Bruner - The Process of Education
Bransford, Brown & Cocking – How People Learn
As it states on the cover
of the book, The Process of Education is a "landmark of educational
theory." It was originally written in 1960 as a general report of a National
Academy of Science conference (the Woods Hole Conference) which brought together
many important thinkers (mostly men, reflecting the status of women in those
days) in psychology, education, math, science, and history. The historical
context at the time of the conference was the "post Sputnik" scramble
to deal with the "crisis in national security" (p. 1) The Soviet
Union had succeeded in beating the Americans in the race to space and there
was widespread concern about what this might mean for the safety of the US.
It also raised concerns about preparing students to succeed in math, science,
and technology in an effort to educate future leaders in the fields of math
and science - areas that directly influence the development of tools to protect
American interests. At the time of the conference, behaviorism was still the
dominant learning theory, and classrooms in the
There are many important ideas in this little book. Here are some of the ones that we will discuss on Wednesday in class:
1. Bruner uses the term “structure” in a couple of different but related ways: structure of a discipline and structures in memory (schemata). What is structure, and how might this idea help you as a teacher?
2. Bruner also talks a lot about the "fundamental ideas of a discipline?" What does he mean by “fundamental?”
3. Pick a discipline that you feel you know pretty well (perhaps your undergraduate major). What are some of the fundamental ideas? What do you think about Bruner’s claim that they can be taught to any child at any age? (and what does he mean by “intellectual honesty?”)
4. What do you think about the idea of a “middle language – classroom discussions and textbooks that talk about the conclusions in a field of intellectual inquiry rather than centering upon the inquiry itself “ (p.14) How does this match up with your own educational experiences?
5. On p. 20 Bruner talks about the importance of developing attitudes toward learning and inquiry. He suggests that it might be important to retain some quality of learning as a process of discovery. However, he also seems to be suggesting that students need to understand the fundamental ideas of the discipline. Are these two ideas compatible? Is there a tension between them? Can we have it both ways?
6. 40 years later, the National Academy of Science convened another group of prominent scientists and educators. The result of this collaboration was How People Learn. In the first chapter, the authors lay out many of the current big ideas in learning from a cognitive point of view and their implications for teaching. Compare the two documents, one from the beginning of an era, and one from the present. What are some of the ideas described by Bruner that have survived four decades of research? What’s missing?