Why do we need to learn it, if we can just look it up?
I have attempted to answer the question about rote learning in relation to my own teaching experiences. I find in my own educational setting (the elementary level), fewer teachers are focusing on rote learning, and instead there has been a recent push on inquiry based learning, which I tell my students is learning and researching topics and ideas that are not “googleable.” With advancements in technology, I find it is getting more and more difficult to justify why my students need to memorize the formula for calculating the area of a trapezoid, or remember facts about the five Kingdoms, when they can be quickly searched up using the Internet. Even reasons like “you might not always have a calculator on you,” or “you might not have Wi-Fi” are becoming obsolete as the majority of my students have their own devices (which include a calculator), and (free) Wi-Fi is becoming more and more available.
While education here in B.C seems to be moving away from rote learning, I am not sure it is the same in all places. Many of my international students often tell me that the math here is much easier than in say China or Korea, as students here do not have to do as much memorization. It is my understanding that with regards to math, students in other countries do much more rote learning, and it is interesting to note that these students are usually my top mathematicians. (Having only ever taught in British Columbia, these are just my own observations based on my own teaching experiences).
Plato suggested that “writing destroys memory” and “weakens the mind” (Ong, 1982, p. 79), I disagree. I do not believe that writing destroys memory, but helps us preserve it. For example, the Diary of Anne Frank gives us insight into what life was like for Jewish people during the Holocaust, or the journal or blog you kept about your trip to Europe allows you to share your experiences with others and helps you remember the places you visited, the things you did and the people you met. Many people are visual learners, and so writing out a complex algebraic expression or an important speech or document helps preserve and solidify the ideas in the mind and makes them permanent. As Ong states “[w]ithout writing, the literate mind would not and could not think as it does, not only when engaged in writing but normally even when it is composing its thoughts in oral form” (p. 78). As our world changes, writing has actually helped our society advance, develop and adapt with the changes, as means of communication have broadened. Ong writes that “[s]ustained thought in an oral culture is tied to communication” (p. 34), but it is through writing that communication has been able to expand and evolve.
With all that being said, I do still believe there is a place for rote learning, but I think it looks a bit different in today’s educational setting than it has in the past. I still go over the multiplication tables with my students, but instead of simply having them repeat it orally or through repetitive worksheets, I have students do it through games on the computer or on their devices.
References
Ong, W. (1982). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. London: Methuen. Retrieved from. http://site.ebrary.com/lib/ubc/reader.action?docID=10017717
Image “Slide_SethSays” by Seth Godin is licensed under Flickr Commons.
Well said Kara. I also agree that there is a place for rote memorization, such as in the area of mathematics. I am a primary teacher and push for the memorization of basic facts. However, with regards to many other facts that we must store in our over-burdened minds such as capital cities or the number of moons around each of the planets, memorization does not seem that necessary. I do not think I would like to have an architect rely on memory for the formula for important calculations with regards to the construction of a new building! But memorization, like with math facts, that can increase speed and efficiency in math is certainly quite worthwhile. I do not think we need to move away from that completely simply because it is easy to find an answer online. There are so many fun and interesting ways that we can practice facts now days that even the term ‘rote memorization’ does not seem to have the right connotation. Maybe if we came up with a more fun sounding term, students and others would not be so opposed to the practice!
I also agree that writing is definitely expanding communication rather that hindering it. I’ve mentioned before that for me, this course would not be at all possible if it were not for the technology that allows us to share our thoughts and ideas online. This all developed from writing and I do not see it as a detriment to society in anyway. I love your example of the Diary of Anne Frank. There are so many written documents that allow us to learn about historical events that may never have otherwise been heard by anyone had we relied solely on oral communication. There are letters that have been written from people that never had the chance to share their thoughts with anyone, telling things that would otherwise have gone unknown. Advances in technology are really making our world smaller. We know of world events as they are happening, whereas in the past, news would take a very long time to travel even within a province.
I agree a more “fun” sounding term, something different than “rote” or “memorization” would go a long way! I recently attended a workshop on how to get boys to write more, and it was recommended to use sports terms to engage students. For example, don’t call it journaling, but extreme writing. That way, it doesn’t turn kids off as quickly.
