cover|300

Why Don't Students Like School

Three-Sentence Summary

"Why Don't Students Like School" explores the psychology behind why students struggle with enjoying school and proposes solutions for making education more engaging and effective.
Drawing on cognitive science, Daniel T. Willingham explains that the human brain is not designed for thinking but for solving problems related to survival, which forms a significant part of the disinterest students often display in academic learning.
The book presents nine principles based on this understanding, providing teachers and school administrators with practical strategies to create a learning environment that stimulates curiosity, fosters comprehension, and encourages a love for learning.

Extended Summary

In "Why Don't Students Like School," cognitive scientist Daniel T. Willingham delves into the intricacies of how the human brain works to explain why many students find school uninteresting or even tedious. He presents an argument grounded in scientific research: our minds are not naturally inclined towards thinking - they are primarily designed to save us from having to think. In essence, our brains have evolved to solve problems directly linked to survival rather than engage in abstract thought or memorization of facts.

The book breaks down this overarching theme into nine principles that educators can use as a guide in their teaching practices. These principles include understanding that people are naturally curious but not naturally good thinkers; memory is the residue of thought; deep knowledge must precede deep thinking; proficiency requires practice; and children are more alike than different in terms of learning.

Willingham supports these principles with real-life classroom examples, demonstrating how they can be applied practically. He also addresses common myths about how people learn and provides insights on how educators can foster an environment where students enjoy learning.

One key takeaway from the book is that educators should focus less on rote memorization and more on encouraging critical thinking skills through problem-solving tasks that resonate with real-life situations. This approach has the potential to make school more exciting and meaningful for students, contributing to an increased love for learning.

Key Points

The human brain is not naturally inclined towards abstract thinking or memorization; it's designed to solve survival-related problems.
Engaging education should encourage critical thinking through problem-solving tasks that resonate with real-life situations rather than focusing on rote memorization.
Willingham presents nine principles rooted in cognitive science that educators can apply to make learning more enjoyable and effective.

Who Should Read

Teachers, school administrators, parents, and anyone interested in education would find this book valuable. It provides insights into how the human brain works and how these processes impact learning, offering practical strategies for making education more engaging and effective.

About the Author

Daniel T. Willingham is a professor of psychology at the University of Virginia, where he has taught since 1992. He earned his B.A from Duke University and his Ph.D in Cognitive Psychology from Harvard University. His research primarily involves the application of cognitive psychology to K-16 education.

