Education, An Empirical Art
In empirical arts, practices with repeatable and reproducible results
come first, tested via trial and error. Then theories and principles
come later to summarize, to codify, to refine and even enlighten the
practices. While practices or sequences of them in some empirical or
hands-on arts in science, technology and business, assembly lines
included, may comply with principles and standards, even be
connected and organized and designed around said principles and
standards, the forerunner to such organization or optimization
should consists of methods that are tried and tested, methods that work
in a plug and play manner, methods whose benefits, origins and
limitations are described..
Education is an empirical art. We may not read a student's mind, how a
student thinks or links together skills and patterns, yet we can
observe and test student performance, skill by skill, concept by concept,
and encourage, but not guarantee, mastery of standard calculations and
standard arguments or chains of reason in algebra, geometry and beyond.
In some disciplines, not all, there are right and wrong answers due to
methods that lead to repeatable and reproducible, and thus verifiable
results independent of whom-ever applies the method. Learning how to
apply and combine methods carefully to obtain reproducible and thus
verifiable results is an old sign of intelligence in many old arts and
disciplines in business, trades, science, engineering, technology
and bureaucracy. The latter is subject to the limitations of rule and
pattern based thought and practices, and the critical knowledge that not
all is certain in empirical based thought and practice.
Critical thinking in science and technology begins with an awareness that
what we hope for, dream of or construct in our minds remains speculation
or faith IF or WHILE it or its consequence cannot be observe or tested
directly to be corroborated if not confirmed. The foregoing is a rebuttal
to the constructivist theory of learning, the part which opposes testing,
the existence of questions with right or wrong answers, and which says
student knowledge, if individually constructed, should not be
contradicted. Empirically sound education must oppose wishful
thinking. That being said, constructivist methods for engaging,
authentic, genuine material and the development of critical thinking
could be incorporated into education as an empirical art.
More on Testing. Knowledge empirically found or
tested is relative and not absolute. Instruction which relies on
testing skills and concepts can only identify errors in the mastery of
the latter while correct responses only confirm, but do not guarantee
mastery. But the level of student competence in a discipline defined by
skills and concept mastery can be estimated from the degree of
difficulty, the unlikelihood of correct responses if skills and
concepts have not been mastered, and comprehensive of a test or
series of test. Here individualized testing may be informative that
mass testing. Empirical soundness of instruction and testing, the issue
of lessons and associated tests with repeatable and reproducible
results locally and beyond, should not be scrutinized in an absolute
manner. Cognitive theory should look at education as an empirical
art.
While a teacher can not read the mind of a student, a teacher may see and
correct mistakes, minor to major, in the content and style of student
writings and further endeavors or products, so that the student may
learn from his or her mistakes, and possibly learn how to make fewer
mistakes. In the short span of education, several years or more, the
student will meet subjects in which individual construction or
organization of skills and concepts cannot in the first instance replace
the early collective and refined products of many minds.
Instruction is an empirical art with value judgments and decision
dependent on the subject at hand and what students produce -
observable behaviors or products only. Any else is subjective - not
repeatable and reproducible. In particular, the constructivist
approach to instruction, despite fine calls for authentic, realistic and
engaging material and practices in the classroom, calls that should be
heeded and empirically supported as much as possible, in its opposition
to the testing and measurement of skills and performance provide vacuous
standards for instruction and undermines the sequential nature of
learning in which skills and concepts at one level need to be learnt and
verified before the next level begins.
|
|