Serendipity35 - Education 2.0

How Verbal Thinking Elevates Learning

ronkowitz@gmail.com (Kenneth Ronkowitz) — Thu, 06 Nov 2025 10:10:00 +0000

The notion of talking to oneself, often dismissed as a mere quirky habit or a sign of preoccupation, is, in fact, a powerful, evidence-based cognitive tool essential for learning, problem-solving, and achieving self-regulation. For educators, understanding and deliberately integrating this "verbal thinking"—known in psychological literature as private speech, self-talk, or self-explanation—into pedagogical practice can unlock deeper comprehension and foster truly independent learners.

The psychological roots of verbal thinking's benefit trace back most prominently to the work of Soviet psychologist Lev Vygotsky. His socio-cultural theory identifies a critical stage in a child's cognitive development where social communication turns inward to become a robust tool for thinking. Vygotsky outlined a three-stage developmental framework for language: beginning with Social Speech in young children, where language is purely external and used for communicating with others; progressing to Private Speech during the preschool years (ages 3-7), where the child begins to speak aloud to themselves, often in a whisper or mumble, utilizing this overt language as a self-guiding tool for planning, regulating, and controlling their own behavior and problem-solving attempts.

For example, a child engaged in a puzzle might audibly walk themselves through the steps: "First, put the red block here, then the blue block goes on top." This transitional phase ultimately leads to Inner Speech (age 7+), which is the fully internalized, silent verbal thought that most adults use for abstract reasoning, reflection, and sophisticated problem-solving. For educators, the key takeaway from Vygotsky’s work is that overt verbal thinking, or private speech, represents the crucial bridge from externally guided learning—where an adult or peer provides the instruction—to true self-regulation and independent, complex thought. By encouraging students to verbalize their process, teachers are helping them build the necessary internal scaffolding for later, silent, and more sophisticated thinking.

Crucially, verbal thinking doesn't just manage behavior; it fundamentally alters how information is encoded and understood by the brain, supporting both memory and comprehension. Research in memory retrieval highlights a phenomenon known as the Production Effect, which demonstrates that reading or generating information aloud significantly improves its memory retention compared to reading it silently. This memory boost occurs because speaking information aloud engages a greater number of sensory channels simultaneously. The learner uses visual input (seeing the text), verbal/motor input (the physical articulation of the words), and auditory input (hearing the words being spoken). This richer, multi-modal encoding creates a more distinctive and robust memory trace in the brain, making the information much easier to recall later. This distinctiveness is vital: when a learner produces a word aloud, it stands out against the background of other silently read words, making the item unique in memory. Therefore, simply having students read key definitions, summaries, or steps aloud in a low-stakes environment is a simple, yet highly effective, way for educators to leverage this proven physiological mechanism to strengthen long-term memory.

Perhaps the most powerful cognitive benefit, particularly for complex material, is the deep processing that occurs through self-explanation. This process is not mere repetition; it is the active, conscious act of trying to explain new information by relating it to what one already knows, making necessary inferences, and proactively clarifying any ambiguities. The first benefit here is powerful metacognitive monitoring: when a learner verbalizes a concept, the very act of articulation immediately exposes areas of confusion or "knowledge gaps." If a student struggles to explain a step in a math proof or a scientific concept, the flaw in their understanding is instantly revealed, prompting them to go back and refine their knowledge. This is a critical act of metacognition—the vital process of thinking about one's own thinking. Secondly, self-explanation drives coherence building. Verbalizing forces the student to translate disparate, often fragmented, pieces of information into a coherent, logical structure. They are not just recalling isolated facts but actively constructing a unified mental model of how the concepts interact. This principle is famously embodied by the Feynman Technique—explaining a concept simply as if teaching it to a novice—which serves as a form of high-level, deliberate verbal thinking that ruthlessly exposes the limits of a learner's comprehension.

The idea that talking to yourself out loud is not only "okay" but also an excellent learning technique is satisfying, but as I dug into this research, I recognized things from my college and grad school education courses. Other than the idea that it's not abnormal behavior to talk to yourself, this research is not completely new. I used several of these pedagogies in my teaching.

