{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","provider_name":"Transistor","provider_url":"https://transistor.fm","author_name":"The Knowledge Architects: Building Wisdom in the Information Age","title":"Episode 28 | Concept Maps","html":"","width":"100%","height":180,"duration":977,"description":"\nEpisode Summary\n\nIn 1969, a Cornell professor began a study that would take him twenty-two years to publish. He taught science to six and seven year olds, then kept interviewing them, year after year, all the way through grade twelve. About three years in, he hit a wall. He had a mountain of interview transcripts and no way to see what was actually inside a child's head. The tool his team invented to solve that problem escaped the laboratory, became a worldwide study technique, and forty years later was put on trial in the pages of Science.\nFor three episodes we have been building an argument. Episode 25 gave us the theory, Episode 26 the phenomenon, Episode 27 the engineering. But in all three, somebody else made the picture and the learner received it. This episode asks what happens when the learner draws it. We trace Joseph Novak's concept map from its origins as a measurement instrument, through David Ausubel's assimilation theory, into one of the larger evidence bases in educational psychology. Then we do the harder thing and read that evidence honestly, because it contains three uncomfortable findings, and every one of them was stated by the field's own researchers.\n\nKey Topics Covered\n\nThe concept map was deduced, not stumbled upon: Ausubel's theory said cognitive structure is hierarchical, therefore the drawing had to be hierarchicalNovak's twelve year longitudinal study, the federal funding it never received, and the kits he ran it onNovak and Musonda (1991): the lasting effect of two years of tape guided science lessons at ages six to eightThe quietest finding in that study: ten years of ordinary schooling barely dented the uninstructed children's misconceptionsDavid Ausubel's assimilation theory: meaningful learning versus rote learning, and the epigraph that defined Novak's careerWhy meaningful learning is volitional, and why the ordinary objective test fails to reward itThe rote to meaningful continuum is Novak's amendment: Ausubel resisted it, then...","thumbnail_url":"https://img.transistorcdn.com/FqjMDaQUSm1bYfkwwD6aDUnSGdwLjCiheWhxBb00zow/rs:fill:0:0:1/w:400/h:400/q:60/mb:500000/aHR0cHM6Ly9pbWct/dXBsb2FkLXByb2R1/Y3Rpb24udHJhbnNp/c3Rvci5mbS84YjIz/YzkwMzlmNGM5YmEw/NTJkOGYyMTk0YTMw/ZWM0Zi5wbmc.webp","thumbnail_width":300,"thumbnail_height":300}