Early cognitive development (substantive); science policy and program development (from perspective of a professional association -American Psychological Association).

What are the findings or theories from your area of expertise that we could apply to higher education?

Cognitive development, specifically the development of expert knowledge and procedures.  I am interested in looking at how the acquisition of new knowledge and procedures interact with prior knowledge and how we can use prior knowledge to design curricula.   Some of the theories and findings from early cognitive development that are applicable to higher education involve the development of expertise in a content area, and the development of expert procedures (“how to” strategies). What is important in this regard is to use what we know about what the person brings to the classroom in order to enhance instruction techniques and content.  For example, people form very strong views early on about how the world works, including concept content and assumptions about event structures. Sometimes this understanding is incomplete, or skewed, or simply wrong – but it is not a simple matter to simply teach what is right. This entire field, labeled ‘cognitive misperceptions’ yielded some important insights about how curricula need to keep both starting and end points in mind. And now there is research that goes further and helps us understand not only how to overcome cognitive misperceptions but also how to integrate the development of expert knowledge and procedures acquired in a formal setting with everyday contexts.

What are the (most important) unsolved problems? What should be included in an agenda for research?

 In thinking about the changes that are taking place in higher education two things come to mind immediately.  First, there are substantial changes in the demographics of people attending higher education.  Secondly, there are huge changes that have taken place in the technology that we have available. These two changes mean that the “face” of education is changing. There are tools we can use to think about these changes, and to think about how to alter curricula.

As demographics change, the structure and content of education may change as well. At an organizational level, we probably need research on the structures of higher education – to ask what sorts of models (liberal arts, community college, technical schools, apprentice models) are appropriate for what sorts of outcomes, but this is beyond the scope of psychology! At a curricular level, it would be interesting to have more comparative studies like those currently available for mathematics and reading – to be able to map out how different strategies in different settings affect learning differently. And at a very direct level, it is probably important to assure that our curricula prepare students to live in an increasingly international world – to “internationalize” the curriculum. There is cross-cultural research that can be useful here.

Technology is the current buzzword, and for good reason. Technological advances are happening incredibly rapidly – we will soon be able to have every imaginable sort of classroom available to many more people – through virtual classes, high speed cable links, and the like. We will also be able to have every imaginable sort of study materials – including all of the senses. But we don’t have the research to know how this will impact learning, much less longer term effects. We have a grand experiment going on right now, and one priority I would assign is research on learning in a technologically sophisticated environment. To think about how education might best demographic changes, we can look at the large corpus of cross-cultural research , I think that it would be helpful to look at what cross-cultural psychology can provide in terms of structuring curriculum.  Cross-cultural psychologists have had to find ways to communicate concepts across different cultures and have had to find ways to transmit information to different cultures.  It could be useful to look at the strategies of cross-cultural psychology as we look at reforming higher education.

An additional issue that is related to research concerns collaboration.  How do we get psychology researchers to work with education researchers?  Traditionally there has been very little cross-pollination between psychology research and education research.  Funders and policy makers (such as NSF, NRC) have been trying for about a decade to bring findings from cognitive science to education, but the going is very slow.  The two groups of researchers seem to speak different languages, to read different literatures – and although there are certainly many stunning exceptions, cutting edge cognitive research does not inform education research.

What prototypes can you point us toward where principles from the science of learning are already being applied (e.g., activities, courses, fields of study, degree programs, or entire systems)?

There are certainly people that have programs where principles from the science of learning are being applied.  They are mostly in math and science education.  Many of the people that are doing this kind of work are people that are attending this conference. 

What are the major problems with or barriers to redesigning higher education? Do you have any ideas for overcoming them?  

One of the big problems is that the application of cognitive science and the science of learning is not wide spread.  Single schools and single schools systems are doing things individually, but we are not at a point where all teachers are aware of these principles.  I really think that all science and math teachers should have an understanding of “lay” conceptions of the topics they teach (which give rise to cognitive misconceptions), and should have some understanding of what we know about conceptual change.  In order to achieve this we need to have scientists become better at translating their research into a form that can be used by the practitioner.  There needs to be a method or a format where current research findings are translated into practical teaching suggestions—a list of best teaching practices based on scientific findings. There is a lag between what is being done in research and what people use in practice. As a field, we need to get better at translating current research findings into practical approaches.  We need a mechanism for getting the very best most current research into a wide spread forum, such as, getting this information into a PTA newsletter. I think that this is an area where professional organizations can play a part.  I have often spent time asking scientists to write things in layman’s terms.  Often though, this does not work and what you actually need is someone who can write that way, but who also understands the content area.  Either way it is important to get the research into the hands of those who practice.

Institutional problems- higher education takes place in large institutions that have a certain amount of inertia.  Getting large structures to change is difficult.  We might benefit from getting I/O psychologists perspectives on the best methods for getting organizations to change. 

What do we need to do so that one outcome of the retreat is to effect change (in ways that we want)?

A very, very concrete list of recommendations with a specific list of tasks that need to be accomplished is needed.  We need a taskmaster, and whether the tasks are given to individuals or to organizations, we need to have someone who can delegate these tasks.  We need really concrete tasks with measurable outcomes.  Additionally, publications that list the best practices for whatever goal it is that one wants to achieve.