The challenge for educators, then, is to move verbal thinking from an accidental occurrence to a deliberate, scaffolded learning strategy within the classroom environment. One highly effective technique is the Think-Aloud Strategy, which focuses on teacher modeling. This strategy is used to make the invisible thought process of an expert visible and accessible to students, thereby explicitly teaching them how to engage in effective self-talk. To implement this, the teacher must first explicitly state the goal: "I’m going to show you how a skilled reader or problem-solver thinks by saying my thoughts out loud." Then, as the teacher reads a complex passage, works through a mathematical equation, or analyzes a primary source, they must stop frequently to verbalize their internal dialogue. This might involve using strategic planning language like, "I'm thinking I should use the quadratic formula here because the equation is set to zero," or demonstrating monitoring and correction by saying, "That word, 'ephemeral,' sounds like it means brief, so I’m going to pause and look that up to make sure I understand the context," or making connections: "The author just described the main character as restless. That connects to the idea I read earlier about his lack of a stable job. I wonder if this will lead to him leaving town." Once modeled, the teacher must transition students to practicing the strategy, perhaps through paired activities known as Reciprocal Think-Alouds, before expecting independent use.

A second practical technique is the Self-Explanation Prompt. This method strategically inserts verbalization breaks into a learning task to force metacognitive reflection and is particularly useful in technical subjects. Implementation begins by identifying key moments in a text, problem set, or lab procedure where a deeper understanding is absolutely necessary before the student can proceed. At these pause points, the teacher provides students with specific open-ended questions they must answer aloud to themselves or in a brief reflection journal. Prompts should be targeted to specific cognitive functions, such as focusing on rationale ("Why did I choose this variable to isolate?"), demanding synthesis ("What is the main idea of this section in my own words?"), or explicitly asking for a connection ("How does this new concept relate to what we learned last week?"). For maximum impact, teachers should then encourage a "Think-Pair-Share" approach where students must first explain their logic to a partner, which solidifies the idea and provides practice in articulation before the whole class moves on.

Finally, the "Teach It Back" Method is a form of high-stakes verbal thinking rooted in the pedagogical principle that to teach a concept is to truly master it. In this strategy, a student is assigned the role of briefly "teaching" a key concept, a section of the reading, or a part of the homework to a small group, to the class, or even to an imaginary audience. The critical instruction given to the student is to explain the topic as simply as possible, perhaps using an analogy, metaphor, or non-technical language if appropriate. The student must translate complex, academic language into straightforward, accessible terms, which serves as the ultimate test of their own comprehension. The teacher should provide specific feedback not only on the accuracy of the content but also on the clarity and logical structure of the explanation, reinforcing the importance of effective verbal articulation as a measure of understanding. By integrating these verbal thinking strategies—modeling, prompting, and teaching back—educators are not just improving a single study skill; they are building the core components of the resilient and self-regulated learner, equipping students with the tools for lifelong, independent cognitive growth.

SOURCES
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. (This source is foundational for the concepts of Private Speech and its role in Self-Regulation.)

MacLeod, C. M. (2011). The production effect: Better memory as a consequence of saying aloud during study. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(2), 195–204. (This research provides the physiological basis for the Production Effect and memory benefits.)

Chi, M. T. H. (2013). Self-explanation: The effects of talking aloud or writing on learning. Topics in Cognitive Science, 5(1), 1–4. (This source details the mechanism and benefits of Self-Explanation for deep comprehension.)

Berk, L. E. (1992). The role of private speech in the development of mental processes. Psychological Review, 99(4), 779–795. (This provides contemporary developmental research supporting and elaborating on Vygotsky’s observations of private speech.)