Readwise Highlights

So far I’ve described two ways in which your brain is set up to save you from having to think. First, some of the most important functions (for example, vision and movement) don’t require thought: you don’t have to reason about what you see; you just immediately know what’s out in the world. Second, you are biased to use memory to guide your actions rather than to think. But your brain doesn’t leave it there; it is capable of changing in order to save you from having to think. If you repeat the same thought-demanding task again and again, it will eventually become automatic; your brain will change so that you can complete the task without thinking about it. Location 236
The implications for education sound rather grim. If people are bad at thinking and try to avoid it, what does that say about students’ attitudes toward school? Fortunately, the story doesn’t end with people stubbornly refusing to think. Despite the fact that we’re not that good at it, we actually like to think.We are naturally curious, and we look for opportunities to engage in certain types of thought. But because thinking is so hard, the conditions have to be right for this curiosity to thrive, or we quit thinking rather readily.The next section explains when we like to think and when we don’t. Location 250
It’s notable too that the pleasure is in the solving of the problem.Working on a problem with no sense that you’re making progress is not pleasurable. In fact, it’s frustrating. Location 267
But not all types of thinking are equally attractive. People choose to work crossword puzzles but not algebra problems. Location 274
So, if content is not enough to keep your attention, when does curiosity have staying power? The answer may lie in the difficulty of the problem. If Location 293
To summarize, I’ve said that thinking is slow, effortful, and uncertain. Nevertheless, people like to think—or more properly, we like to think if we judge that the mental work will pay off with the pleasurable feeling we get when we solve a problem. Location 303
Let me summarize what I’ve said in this chapter. People’s minds are not especially well-suited to thinking; thinking is slow, effortful, and uncertain. For this reason, deliberate thinking does not guide people’s behavior in most situations. Rather, we rely on our memories, following courses of action that we have taken before. Nevertheless, we find successful thinking pleasurable.We like solving problems, understanding new ideas, and so forth. Thus, we will seek out opportunities to think, but we are selective in doing so; we choose problems that pose some challenge but that seem likely to be solvable, because these are the problems that lead to feelings of pleasure and satisfaction. For problems to be solved, the thinker needs adequate information from the environment, room in working memory, and the required facts and procedures in long-term memory. Location 398
Sure That There Are Problems to Be Solved Location 409
Respect Students’ Cognitive Limits Location 417
Clarifying the Problems to Be Solved Location 429
Reconsider When to Puzzle Students Location 443
Accept and Act on Variation in Student Preparation Location 455
Change the Pace Location 464
Keep a Diary Location 470
sufficient capacity in working memory. Location 623
chunking. Location 645
Thus, background knowledge allows chunking, which makes more room in working memory, which makes it easier to relate ideas, and therefore to comprehend. Location 669
I’ve listed four ways that background knowledge is important to reading comprehension: (1) it provides vocabulary; (2) it allows you to bridge logical gaps that writers leave; (3) it allows chunking, which increases room in working memory and thereby makes it easier to tie ideas together; and (4) it guides the interpretation of ambiguous sentences.There are in fact other ways that background knowledge helps reading, but these are some of the highlights. Location 690
mind connects the material Location 817
Memory is the residue of thought. Location 969
Things go into long-term memory if they create an emotional reaction is not quite right. It’s more accurate to say, Things that create an emotional reaction will be better remembered, but emotion is not necessary for learning. Location 1036
Putting Story Structure to Work Location 1214
Rather, I’m suggesting something one step removed from that. Structure your lessons the way stories are structured, using the four Cs: causality, conflict, complications, and character.This doesn’t mean you must do most of the talking. Location 1217
students to think of the very first thing they had ever seen.The students mulled that question over and generated such guesses as “the doctor who pulled me out,” “Mom,” and so forth.The guest then said, “Actually, the first thing each of you saw was the same. It was pinkish, diffuse light coming through your mother’s belly.Today we’re going to talk about how that first experience affected how your visual system developed, and how it continues to influence the way you see today.” I love that example because it grabbed the students’ attention and left them eager to hear more about the subject of the lesson. Location 1383
If memory is the residue of thought, then students will remember incorrect “discoveries” as much as they will remember the correct ones. Location 1404
The answer is that they understand new ideas (things they don’t know) by relating them to old ideas (things they do know). That sounds fairly straightforward. It’s a little like the process you go through when you encounter an unfamiliar word. If you don’t know, for example, what ab ovo means, you look it up in a dictionary. There you see the definition “from the beginning.” Location 1506
