</li> <li> The article reviews both:<ol><li>Ziill, lames E. (2002). The Art of Changing the Brain: Enriching the Practice of Teaching by Exploring the Biology of Learning. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publi.shJng. pp. 263.</li><li>National Rnsoarch Council (2000).How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. pp.374.</li></ol> The article notes: "These books are very important additions to the literature of teaching and learning—especially for their analysis of what scientists and researchers have learned about how people learn and how teachers can use such knowledge to improve their teaching. Ziill's book especially deserves careful reading by college teachers. ... How People Learn (HPL) is a broad review of research on the mind and an expansion of  an original volume published in 1999 by the Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education of the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences. It was edited by John D. Bransford of the  Learning Technology Center of Vanderbilt University; Ann L. Brown of the Graduate School of Education at the University of California at Berkeley; and Rodney Cocking, the study director. ... HPL cites a study that shows how people have a tendency to remember things or information they were not exposed to. A researcher gave subjects this list of words: sour, candy, sugar, bitter, good, taste, tooth, nice, honey, soda, chocolate, heart, cake, tart, and pie. When they were asked later about whether certain words were on that list, many subjects mistakenly said 'sweet' was on the list. ... It is interesting that neither book gives much attention to popular notions of the importance of right and left sides of the brain. HPL dismisses that idea as a 'faddish concept that has not been demonstrated to be of value in classroom practice.' It says another misconception is the idea that people use only a small fraction of their brain."</li> <li> The article notes: "In keeping with the theme of this issue, Reflection and Renewal, this essay book review illuminates one of the threads connecting three texts about thinking: How We Think (1997; orig. 1910), Dewey's classic treatise on human learning; How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School (2004), Bransford, Brown, and Cocking's authoritative compendium of learning science; and The Global Achievement Gap: Why Even Our Best Schools Don't Teach the New Survival Skills Our Children Need — and What We Can Do About It (2008), Tony Wagner's compelling proposal to reformulate schools in light of the global knowledge economy. The connective thread, developed initially by Dewey, focuses on the centrality of children's development from thinking about the present to the possible future and, most germane to this review, the necessary elements of schooling that support this development. The intent of this review is not to summarize three texts that are familiar to many in the field. Rather, it is to connect a classic text, How We Think, to a contemporary one, The Global Achievement Gap, using How People Learn, a well-known text, as a conduit. For some, this essay may encourage close or closer examination of these three important works. For others, this essay may stimulate thinking about new or additional connections among them."</li> <li> The article notes: "Therefore, in 1995, the National Research Council (NRC) set out on the daunting task of synthesizing developments in human learning research and using this research to evaluate how our society teaches. The NRC's report, published as How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School, contains important and wide-ranging implications for the design of curricula, instruction, assessments, and learning environments. The report is organized around a central set of three principles about learning and how they should be applied in education. The first recommendation is for teachers to engage the preconceptions that students inevitably have about any subject. Students are not empty vessels waiting to be filled with the knowledge flowing from a teacher's mouth. Rather, students at all ages arrive in the classroom with preconceptions and will always try to fit new information into these preconceptions. Regardless of whether or not these preconceptions are based on real facts, they will always influence learning as the student attempts to assimilate new information into what he/she believes to be true. To identify preconceptions, the teacher needs to design classroom tasks so that the student's thinking process can be revealed. Second, understanding in any area requires a deep factual knowledge of the subject; this deep knowledge consists of ideas that are organized into a context that facilitates retrieval and use. The explicit implication of this educational principle is that superficial coverage of all topics should be abandoned for in-depth coverage of a limited number of topics, stressing specific key concepts. Third, the authors emphasize the importance of student participation in his/her own learning by actively evaluating what they do and do not know. This is a process called “metacognition.” How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School thoroughly establishes the scientific rationale for the recommended core educational principles it presents. The authors use specific examples to illustrate how experts in different fields are able to access connected information, process it in an organized manner, and use a metacognitive perspective to monitor their own progress. The authors also cite cognitive psychology and biological neuroscience research to describe findings relating to how people learn from early childhood through adult life. Emphasis is placed on the brain's immense capacity to learn and functionally reorganize."</li> <li> The article notes: "How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School (1999, National Academy Press) is a successful attempt to synthesize current knowledge about learning. Almost 20 scientists and educators participated in this National Academy of Sciences project, and educational policymakers will find the project's results useful for validating the claims of educational programs that purport to be based on scientific research."</li> <li> The article notes: "I'm delighted to report that How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School (Expanded Version) isn't like that -- which may be both good news and bad news for its potential audiences. The good news is that readers will find a thoughtful compilation of (mostly) recent research from what are coming to be known as 'the learning sciences': cognitive science, educational psychology, computer science, anthropology, sociology, information sciences, neuro-sciences, education, design studies, and instructional design. A follow-up to the 1999 National Research Council publication of How People Learn in 1999, the Expanded Version presents a richly textured challenge to 'many teachers', parents' and students' models of what effective learning looks like' (p.141). The book does not advocate easy-to-market learning programs or easy-to-inservice topics like multiple intelligences or learning styles. Instead, it offers an overview of a wide range of research, a variety of examples, and suggestions for further research and action. And it debunks conventional pedagogical myths: that a good teacher can teach anything; that generic thinking skills apply across any discipline; that content knowledge is enough. So the book is both good news and bad news, depending what you want. As the authors explain with deadly accuracy, educators, policy makers and the general public don't actually care much about research. While there has always been a cachet about being up on the latest, education has a weary history of disdain for theory (usually dismissed as airy-fairy, impractical, and ivory-tower) and vulnerability to bandwagons that purport to be theory-based."</li> </ol>

There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow How People Learn to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 11:45, 31 May 2020 (UTC)</li></ul> thanks to for their comprehensive analysis above, although paling in comparison, i am still including my contribution below:) Coolabahapple (talk) 14:12, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , I think you found a great list of sources yourself. :) Thank you for finding and adding them here! Cunard (talk) 23:18, 31 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment, appears to be a standard text in the field of cognitive science regarding teaching and learning since it was first published in 1999/2000(?) ie. "Developing Teaching, "Introduction to Education: Understanding and Evaluating Education - Readings", "The Challenge of Learning Communities as a Growing National Movement ("There is no shortage of good literature to draw upon. John Bransford's book How People Learn or Lionel Gardner's Redesigning Higher Education for Dramatic Gains in Student Learning are good places to start.")", has been reviewed/discussed in Gifted Children (published by the American Educational Research Association Special Interest Group for Research on Giftedness, Creativity, and Talent - here, International Journal of Science Education - here, The Foundation Review - "The Quest for Deeper Learning and Engagement in Advanced High School Courses" (a study of the Advanced Placement course "U.S. Government and Politics"), so reckon this is a Keep as meeting WP:NBOOK. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:12, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per the sources identified above. I hope you put some of those into the article, rather than just the deletion discussion. :) — Toughpigs (talk) 23:56, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Withdraw nomination per comments above. Happy to be proved wrong - thanks for taking the time to comment here. Boleyn (talk) 18:56, 1 June 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.