Classroom Cellphone Bans: Pros and Cons

ronkowitz@gmail.com (Kenneth Ronkowitz) — Wed, 27 Nov 2024 09:01:00 +0000

Schools are instituting bans on cell phones in classrooms. These bans aim to create a more focused, interactive, and supportive learning environment for students. But they are certainly controversial. Some large school districts like Los Angeles Unified School District and New York City Public Schools are looking to or have already implemented district-wide cellphone bans. Though this is more common in K-12 classroom, in higher education there are examples of individual faculty, certain courses or departments that have initiated bans.

The reasons generally given for these bans include:

Reducing Distractions: Cell phones can be a significant source of distraction for students, leading to decreased focus and engagement in class

Improving Academic Performance: Studies suggest that limiting cell phone use in classrooms can lead to better academic outcomes, as students are more likely to pay attention and participate in lessons

Enhancing Social Interaction: Banning cell phones encourages face-to-face communication and interaction among students, which is crucial for developing social skills.

Preventing Cyberbullying: Cell phones can be used to facilitate cyberbullying of students, faculty and administration, and removing them from the classroom can help create a safer environment

Promoting Mental Health: Excessive screen time and social media use have been linked to mental health issues in young people. Reducing cell phone use in schools can help mitigate these effects

When cell phones first became more prevalent with students (starting with college students and working down to high school and now younger students) there were individual teachers who instituted bans on using them in class. There were also teachers who promoted the wise use of them in their courses. The cons side of this also has good reason against banning cell phones from classrooms

As Educational Tools: Cell phones can be powerful educational tools, providing access to learning apps, online resources, and educational videos that can enhance the learning experience.

For Emergency Communication: Cell phones allow students to quickly contact parents or emergency services in case of an emergency, providing an added layer of safety.

Developing Digital Literacy: In today's digital age, students need to learn how to use technology responsibly. Allowing controlled use of cell phones in the classroom can help develop these skills.

Access to Information: Cell phones enable students to instantly look up information, conduct research, and verify facts during lessons, promoting active learning.

Inclusivity: For students with special needs, cell phones can provide necessary accommodations, such as text-to-speech applications and other assistive technologies.

Organizational Tools: Many students use their phones to keep track of assignments, deadlines, and schedules through calendar apps and reminders.

Parental Contact: Parents can directly communicate with their children, which is reassuring for both parties, especially in cases of schedule changes or family emergencies.

A web search will turn up lots of articles on the pros and cons of cell phone use and bans on their use in classrooms.
https://congressionaldigest.com/pros-and-cons-of-banning-cellphones-in-schools/
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2023/03/experts-see-pros-and-cons-to-allowing-cellphones-in-class/

So You Want To Be An AI Prompt Engineer

ronkowitz@gmail.com (Kenneth Ronkowitz) — Tue, 21 May 2024 09:51:00 +0000

When I was teaching in a high school, I used to tell students (and faculty) that we were not preparing them for jobs. I was sure many of our students would end up in jobs with titles that did not exist then. There is a song by The Byrds from the 1960s titled "So You Wanna Be a Rock 'n' Roll Star." In 2024, it could be "So You Want To Be An AI Prompt Engineer."

The role of AI prompt engineer attracted attention for its high-six-figure salaries when it emerged in early 2023. What does this job entail? The principal aim is to help a company integrate AI into its operations. Some people describe the job as more prompter than engineer.

There are already tools that work with apps like OpenAI’s ChatGPT platform that can automate the writing process using sets of built-in prompts. Does that mean that AI will replace AI prompt engineers already? For now, the prompter works to ensure that users get the desired results. They might also be the instructors for other employees on how to use generative AI tools. They become the AI support team. AI can automate "trivial" tasks and make more time for work that requires creative thinking.

What kind of training leads to getting this job? You might think a background in computer science, but probably a strong language and writing ability is more important. People who write in the corporate world might justifiably fear AI will take their jobs away. Being a prompter might be an alternative.

Still, I suspect that there is a good possibility that a prompter/engineer's job might be vulnerable as software becomes better at understanding users’ prompts.

If you are interested in being an AI prompt engineer, I posted last week about some free online courses offered by universities and tech companies that included three courses that relate to creating prompts for AI.