A student with rote knowledge might later report,“Government is like a classroom because both have rules.”The student has no understanding of what properties the two groups have in common.The student with shallow knowledge understands that a government is like a classroom because both groups are a community of people who need to agree on a set of rules in order for things to run smoothly and to be safe.The student understands the parallel but can’t go beyond it. So for example, if asked,“How is government different from our school?” the student would be stumped. A student with deep knowledge would be able to answer that question, and might successfully extend the analogy to consider other groups of people who might need to form rules, for example, his group of friends playing pickup basketball. Location 1633
There are, however, ways to cheat this limitation. In Chapter Two I discussed at length how to keep more information in working memory by compressing the information. In a process called chunking, you treat several separate things as a single unit. Instead of maintaining the letters c, o, g, n, i, t, i, o, and n in working memory, you chunk them into a single unit, the word cognition. A whole word takes up about the same amount of room in working memory that a single letter does. But chunking letters into a word requires that you know the word. If the letters were p, a, z, z, e, s, c, and o, you could chunk them effectively if you happened to know that pazzesco is an Italian word meaning “crazy.” But if you didn’t have the word in your long-term memory, you could not chunk the letters. Location 1849
Thus, the first way to cheat the limited size of your working memory is through factual knowledge.There is a second way: you can make the processes that manipulate information in working memory more efficient. In fact, you can make them so efficient that they are virtually cost free.Think about learning to tie your shoes. Initially it requires your full attention and thus absorbs all of working memory, but with practice you can tie your shoes automatically (Figure 2 Location 1856
Mental processes can become automatized. Automatic processes require little or no working memory capacity.They also tend to be quite rapid in that you seem to know just what to do without even making a conscious decision to do it. An experienced driver glances in the mirror and checks his blind spot before switching lanes, without thinking to himself “OK, I’m about to switch lanes, so what I need to do is check my mirrors and glance at the blind spot.” Location 1871
Finding a fact in long-term memory and putting it into working memory places almost no demands on working memory. It is no wonder that students who have memorized math facts do better in all sorts of math tasks than students whose knowledge of math facts is absent or uncertain. And it’s been shown that practicing math facts helps low-achieving students do better on more advanced mathematics. Location 1908
So far I’ve described two ways in which your brain is set up to save you from having to think. First, some of the most important functions (for example, vision and movement) don’t require thought: you don’t have to reason about what you see; you just immediately know what’s out in the world. Second, you are biased to use memory to guide your actions rather than to think. But your brain doesn’t leave it there; it is capable of changing in order to save you from having to think. If you repeat the same thought-demanding task again and again, it will eventually become automatic; your brain will change so that you can complete the task without thinking about it. Location 236
The implications for education sound rather grim. If people are bad at thinking and try to avoid it, what does that say about students’ attitudes toward school? Fortunately, the story doesn’t end with people stubbornly refusing to think. Despite the fact that we’re not that good at it, we actually like to think.We are naturally curious, and we look for opportunities to engage in certain types of thought. But because thinking is so hard, the conditions have to be right for this curiosity to thrive, or we quit thinking rather readily.The next section explains when we like to think and when we don’t. Location 250
It’s notable too that the pleasure is in the solving of the problem.Working on a problem with no sense that you’re making progress is not pleasurable. In fact, it’s frustrating. Location 267
But not all types of thinking are equally attractive. People choose to work crossword puzzles but not algebra problems. Location 274
So, if content is not enough to keep your attention, when does curiosity have staying power? The answer may lie in the difficulty of the problem. If Location 293
To summarize, I’ve said that thinking is slow, effortful, and uncertain. Nevertheless, people like to think—or more properly, we like to think if we judge that the mental work will pay off with the pleasurable feeling we get when we solve a problem. Location 303
Let me summarize what I’ve said in this chapter. People’s minds are not especially well-suited to thinking; thinking is slow, effortful, and uncertain. For this reason, deliberate thinking does not guide people’s behavior in most situations. Rather, we rely on our memories, following courses of action that we have taken before. Nevertheless, we find successful thinking pleasurable.We like solving problems, understanding new ideas, and so forth. Thus, we will seek out opportunities to think, but we are selective in doing so; we choose problems that pose some challenge but that seem likely to be solvable, because these are the problems that lead to feelings of pleasure and satisfaction. For problems to be solved, the thinker needs adequate information from the environment, room in working memory, and the required facts and procedures in long-term memory. Location 398
