Inert knowledge

Abstract: Instruction is motivated by the assumption that students can transfer their learning, or apply what they have learned in school to another setting. A common problem arises when the expected transfer does not take place, what has been referred to as the inert knowledge problem. More than an academic inconvenience, the failure to transfer is a major problem, exacting individual and social costs. In this article, I trace the evolution of research on the transfer of learning, in general, and on language learning, in particular. Then, a different view of learning transfer is advanced. Rather than learners being seen to “export” what they have learned from one situation to the next, it is proposed that learners transform their learning. The article concludes by offering some suggestions for how to mitigate the inert knowledge problem from this perspective.

Abstract: At the time when systematic science instruction starts, most children have already constructed a naive theory of physics that makes it possible for them to interpret phenomena in the physical world. Theory is used here to denote a relational, explanatory structure, and not an explicit, wellformed, and sociallyshared scientific theory. This naive theory is based on everyday experience and information coming from lay culture and is very different in its structure, in the phenomena it explains, and its individual concepts, from the scientific theories to which children are exposed in school. Learning science requires the fundamental restructuring of the naive theory, a restructuring that can be referred to as theory change. More specifically, conceptual change can be defined as the outcome of a complex cognitive as well as social process whereby an initial framework theory is restructured. Studies of conceptual change have shown that this is a slow and gradual affair often accompanied by misconceptions, inert knowledge, internal inconsistencies, and lack of critical thinking.

Abstract: Often in school, at university, or in further education abstract concepts and principles are taught without providing the opportunity to elaborate on how to apply this abstract knowledge. For example, in university lectures, principles of scientific argumentation are explained without the opportunity to learn how to apply them. In such cases, often just inert knowledge (Whitehead, 1929) is acquired (Renkl, Mandl, & Gruber, 1996). The learners can state the relevant concepts and principles but they cannot or, at least, do not apply them when solving complex problems. In other cases, such as project-based learning, the learners may encode concrete problem solutions, however, this is often of little help when solving subsequent related problems. This deficient knowledge use is mainly due to two factors. For one, the learners may not have encoded the general rules or principles behind the previously encountered problem solutions. For another, the learners may not have noticed the relevance of the known problem solutions (e.g., Reeves & Weisberg, 1993; Renkl, 2009). In order to best enhance cognitive skills, instruction should encourage learners to encode and interconnect both abstract concepts as well as abstract principles and concrete cases in which it is shown how this abstract knowledge is applied. In order to achieve such interconnected knowledge structures, instruction by examples, especially as specified in research on worked examples, is an appropriate instructional method.