Neural organization

What makes transfer possible is the process of encoding (Miller, 1956). Encoding is the process by which information is transferred from one’s short-term memory to one’s long-term memory (Bruning, Schraw, & Norby, 2011, p. 363) and it is at the heart of the construction process. Without meaning construction and the encoding of that meaning, there would be nothing to transfer. There are several key components that are part of the encoding process. These include, storage of concepts and organization of concepts- with particular attention paid to connections between and among concepts, and mental representation, in various forms such as words, numbers, images, action clips (e.g., “mental movies”), sensations (e.g., body memory), sounds, smells, tastes, and emotions- all of which refer to and symbolize a particular notion. These representations may include, but are not limited to, a concept’s definitions, messages, synonyms and analogies, its nature as captured in supporting principles or theories, its detailed substance, the individual features, functions, and behaviors that make it unique, and the features,

functions, and behaviors it shares with other concepts. This serves as a repertoire of multi-modal, multi-linguistic, and multi-media representations related to one concept.

Teachers can assist learners in creating a mental “toolbox” of big ideas, and their related principles and concepts that might be applicable to certain situations. (Multiple chunks with some of the same concepts in each equate to flexible mental representations of concepts.) This also involves assisting learners in “reading” a situation, in order to recognize patterns of useful information or configurations and their implications, analyzing a situation by formulating reasoned interpretations or solutions, and identifying what makes a concept a “high-quality possibility” in a given situation. Additionally, it can be helpful to learners when teachers organize information into “chunks” of related information. This makes these ideas easier to encode in organized conceptual structures (i.e. schemata).

2.2.9.1 Storage.

Awakening prior knowledge is not the same thing as awakening long-term storage. It is not enough to form mental representation(s) of a concept- even if they are detailed and plentiful- if those representations are not lasting. As such, encoding, which is the process of storing these representations in long-term memory, is an implicit and essential part of the construction process. Triggering the response to store ideas, involves several elements. In part, this involves both a cognitive and social-emotional “availability” on the part of the learner. For example,

during an education experience a learner might create images, sounds, words, mental movies,

and many other mental representations of the idea of gravity. In that moment, she may appear to have constructed the essence of gravity- it’s definition, analogies, and underlying theories. Yet, if neither content nor related learning experiences provide an affective stir, she will not encode this essence, long-term. This is because the brain is most likely to encode representations, long-term,

when some part of the learning experience is aesthetic or emotive. As such, memorizing is not the same as encoding, as the former may or may not engage the social-emotional domain. For example, an opportunity to investigate instances in which one might apply a concept, within the context of a simulation, is much more likely to trigger the social-emotional domain than

memorizing a list of instances in which others think one should apply a concept. In contrast, storing mental representations in mind, long-term always requires emotional or affective engagement, and this is most likely to occur through a learner’s direct experience with, observation of, and reflection upon an idea.

Knowing what to store, then, is dependent upon cognitive attentiveness and direction of attention. Knowing what to store also involves the act of abstracting the general features of a concept, over many instances. While having more conceptual chunks in memory and more relations or features defining each chunk, is important for expanding understanding, possessing an abundance of information is moot if the concepts are poorly organized. Thus, while affective engagement might trigger long-term storage, and attention, direction, and abstraction might help the learner decide what to store, the brain must decide where and how to store this meaning- lest relevant information will never be found or useful.

2.2.9.2 Organization.

Deciding where to store meaning and how to arrange it is not always a conscious process. Often the brain decides where and how to organize concepts subconsciously, and thus, a learner may not even be cognizant of this element. Organization, however, does inform the efficiency with which a learner retrieves the information. As discussed previously (see Conditions of

Applicability, above), information needs to be conditionalized upon the potential contexts, in

This amounts to a kind of cognitive filing. It is hoped this filing results in clustering ideas into related units, governed by underlying concepts and principles. Hence, usually smaller details (e.g., facts, examples, quotes, images) are “filed under” bigger ideas. Typically, these big ideas are the essential and significant features of a concept, but they can take a variety of forms. Examples of big ideas may be a concept’s conditions of applicability or dispositional attitudes and mindsets that can help a person complete an act of application or see it as useful to life.

