Curriculum planning for un-learning

  • Thread starter Thread starter Stephen Tashi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Curriculum
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the concept of "unlearning" in the context of curriculum design for mathematics and science education. Participants argue that current educational practices often fail to account for the necessity of unlearning outdated or incorrect concepts, such as the intuitive but inaccurate definition of "center of mass." Evidence suggests that students retain misconceptions, as seen in their reliance on flawed long division methods and the introduction of quantum mechanics through misleading models like the Bohr atom. This indicates a significant gap in curriculum planning that overlooks the cognitive process of unlearning.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of curriculum design principles
  • Familiarity with cognitive development theories
  • Knowledge of foundational concepts in mathematics and science education
  • Awareness of common misconceptions in educational contexts
NEXT STEPS
  • Research effective curriculum design strategies that incorporate unlearning
  • Explore cognitive development theories related to learning and unlearning
  • Investigate methods for addressing misconceptions in mathematics education
  • Examine case studies on teaching quantum mechanics effectively
USEFUL FOR

Educators, curriculum designers, cognitive psychologists, and anyone involved in teaching mathematics and science who seeks to improve student understanding and retention of accurate concepts.

Stephen Tashi
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Education Advisor
Messages
7,864
Reaction score
1,602
Learning mathematics and science at a given stage seems to involve unlearning some of what you learned at an earlier stage. Do experts in "curriculum design" take this into account when they organize materials?

At the moment, I'm thinking of the intuitive, but technically incorrect definition of "center of mass" given at http://dev.physicslab.org/Document.aspx?doctype=3&filename=RotaryMotion_CenterMass.xml , but, of course, there are many other examples of things we learned at one stage of education and have to un-learn later.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Stephen Tashi said:
Do experts in "curriculum design" take this into account when they organize materials?
A $64,000 question. Impression, based on frequency of "n goes into m a total of l times with a remainder of r" answers to long division problems at high school level, is "No." The kids will even give you the calculator keystrokes to arrive at this result for the introductory use of the "by hand" long division algorithm, and show "n x l + r = m" as a check of their work. They've never unlearned the "remainder" game, and that's the way they're going to do it forever.
Science? I cannot honestly tell you that I've seen evidence that the introductory material that has to be unlearned has actually been taught --- current approaches appear to be built around a "creative investigation," the kids observe and explain any old way they want, and never get steered toward fossilized scientific methods. Hopefully that's not universal, and I've just been unfortunate enough to see only the "novel" methods.
That's part of what got me active again on PF, curiosity regarding what was showing up for OPs, and I'd say what I've seen over the last couple months is consistent with what I've been seeing elsewhere.
 
As all subject matter is presented more or less in a linear sequence, I don't think that unlearning is required. You may not see this sequence when you are "being exposed" to new material but it has to be there for further learning to take place. You can't add when you can't count because counting is inherent in addition. Likewise with any subject matter, there must be building blocks of some sort. So unlearning is not part of the education experience. Relearning is different because you can at times see the structure involved and depending on the approach being used, it will appear as different.
 
jmeps said:
So unlearning is not part of the education experience..

I completely disagree. Unlearning may not be part of the theoretical experience of some idealized student that exists in the mind of curriculum planners, but it is a part of every actual student's experience.
 
QM is introduced in HS chemistry with the Bohr atom. Little tiny marbles orbiting another little marble. Getting people to unlearn that model is one giant, never ending headache.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
845
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
9K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • Sticky
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
67K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K