I wanted to expand more here on chunking, something most people agree upon but so few manage to actually do. “Chunking” is a relatively new verb. It is a scientific word. It means breaking down a learning process, assessment or movement into its series of mini-movements so that someone learning it can learn it more accurately and faster, and build the right neural pathways. Neuroscientists use this word. Try not to think of “chunky” students, just chunky learning and assessment. I am personally finding it hard to come to terms with this new term due to its linked mental connotations. It is similar to the term “rigour” which, even after 15 years, my brain still associates with death and therefore something negative. However, as I stated in my last post on the subject “chunking” is something I have done for years as a teacher without knowing its name.
I wanted to expand more here on chunking, something most people agree upon but so few manage to actually do. “Chunking” is a relatively new verb. It is a scientific word. It means breaking down a learning process, assessment or movement into its series of mini-movements so that someone learning it can learn it more accurately and faster, and build the right neural pathways. Neuroscientists use this word. Try not to think of “chunky” students, just chunky learning and assessment. I am personally finding it hard to come to terms with this new term due to its linked mental connotations. It is similar to the term “rigour” which, even after 15 years, my brain still associates with death and therefore something negative. However, as I stated in my last post on the subject “chunking” is something I have done for years as a teacher without knowing its name.
Chunking may well be a new verb, but the concept of chunking is certainly not new. George A. Miller formulated the chunking concept in 1956. The problem he identified was that our working memory is limited in capacity. At the time he stated that working memory could hold seven (plus or minus two) chunks of information at once. Now we believe that the number is closer to four, maybe five bits of information. Cognitive researchers also now know that the capacity of working memory depends on the type of information and the features of the information. If a learner’s working memory is full, the excess information is lost—it simply disappears. It means that if you are explaining something complex and the learner must hold several factors in mind to understand it, you’ll need to chunk information into bite-sized pieces.
I’m going to be honest…over the years as a designer, adult trainer and classroom teacher, I have borne witness to the fact that there is a lot of bad teaching and instruction out there, largely as a result of the lack of understanding of how learning takes place. The focus is to all often on the teaching. As a school inspector I used to ask the principal how many people worked in the school or college to see if they counted the students as workers, I latterly changed the question to how many people learned there? to see if they counted the teachers. Companies spend many millions each year producing training for their employees only to find that nothing new has been learned and that performance on the job has not changed. Governments around the world also spend millions on educational resources, “learning platforms” (is it the platform or the student who should be learning), interactive whiteboards, computers and tablets to find even more disengaged learners in the system. Remember we are all wired to learn, the trick is to guide this learning into something we want to teach.
In teaching and lecturing the art comes from the teacher’s and instructors personality, experience, and talents. The science comes from knowledge of how learning happens and structuring and chunking the content correctly. We cant continue the process of trying to cram large often lifeless, sterile, futile, quickly forgotten stuff into the minds of the poor helpless individuals tied into their seats by ironclad bonds of conformity. It is simply a waste of time and money. And we can’t just group content by topic area and hope that these chunks of knowledge happen to coincidently match the real science of learning. Nor can we expect teachers and lecturers to be talented deliverers of exciting learning environments and also experts in the chunking of content to match the latest learning sciences. It is our job as education and training experts to give teachers and lecturers the tools they need to do their job, the art, effectively. A man knowing little or nothing of medical science could not be a good surgeon, but excellence at surgery is not the same thing as knowledge of the latest medical science; nor is it a simple product of it. We don’t expect the surgeon to create their own tools, only to inform and question the efficiency and effectiveness of them. Yet we do expect teachers and lecturers to be both artists and experts and more, we also expect them to be good developers of their own learning delivery tools, to write their own content and to chunk it into deliverable sections and then to build tailored individualised learning for each and every student using the chunks. We unrealistically expect ALL our teachers and lecturers to be some sort of supper human-being capable of everything.
