Taking an ecological approach to learning science.
I am an independent researcher currently based in the UK, sharing interesting trends and stories domestically and from around the globe.
Blending rigorous research with animation to create content that explains complex issues in relatable ways. I hold a BSc in Sports Coaching and an MSc in Strength and Conditioning from Brighton University.
Whether you are a teacher, student, parent, or interested learner, there is always another perspective that I think is worth exploring. If that sounds interesting, subscribe and follow along.
I happen to be reading "Seven Myths About Education" by Ms. Daisy Christodoulou. The book makes many references to Ofsted inspections and shows, in the specific matter of curriculum, how the "best practice" that it seeks to promote is anything but that. So, there is a real need to look at the big picture here. This should NOT be about whether we should hold teachers to account or not. We got to fundamentally trust our teachers and give them a ton of support. Because, if you read the book, you will know that nor the teacher, nor the school is the real problem when it comes to our children's education.
As a proud black woman I can attest to bias in academia. Just because someone has written something before and you write it later that only means you are the first woman to write it. I have written many articles and research projects which others may have written using the same words but I am the first black woman to write them and deserve credit for this. I have copied many papers especially from Harvard but the white patriarchy protects its members whilst excluding people of colour and women who have discovered the same things albeit later. It's time to stop the white patriarchy and recognise the first black and female researchers to do their own unique work even if it has been done before.
Old school journalist from Germany here: when the presenter and the presentation seems to be more important than the news and the facts itself I‘m immediately suspicious….
Oh, it was all too easy, wasn't it. Undergraduate degree in 2001 and masters and doctoral degrees in 2004. I had to work, flat out for 5 years on my research masters and 7 years on my doctoral thesis due to the volume of my data. If you get it for free, there is no time for the kind of growth that is required. Another problem in modern academic settings is the pressure of producing multiple research outputs every year. When you realise your data doesn't support your thesis, you torture it, and there you go. I had a terrible experience with a top-tier US professor who used some of my data to say what it did not say because the paper was almost completed and the deadline for submission was reached.
Spell check. Use it. It generally works very well. You displayed several miss-spelled words. There is also a book called a dictionary. I'm waiting for the corrections. Even in your comment below : "and reply to those RU-vid notifies me off". Surely you meant "notifies me of" . One letter can make a huge difference! We should focus on media literacy. Agreed.
Investigation yielded like 1300 pages and as far as the plagiarism almost everything she wrote in her books was plagiarized it's ridiculous there's almost zero original writing in her books it's all plagiarized like all of it. Her lawsuit was also dismissed everything is dismissed as she is guilty of data fraud, plagiarism who knows what kind of damage she did with her studies and her papers being falsified I'm glad somebody caught it.
3 дня назад
To quote an old girlfriend who became a Paychologist/Therapist, "Feminists are at war with men, and they have this secret saying which goes, 'Lying is necussary for the cause.' "
Thank you for watching. Comments are welcomed and encouraged - what do you think? I heart comments I have seen, and reply to those RU-vid notifies me off. FEEDBACK: KEY COMMENTS:
Obviously, academic fraud is wrong, but is this not minor compared with the fraud of academic ideologies around gender and history in certain universities? It is unfortunate that the bedwetters who sanctimoniously rant about this do not turn any attention to the culturally toxic fraud of woke.
I have tried listening to this child and just come away feeling like he thinks his version of events is based on "the facts" and in fact he's wayyyyy to emotional and his opinions are riddled throughout his vids. Comes off as a dreamer and way more childlike than adult. Also wayyyyyy too zesty n bitchbuilt
Great storytelling on this video, great audiocomments. The only thing that I really need to point out here is that: piecing together different segments of an entire monologue or dialogue and then filling in the gaps with your own interpretation usually creates misinformation. you can put anything into pretty much anybodies mouth
Idk why YT recommended this to me, but commenting for the algorithm. I don't think I've ever seen anyone with my disability (narcolepsy) in the paralypics and the daily exhaustion and disrupted sleep would definitely would affect training. Great work.
