Preliminary reflections on rote learning.
Even early in a teaching career it is already to identify some of the greatest philosophical battles that take place in academic corridors. Recently at a gathering of mathematical educators I started a robust conversation over the merits of learning timetables by rote learning.
Questions on the intent of education, specifically mathematically based, are not anything new. Twenty years ago we were asking whether there is benefit to using calculators in a classroom or if the underpinning mathematical knowledge is more important, this is still relevant.1 There seems to be a disconnected between the academic debates on education and what is practised within classrooms. It is necessary for a teacher to be equipped to take the best research and apply it to their learning context.2
There is an argument that rote learning can be considered the opposite to creative thinking.3 Perhaps this is an unfair generalisation of broad educational strategies. Yet we still see school models built from an era of industrial revolution. Education is changing, yes, but perhaps not at a desired speed – and not with a degree of uniformity.
It can still be argued many educators focus on the assessment and data, as well as replication of skills instead of the core educational outcomes that drive our knowledge forward.4 At times this can be driven forward by cluttered oversight of educational systems.
Still it is worth entertaining a notion that within rote learning, comes routine. Routine in education can be a magical strategy. It can assist with challenging behaviour and provide opportunities for deeper learning from students.5 Though it needs to be considered with the same meaningfulness as other teaching strategies – not as an activity to consume time. It is worth exploring if rote learning can be differentiated by definition. If there is the potential for this versatility – perhaps rote learning in a diverse education setting becomes a key player for learning outcomes.
In the context of the Australian Curriculum, the necessity for knowledge of multiplicative thinking is self-evident. It is clear that a student needs be able to use timetables by rote in their thinking to free up cognitive space for higher order thinking. The jury is still out on how that education takes place.
—
References
1Hiebert, J. (1999). Relationships between Research and the NCTM Standards. Journal For Research In Mathematics Education, 30(1), 3. doi: 10.2307/749627
2Hiebert, p3
3Lithner, J. (2007). A research framework for creative and imitative reasoning. Educational Studies In Mathematics, 67(3), 255-276. doi: 10.1007/s10649-007-9104-2
4Ritchhart, R., Church, M., & Morrison, K. (2011). Making thinking visible: How to promote engagement, understanding, and independence for all learners. John Wiley & Sons.
5Ritchhart, R. (2015). Creating Cultures of Thinking. Jossey-Bass.
AITSL Standards: 1.2, 3.3, 4.3
The Remote Teacher 