In this article, Jerome S Bruner presents an education theoretical framework based on the notion that learning is an active process whereby learners construct new concepts and ideas based on already existing knowledge. Brunner introduces the concept of generic learning, a kind of learning that permits learners to cross the barrier into thinking. Through this kind of learning, the problems encountered by learners become easily recognizable and solvable using mastered old principles. Bruner contends that this kind of learning is hugely absent from the American education system and that there is a need for it to be encouraged. I personally agree with Brunner’s sentiments. Most of the current education framework is in a structure that does not stimulate any thinking from the learner’s part. Learners are taught new concepts, which they are required to learn, but this learning does not go beyond the classroom. Teachers particularly have a habit of teaching subjects, which they themselves do not fully understand and have to rely on books.
The applicability of such a concept might seem ambiguous but I personally think that it is achievable. For instance, Bruner recalls an instance when he witnessed a teacher encourage his students to organize and use minimal information to draw or deduce a maximum number of inferences. I think that this concept can definitely be applied in the current education system. Instead of feeding learners with a load of information, which they might not recall in the future, it would be perhaps wiser to give them minimal information in a generic way that stimulates thinking. For instance, the teacher might give the students incomplete information and encourage them to fill in the gaps. This is indeed something that Brunner talks about in his article where he describes an experiment that sought to establish the effectiveness of two ways of learning. In one setting, a group of students in a geography class was presented with blank maps containing vague tracings of water bodies such as lakes and rivers as well as natural resources. The students were then supposed to critically think and indicate where cities, railroads and highways would be located. Such a process inadvertently stimulated a thinking process from the students. In the second setting, the students were taught in the traditional and conventional manner, where all facts were presented to them when sitting down, bench bound. Bruner states the two groups will be assessed after a period of six months to see who remembers more. I however think that it is possible to deduce the outcome of this particular exercise even right now. The first instance where the students were fed with minimal information and were then encouraged to fill in the gaps definitely stimulated thinking and due to this this; there is higher probability of retaining what was leant. In the second scenario, the students will most probably forget what they have leant as new information continues to piled over what they have already learnt.
In conclusion, there is a definite need for a revolution on the American education system. Although some who have passed through this system have turned out all right, we need to move from the traditional and conventionally way of learning into the generic way of learning that stimulates thinking. As the author suggests, this will help us to culture a new generation of highly innovative individuals.
References
Bruner, Jerome S. (1959). “Learning and Thinking”. Harvard Business Review. 184-192.