The paralympics have been plagued by some rather unsportsmanlike behavior over the years - It quickly becomes a race to find the *least* disabled athletes you can field. The sports world is rather slimy & victory oriented, so it is probably best to organize events in ways that minimize metagaming. Glad I'm not the one who has to decide who's acceptably handicapped and who isn't, though.. 😬
Thank you for watching. Comments are welcomed and encouraged - what do you think? I heart comments I have seen, and reply to those RU-vid notifies me off. FEEDBACK: KEY COMMENTS:
I think there is some misconceptions here. Theres alot said but I'll just mention a few. 1. The idea that we cannot see how long term memory is being accessed/altered/new info encoded, and that it cant be answered, that is not necessarily a con with CLT inherently but moreso an area needing further work on. To be fair, I havent see any other large tested theories that provide any such explanation. It seems a case to me, and correct me if wrong, that we are saying X cannot account for Y phenomenon (which is fringe) and therefore we ought to give it less credence - but almost nothing else does. CLT and many other theories imo probably need to be looked at as whether or not they are the most credible and most predictive theories we have right now. Ditching something simply because it doesnt fulfill everything is a perfectionist fallacy and problematic. 2.Swellers quote about withholding information for learning is indeed problematic - but only at the surface level because this is not really what sweller meant. I think Sweller did a poor job at explaining here, what he probably meant to say was that due to the expertise reversal effect - giving learners the adequate knowledge is needed upfront. Sweller at times could be clearer by explaining the effect he's referring to rather than trying to provide universal statements that appear untrue when prior knowledge levels are different. Its true that worked examples, curriculum spreading, etc. are examples of withholding information but again its the communication thats wrong here, because sweller isnt trying to simaultaneously say that going over a month of information in an hour is good, yet at the same time, breaking it up across days, worked examples, problem based learning is good. I think swellers quote is being taken out of context, interpreted to mean instantaneous delivery of information, is incorrect. Too much of his work suggests its poor communication. 3. "But it doesnt say how different it has to be for it to be new". Correct, the modelling is rather weak so far in CLT. There is still more work needed on the theory to match domains and adequately model phenomenon - thats more a statement of where the whole of CLT is, thats not to discredit it necessarily. Right now if you look at CLT related work you will see that the only real pattern is that researchers have a comparison group and just say well I think group 1 will do better than group2. Thats about it. Theres a real lack of bold prediction and modelling right now. You could argue that it will be a long time before this happens as theres alot of variance within the topic of prior knowledge in general. But again, most of the cog science hasnt got enough predictive power right now, again this is a bit of a perfectionist fallacy as simply all of cog science has this issue. Its not special to CLT. 4. The constructionist - generative learning comment. Ahhh no. This is just a big misinterpretation because your statement cannot reconcile studies where explicit instruction lead to far greater learning than constructivist methods. This is again a moment of taking things out of context, whether intentional or not. Also your description of generative learning activities is still bound by the limits of Working memory. Is generative learning/ Select-organize-integrate helpful? yes - Is it universally good always? no. This is where CLT does have some practicality as the growing body of CLT is helping us more understand when and why elements to things (and that is why sometimes mixed results in studies). There is alot of points here, and I think its good that you at least explain how its not a perfect theory yet. Theres still alot of future ground, but I would say that if people are able to keep up to date they will see in literature reviews, and landmark studies, they will come across the indications of future work needed and be able to draw their own conclusions about the state of CLT.
Thank you for this comment. Love it! A 'perfect' theory is impossible but I recognize you likely are suggesting there is room for improvement which was one of the aims of this video. By saying I think Sweller meant... and communication/interpretations of the theory are misrepresented/misunderstood bolsters my underlying argument that CLT is to vague and is overhyped. Cognitive psychology is an important field of study but the emphasis on this theory over other load theories in learning science seems overhyped to me. I will certainly keep thinking on this, especially as an ecological psychologist.
I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree on some points. I don't think it's overhyped, but often misunderstood. I certainly don't think researchers are overhyping it. It is however true that people has lot some focus on attentional processes and things that interact with it for learning. On your point about ecological psychology, ultimately a cognitive mechanicistic level explanation will be required alongside any robust findings, and CLT offters that ability. It's important to understand that as sweller talks about working memory, he often is also talking about ltm. Alot of people may think CLT is solely about working memory in a silo whereas his developments and integration with other theories suggest otherwise. This is probably where alot of issues arise with the lay readers on the topic. more integration of ltm into CLT is only apparent if you follow the bulk of his research (as opposed to other researchers). I find that most people who get the introduction to CLT do not actually follow his research, rather they look only at the base proposition of CLT. In summary, i think its the surface knowledge approach that is often taken with CLT causes issues with it. The gaps/yet to researched areas of it exist because alot of researchers do not attempt to advance the theory of CLT, rather they use it as a supporting metric for their research aims.
This feels so nit-picky. When he said the news was too fun, I thought it was pretty obvious he was talking about subject matter rather than how the story is stylized.
For me, sport is not fun enough to justify the inconvenience and pain involved in participating. I get nothing from most of those 11 factors (games and seeing improvement being exceptions). I get my activity from a treadmill beneath my desk.
You do you, but mind our brains are extremely good in making up reasons for why we shouldnt do anything that is additional effort in the short term, almost no matter how positive it would be for our health or us as a person in the long term. Always something to consider when we think "maybe that helps but its too much effort". Thats usually our evolutionary-tuned brain trying to save energy in the short term. And a basic treadmill certainly isnt enough for the average person to contribute to much to a happy/healthy live, theres way more to sport than just moving your legs. Not even talking about team-sports here btw, just doing outside sports tend to have big benefits.
Thank you for watching. Comments are welcomed and encouraged - what do you think? I heart comments I have seen, and reply to those RU-vid notifies me off. FEEDBACK: KEY COMMENTS:
"Media integrity is something the mainstream media have" You'd be surprised. "With scientific articles saying things like "We also find that social network sites play an outsized role in generating traffic to fake news" They also play an outsized role in generating traffic to real news, including stories the mainstream media downplays due to political affiliations and conflicts of interest of their owners. Plus, those "scientific articles" are worthless, they reach the conclusions that they're biased to reach (because of the politics/class alliances/etc of the research team and the people who fund them), and most of them have bad methodology and don't replicate. This is not physics where there is hard proof, anybody can publish any shit "scientific" social science article proving whatever they want.
Thank you for watching. Comments are welcomed and encouraged - what do you think? I heart comments I have seen, and reply to those RU-vid notifies me off. FEEDBACK: KEY COMMENTS:
Thank you for watching. Comments are welcomed and encouraged - what do you think? I heart comments I have seen, and reply to those RU-vid notifies me off. FEEDBACK: KEY COMMENTS:
The real problem is the scientists at the top have a vested interest in current dogma. so an6y challenge to it is suppressed. Government funding of most research is a bad idea.Government is addicted to the status quo. American universities will no longer attract thew best minds. Looking at recent patents it seems that the US is mow at the bottom of the list with SE asia getting most patents
Psychology and sociology are not science, people need to take the, with a grain of salt, at best they are like homeopathy. psuedo-science is more like it
