The main purpose of rote learning is to memorize information such as basic math skills, dates poetry, spelling words etc. As we become more dependent on mobile technology, it seems like there is less need to rely on memorization for accessing information. This begs the question, “Should we still be teaching rote learning in school?”
I believe rote learning should not be a primary source of learning in the classroom. Bloom’s taxonomy of cognitive behaviours lists memorizing under knowledge which is the lowest level in the cognitive domain. Constructivism, a popular learning theory in the field of education, values critical thinking which is the highest cognitive domain of Bloom’s taxonomy. 21rst century learning favours constructivism over traditional methods, such as rote learning.
Rote learning should not be completely eliminated from the school system either. What happens if one’s personal technology breaks down? Students should be able to call on their memory to provide factual information even if they usually turn to technology for answers. Also, students need to know basic facts in order to solve more complex problems. It would be a waste of time to always turn to technology during problem solving instead of recalling this information from memory.
Referring to writing, Thamus said, “Those who acquire it will cease to exercise their memory and become forgetful” (as cited by Postman, 1992, p.4). If alive today, Thamus would say the Internet, mobile phones, ipads etc. hinder brain functions as well. I believe these technologies support our problem solving and thinking but should not be depended upon as the sole source of information. Rote learning still has a place in our schools. Our goal, as educators, is to integrate new and old teaching philosophies and technologies in the best ways that suit the needs of our students.
Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New york: Vintage books.