Case-Based Reasoning Meets Learning by Doing

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Goal-Based Scenarios: expectations. The trainee is thus left with cases and no place to put them, which means he will soon forget them. 2. Any new case must violate expectations from prior cases The particulars of what case is best presented when are important to work out. The right thing to ask about the right time to tell the cherry tree story is, "After what case should the cherry tree case be presented?" One possibility, a very good one indeed, is that this (and all other cases) are presented only after the listener has taken some action that shows he is in need of the case (lying, in this example). This point shall be elaborated further in the next maxim. Here we address the issue of what to do when the only medium available is the presentation of cases. The ordering of cases in a continuous presentation of cases requires that each case address some expectation in a prior case. Put this way, the cherry tree case would have to be presented after a case about lying and getting away with it if it were part of a course on honesty in relationships. Or it could be presented after the case of Cain and Abel if it were part of a course on managing hostility in children. I am actually not trying to make a joke here at all, but rather to bring up a significant issue. There is no way to say when the cherry tree case ought to be presented in the absence of an understanding of what kind of course it was a part of. What is absolutely wrong is that it be used as a case in American history since it tells us nothing whatever about American history. It might be part of a course in Washington's character. This could be useful in setting up expectations about his honesty that might be built upon or violated in a subsequent story about his adult behavior, but I have never heard such a story and certainly have never heard of it being told for that reason. This bears on the ideas brought up earlier of the thematic organization of cases in a course. Cases cannot be easily remembered if they are not part of some organized set of expectation s about a certain class of behaviors. It may be appealing to tell Paul Revere and George Washington stories to children who may well respond to them as children respond to any well told story. But if we want children to remember what they have been told and put that story to use in some way, they need to be told with some coherent themes in mind, building each new point on an expectation set up by a prior case. 3. Cases should relate to actions Of course, the best teaching relates to actual behaviors, not passive listening. This is what learning by doing is all about. Not all learning can be learning by doing, but when possible this must be the first method of teaching. This does not mean, however, that cases must only be actually experienced to be learned. We can absorb cases that are told to us if they are told at the right time. The question is, "What is the right time?" Expectations are created by both cases and by behaviors. When you see a man enter a store with a gun in his hand, you expect a robbery. This is somewhat different from reading about the same situation. You still expect a robbery, but you are not afraid and are not wondering what you should do next. The prior situation is, of course, far more memorable. Nevertheless, one can tell a case in either situation. Ideally, in a teaching situation, we want to set up the robbery with the student as a player in the scene so that it feels real. The more real it feels the more memorable it will be. Then, any teaching we wish to do involving a new case can be understood in terms of the case that has been set up in a realistic way. The listener is ready to hear about the second case after experiencing the first. In some sense, the second case will be remembered as part of the first, so the more memorable the first, the more likely that the upcoming case will be remembered as well. 4. Cases should have the potential to change behavior http://cogprints.org/635/0/CBRMeetsLBD_for_Leake.html Page 38 of 39 1/22/2010
Goal-Based Scenarios: This maxim is, of course, quite critical. Learning is about behavior change after all. Thus, what we need to do is remember that when a case is told (after a doing experience, for example) we want the listener to have to act upon the lesson of the new case immediately. That is, if the case being told is how someone died in a robbery attempt because they threatened the robber, then we want the next experience to cause the learner to have to make a decision about how to deal with the robber. Or, to put this back to cherry trees, if there isn't a situation presented where the learner needs to choose between lying and telling the truth the lesson will be lost. It follows from this that cases must be followed by actions of some sort. If the actions are purely cognitive, and all a listener needs to do is say what he would do, we run the risk of having students parrot right answers independent of real visceral decision making. Students can learn to say the right answers but can they learn to do them? This can only be found by alternating cases with actions in some way. Conclusion Learning by doing works because it teaches implicitly rather than explicitly. Things that are learned implicitly need only be experienced in the proper way at the proper time. In order to make classrooms into learning-by-doing experiences we need to allow students to be in situations that are germane to their interests. What students learn when they learn by doing often remains implicit. Micro-scripts, participation strategies, explicit functional knowledge, and lessons from cases are often the kind of knowledge that people don't really know they have. The knowledge comes up when they need it and people can sometimes explicitly state what they know. Educators are often confused by the fact that people can explicitly state what they know. In fact, they are so confused by this that they pervert the education system so that it will highlight the explicit stating of what one knows rather than highlight the behavior that would indicate the presence of implicit knowledge. We must turn this state of affairs around if we are to ever really change education. References Dewey, John. 1916. Democracy and Education; An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education, New York: Macmillan. Schank, R. 1982. Dynamic Memory: A Theory of Learning in Computers and People. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Schank, R. 1986. Explanation Patterns: Understanding Mechanically and Creatively. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Schank, R. 1991. The Connoisseur's Guide to the Mind. New York: Simon and Schuster. Page 39 of 39 Schank R. and R. Abelson. 1977. Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Understanding: An Inquiry Into Human Knowledge Structures. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. http://cogprints.org/635/0/CBRMeetsLBD_for_Leake.html 1/22/2010
Page 1 and 2: Goal-Based Scenarios: Schank, Roger
Page 3 and 4: Goal-Based Scenarios: In the use of
Page 5 and 6: Goal-Based Scenarios: they were tol
Page 7 and 8: Goal-Based Scenarios: Page 7 of 39
Page 9 and 10: Goal-Based Scenarios: goal can actu
Page 11 and 12: Goal-Based Scenarios: skill. They a
Page 19 and 20: Goal-Based Scenarios: The word proc
Page 21 and 22: Goal-Based Scenarios: experiences a
Page 23 and 24: Goal-Based Scenarios: choices are e
Page 25 and 26: Goal-Based Scenarios: When one is t
Page 33 and 34: Goal-Based Scenarios: other student
Page 35 and 36: Goal-Based Scenarios: from experien
Page 37: Goal-Based Scenarios: 2. Any new ca

Case-Based Reasoning Meets Learning by Doing

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?