So with no ROI why bother? As a curriculum designer I do understand how teachers, trainers and lecturers do not want to change how they teach every year just because “so and so” came out with a new technique which looks familiar to the one they used several years ago. But what I am advocating here is not new. Not the latest trend. It is how we all learn. We all know that ASAP we must come to terms with our ISPs and plans for those in DAEP and ISS. We have scheduled ARDs or have paperwork on students that have a BIP. We also know that we need to look at the STAAR scores. I know that I have to write training materials in AmE and BE alongside EAP for ELLS. We have the 411 and we are A-OK with actually saying these new words. So all we need to know is if “chunking” or ML “micro-learning” is needed for our VLE or MLE for effective learning. This is all that matters.
Effective learning always begins and ends with the content and its assessment…period. Always has. Not the latest technology, not the latest anagram – good content. The truth is…if you don’t have solid, well-organised chunked content matched to effective motivational assessment, it won’t matter that you used the coolest graphics, the latest technology or the latest functionality…it won’t matter who the teacher, lecturer or guest speaker was or even if the learners and teachers had a lot of fun. Without good chunked content the learning gains when matched to learning objectives will be minimal. If you are not going to focus upon good chunked content save yourself the money. Technology is only there to deliver good chunked content.
So we know that chunking refers to the strategy of breaking down information into bite-sized pieces so the brain can more easily digest new information. I read an article which stated that “chunking is a powerful encoding strategy that significantly improves working memory performance in normal people.” I am not sure about the term “normal people” (who wants to be normal anyhow?) as recent research has shown that even people with mild Alzheimer’s disease (n = 28) that performed digit and spatial working memory tasks requiring either unstructured sequences or structured sequences (which encourage chunking of information) to be recalled performed significantly better on structured trials of the digit working memory tasks, indicating successful use of chunking strategies to improve verbal working memory performance.
Chunking information is particularly important for online learning. Without a teacher or instructor to answer questions and guide the learning process the structure of content becomes much more critical. eLearning content has to be organised in a logical and progressive way through chunking or the learner simply drifts off task. But please do not think that because of this chunking will only work for linear instruction, it also works for learning objects, for non-linear approaches to learning as well as discovery learning, Chunking is also good for practical non-eLearning. Brandeis University’s Volen Center for Complex Systems published a study “Monkey See Monkey Do”. The study notes that: “Several strategies may help leverage a learner’s attention and motivate imitative learning. Organising the motor skill practice is key. For example, Sekuler, an expert on the neural and cognitive terrain of visual memory, says that breaking down a behavioural sequence into chunks can aid imitation learning, just as chunking can help us memorise a string of seemingly unrelated digits or other material. Agam and Sekuler have their sights set on identifying strategies that teachers and coaches could use to make complex actions more “chunkable,” and therefore easier to imitate.
So lets accept that chunking works and see where we go from there. First we need to chunk the content and assessment strategy. If you have a chunk of content that goes on for pages and pages or assessment that is delivered after weeks of learning, you probably haven’t “chunked” enough. Before we build a delivery mechanism we need to also explore the assessment of “chunks”. Throughout my education and training career I have come across the phrase “assess what do the students know, understand and can do”. Ok I can easily tell what they can do but how do I assess what they understand and know? I never personally use “know” or “understand” action verb in my learning objectives. I prefer to use more accurate, descriptive verbs such as “explain,” “describe,” or “discuss.” Once I have the desired content chunks and what I want to measure or assess I can look at the best delivery methods and if concepts such as gasification can help with effective delivery. Only when I have my content to this stage and how I want to deliver and assess the chunks do I start to explore the delivery technologies, often having to build new software systems to better suit the needs of effective learning. The important thing is that the technology choices comes last, not first.
Starting with the technology choices and then pasting in content without first developing a detailed learning design structure is the biggest mistake that most training professionals and subject matter experts make. It is very common for someone tasked with developing training to grab the latest technology trend then jump right in and start putting together training materials without giving much thought to the learner and the organisation and chunking of the content. This results in a very confusing and ineffective experience for all the learners.
Steve Cushing
Recent Comments