Hi Kara,
I liked your point about how writing preserves memory. When I read the excerpt, I was thinking about memory on an individual level, but I agree that we know more about the past because people have been writing it down. Ong mentions that in oral cultures the stories are about people who are larger than life, heroes and their adventures. He states, “Colourless personalities cannot survive oral mnemonics” (Ong, 1982). That means there is very little information about generations past human memory. Whereas, because of written language, we have information about regular life from long ago. You’re example of the Diary of Anne Frank is an excellent example. She recorded her history for us, and future generations, and has given us an insight into her life. It is interesting to be able to learn about “everyday” people through journals and letters.
Another way writing preserves memory is by saving stories that are no longer popular. Ong also mentions in his book that audiences dictated the stories, and the versions of stories, which they wanted to hear (Ong, 1982). We do the same thing of course, but the difference is that there is a record of stories that are no longer popular which can be “rediscovered” later.
I agree that writing has broadened our communications ability. We are able to communicate across huge distances and can receive ideas from past generations. We have continued to expand our ability to communicate and now you can share your ideas with people on the other side of the world, or learn about the everyday lives of your ancestors.
Catherine
Resources:
Ong, W. (1982). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. London: Methuen. Retrieved from. http://site.ebrary.com/lib/ubc/reader.action?docID=10017717
Hey Catherine,
To touch on what you said about Ong mentioning, “audiences dictated the stories, and the versions of stories, which they wanted to hear,” you are correct in what you said about us doing the same, (think social media sites like Twitter). I think for our society, and our abilities to communicate on such a broad scale, it would be easier to find the “truth” in a literate society than an oral one, because you would not need to simply take the speaker’s word. Plato had some reservations about writing, one of them being that “a written text is basically unresponsive” (Ong, 1982, p. 79), you are speaking to someone in person and can receive an explanation, whereas a text cannot respond back to you if you have a question. If that speaker is telling us a story about an event, there was an earthquake for example, how do we know what s/he is saying is true? We could gather other witnesses, but again, how would you know that they did not fabricate the story ahead of time? With the invention of the Internet however, we can easily find the re-telling of stories from multiple perspectives and from different people around the globe, which adds to the credibility of the story.
I think you make an important point about how writing has enabled us to “rediscover” stories that may not be popular. While residential schools and internment camps may not be one of BC’s finest moments, having written proof that these things actually happened, and to have evidence of them from various sources, help to remind us of past mistakes and (hopefully) help us learn from them so we do not repeat them.
Hi Kara;
I, too, believe there is a positive place in the real world for memorization. Just think of the time element alone spent looking up every little tidbit of information needed to complete what could be a series of simple tasks. I would develop a game, a ‘Macgyver’ style competition, a physical race through an obstacle course whereby the students in teams had to use their wits rather than their technology to complete all the tasks in a timely manner. (“Drawing on a vast practical knowledge of science, Macgyver is able to make use of any mundane materials around him to create unorthodox solutions to any problem he faces”.) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088559/ Or if I had a devious side, I’d remove all their batteries for a day (April Fools’ maybe?). I guess what I’m saying is that young people need to experience living with less to appreciate the more of technology. Can some forms of technology become a security blanket, or an addiction? These experiences would be a means of strengthening self-confident in our young people.
“I do not believe that writing destroys memory, but helps us preserve it.” We hear of how individuals who have gone through traumatic experiences write as a form of therapy; that talking doesn’t have the same effects, the emotional release from stress. I also think that in not developing our memory skills we are not looking at the whole person from birth to natural death – not as just a student of a young age but also as an elderly adult. How will this style of learning affect their mental capacities (dementia) in the later years of life? Are education authorities just removing this skill set of learning in order to insert another within what seems to be restrictive daily time limits to the school year?
When Ong discusses the engagement with writing, I think he could be saying that when we physically hold a writing tool (be it a pencil, chalk, stick) and form the shape of each letter of each word, our brains are recording those actions resulting in a stronger connectivity to how we thinking as we focus on our choice of wording to form particular expressions of thought. When we are typing data entry on a keyboard, that brain to document relationship is not as close, one step removed. And maybe that is why spell check was invented and is now so popular.
Terry