2.2.9.3 Connections.

The word “connection” can be ambiguous and diversely used. In this context, it typically refers to conceptual connections between ideas. Even then, such conceptual connections can refer to multiple acts and aspects of the learning process. Connecting smaller concepts to larger ideas, in order to answer life’s big questions about the world and one’s place in it, connotes one type of connection. Forming interrelations among chunks by actively seeking and creating connections between ideas is another. Awakening prior knowledge to connect new information with the existing, through analogical thinking, in order to create personally derived

representations and meanings that are commonly shared, is another.

Sometimes an educator must make explicit connections between concepts that highlight relationships between ideas. Although this is often required as an inherent part of engaging learners in learning experiences, conceptual connections are often not made explicit. In other words, learners may be writing as they record scientific observations in a lab notebook, but they may not perceive the parallel between writing in language arts and writing in other subjects, such as science. By drawing learners’ attention to the comparison, learners come to see writing as an applicable and relevant endeavor. Other times, learners inherently perceive features or patterns across examples that can lead to the abstraction of rules, conjectures, or big ideas. Hence, the

construction and abstraction process often leads to the learner building his or her own explicit connections.

2.2.9.4 Recall, retrieval, interpretation, analysis, and selection.

The processes of recalling and retrieving information, for the purpose of applying the information within new contexts, have traditionally been described in terms of efficiency and automaticity. Automaticity is one way to engage in efficient recall and retrieval, and thus, one way to reduce cognitive load. For example, instantly knowing 5 x 7 = 35 is much more efficient than needing to recalculate the answer anew each time, and thus, reduces the load on one’s working memory. Bransford, Brown, and Cocking (2000) denote, a learner’s familiarity with acts of applying meaning during the learning process may remind the learner of the need to reference her mental “toolbox” of related concepts when she is faced with applications in the real world (p. 43). In other words, although a learner’s broad familiarity with various acts of

application does not typically assist him or her in retrieving a specific chunk of information associated with a particular application task, this familiarity can remind the learner that all problems of application can be approached calmly and systematically by referring to the cognitive toolbox she has built related to that task. This equates to a kind of dispositional automaticity.

Yet, despite ease of recall through automaticity, learning with understanding requires more than just the simple recollection of facts. Thus, another way to reduce cognitive load is described by Bransford, Brown, and Cocking (2000), who define this process in terms of fluency and accessibility. They denote fluent recall and accessible retrieval are reliant upon organized mental “toolboxes of meaning” (p. 43). As such, instead of memorizing facts, this process involves interpreting or “reading” a situation. Reading a situation means the learner can perceive

patterns of useful information or configurations of data within context. It also implies a learner’s ability to segment the perceptual field, develop sensitivity to potential patterns, and recognize problem types (Carpenter, Fennema, Franke, Levi, & Empson, 1999). Once a situation has been interpreted, further analysis is required. This means attempting to understand the situation, in order to assess the implications of identified patterns of information. This is the point at which fluent recall and accessible retrieval come into play. Further, if the situation is a problem to be solved, analysis involves identifying a possible relevant and “high quality” solution. This involves knowing when certain laws may be useful in solving problems. Hence, “practicing” transfer helps learners weigh the relevancy of a concept to a situation. Potentially, it is also a reminder to the learner that he or she should try to understand the problem and reference what she knows about both the associated content and processes, instead of simply looking for surface features or plugging numbers into formulas (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, p. 41). According to Bransford, Brown, and Cocking (2000), these processes help a learner find the most workable solution path (p. 38), when faced with a problem in which multiple concepts must be applied to form the solution, or when a number of ideas represent possible solutions and a learner must select the most fitting.

2.2.9.5 Reflection.

Practice applying concepts under new contexts and conditions (i.e., transfer) provides an opportunity for the learner to practice reflecting on one’s own meaning construction and whether or not one has a sufficient amount of relevant information to make transfer possible. Processes of application raise questions of whether one has enough of the right kind of meaning to solve a problem or to practice an act, like sharing information with others. Likewise, acts of application also allow the learner to reflect upon and construct knowledge related to his or herself as a

learner. This form of reflection is known as metacognition (Brown, 1975; Flavell, 1973). Metacognition is the act of being mindful of how one thinks. Ultimately, the end goal of

metacognition is to develop self-knowledge and develop the ability to teach one’s self. It implies developing a vocabulary related to one’s self as a learner, reflecting on one’s own growth, and setting goals. This involves reflection on the acts themselves, reflection one’s ability to enact the act, and reflection on what one can do to improve his or her ability to enact the act.