Sure That There Are Problems to Be Solved Location 409
Respect Students’ Cognitive Limits Location 417
Clarifying the Problems to Be Solved Location 429
Reconsider When to Puzzle Students Location 443
Accept and Act on Variation in Student Preparation Location 455
Change the Pace Location 464
Keep a Diary Location 470
sufficient capacity in working memory. Location 623
chunking. Location 645
Thus, background knowledge allows chunking, which makes more room in working memory, which makes it easier to relate ideas, and therefore to comprehend. Location 669
I’ve listed four ways that background knowledge is important to reading comprehension: (1) it provides vocabulary; (2) it allows you to bridge logical gaps that writers leave; (3) it allows chunking, which increases room in working memory and thereby makes it easier to tie ideas together; and (4) it guides the interpretation of ambiguous sentences.There are in fact other ways that background knowledge helps reading, but these are some of the highlights. Location 690
mind connects the material Location 817
Memory is the residue of thought. Location 969
Things go into long-term memory if they create an emotional reaction is not quite right. It’s more accurate to say, Things that create an emotional reaction will be better remembered, but emotion is not necessary for learning. Location 1036
Putting Story Structure to Work Location 1214
Rather, I’m suggesting something one step removed from that. Structure your lessons the way stories are structured, using the four Cs: causality, conflict, complications, and character.This doesn’t mean you must do most of the talking. Location 1217
students to think of the very first thing they had ever seen.The students mulled that question over and generated such guesses as “the doctor who pulled me out,” “Mom,” and so forth.The guest then said, “Actually, the first thing each of you saw was the same. It was pinkish, diffuse light coming through your mother’s belly.Today we’re going to talk about how that first experience affected how your visual system developed, and how it continues to influence the way you see today.” I love that example because it grabbed the students’ attention and left them eager to hear more about the subject of the lesson. Location 1383
If memory is the residue of thought, then students will remember incorrect “discoveries” as much as they will remember the correct ones. Location 1404
The answer is that they understand new ideas (things they don’t know) by relating them to old ideas (things they do know). That sounds fairly straightforward. It’s a little like the process you go through when you encounter an unfamiliar word. If you don’t know, for example, what ab ovo means, you look it up in a dictionary. There you see the definition “from the beginning.” Location 1506
A student with rote knowledge might later report,“Government is like a classroom because both have rules.”The student has no understanding of what properties the two groups have in common.The student with shallow knowledge understands that a government is like a classroom because both groups are a community of people who need to agree on a set of rules in order for things to run smoothly and to be safe.The student understands the parallel but can’t go beyond it. So for example, if asked,“How is government different from our school?” the student would be stumped. A student with deep knowledge would be able to answer that question, and might successfully extend the analogy to consider other groups of people who might need to form rules, for example, his group of friends playing pickup basketball. Location 1633
There are, however, ways to cheat this limitation. In Chapter Two I discussed at length how to keep more information in working memory by compressing the information. In a process called chunking, you treat several separate things as a single unit. Instead of maintaining the letters c, o, g, n, i, t, i, o, and n in working memory, you chunk them into a single unit, the word cognition. A whole word takes up about the same amount of room in working memory that a single letter does. But chunking letters into a word requires that you know the word. If the letters were p, a, z, z, e, s, c, and o, you could chunk them effectively if you happened to know that pazzesco is an Italian word meaning “crazy.” But if you didn’t have the word in your long-term memory, you could not chunk the letters. Location 1849
Thus, the first way to cheat the limited size of your working memory is through factual knowledge.There is a second way: you can make the processes that manipulate information in working memory more efficient. In fact, you can make them so efficient that they are virtually cost free.Think about learning to tie your shoes. Initially it requires your full attention and thus absorbs all of working memory, but with practice you can tie your shoes automatically (Figure 2 Location 1856
Mental processes can become automatized. Automatic processes require little or no working memory capacity.They also tend to be quite rapid in that you seem to know just what to do without even making a conscious decision to do it. An experienced driver glances in the mirror and checks his blind spot before switching lanes, without thinking to himself “OK, I’m about to switch lanes, so what I need to do is check my mirrors and glance at the blind spot.” Location 1871
Finding a fact in long-term memory and putting it into working memory places almost no demands on working memory. It is no wonder that students who have memorized math facts do better in all sorts of math tasks than students whose knowledge of math facts is absent or uncertain. And it’s been shown that practicing math facts helps low-achieving students do better on more advanced mathematics. Location 1908