AI Applications and Prompt Engineering is an edX introductory course on prompt engineering that starts with the basics and ends with creating your applications.

Prompt Engineering for ChatGPT is a specific 6-module course from Vanderbilt University (through Coursera) that offers beginners a starting point for writing better prompts.

Another course on ChatGPT Prompt Engineering for Developers is offered by OpenAI in collab with DeepLearning and it is taught by Isa Fulford and Andrew Ng. It covers best practices and includes hands-on practice.

Can Bloom's Taxonomy Teach Us Anything About AI?

ronkowitz@gmail.com (Kenneth Ronkowitz) — Thu, 01 Feb 2024 09:34:00 +0000

Image gettingsmart.com

When I was studying to be a secondary school teacher, Bloom’s Taxonomy often came up in my classes as a way to do lesson planning and a way to assess learners. Recently, there have been several revisions to its pyramid stack. An article on www.gettingsmart.com suggests a spiral might be better, particularly if you want to use it as a lens to view AI.

The author, Vriti Saraf, opines that the most important potential of AI isn’t to enhance human productivity, it’s to enhance and support human thinking, and that looking at AI’s capabilities through the lens of Bloom’s Taxonomy showcases the possible interplay of humans and machines.

It is an interesting idea. Take a look.

Telling Students to Use AI

ronkowitz@gmail.com (Kenneth Ronkowitz) — Sun, 31 Dec 2023 20:00:00 +0000

2023 was certainly a year for AI. In education, some teachers avoided it and some embraced it, perhaps reluctantly at first. Some educators have reacted, partially to AI that can write essays Some schools, some teachers, some school districts some colleges some departments have tried to ban it issues. Of course, that is impossible, just as it was impossible to ban the use of Wikipedia or going back to the previous century, the use of a word processor, or a calculator in a math class, or use the Internet to copy and paste information.

What happened when an entire class of college students were told to use ChatGPT to write their essays?

Chris Howell, an adjunct assistant professor of religious studies at Elon University, noticed more and more suspiciously chatbot-esque prose popping up in student papers. So rather than trying to police the tech, he embraced it. He assigned students to generate an essay entirely with ChatGPT and then critique it themselves.

When I first caught students attempting to use ChatGPT to write their essays, it felt like an inevitability. My initial reaction was frustration and irritation—not to mention gloom and doom about the slow collapse of higher education—and I suspect most educators feel the same way. But as I thought about how to respond, I realized there could be a teaching opportunity. Many of these essays used sources incorrectly, either quoting from books that did not exist or misrepresenting those that did. When students were starting to use ChatGPT, they seemed to have no idea that it could be wrong.

I decided to have each student in my religion studies class at Elon University use ChatGPT to generate an essay based on a prompt I gave them and then “grade” it. I had anticipated that many of the essays would have errors, but I did not expect that all of them would. Many students expressed shock and dismay upon learning the AI could fabricate bogus information, including page numbers for nonexistent books and articles. Some were confused, simultaneously awed and disappointed. Others expressed concern about the way overreliance on such technology could induce laziness or spur disinformation and fake news. Closer to the bone were fears that this technology could take people’s jobs. Students were alarmed that major tech companies had pushed out AI technology without ensuring that the general population understands its drawbacks.

The assignment satisfied my goal, which was to teach them that ChatGPT is neither a functional search engine nor an infallible writing tool.

Source wired.com/story/dont-want-students-to-rely-on-chatgpt-have-them-use-it/

Detecting AI-Written Content

ronkowitz@gmail.com (Kenneth Ronkowitz) — Mon, 04 Dec 2023 10:11:00 +0000

When chatGPT hit academia hard at the start of this year, there was much fear from teachers at all grade levels. I saw articles and posts saying it would be the end of writing. A Princeton University student built an app that helps detect whether a text was written by a human being or using an artificial intelligence tool like ChatGPT. Edward Tian was a senior computer science major. He has said that the algorithm behind his app, GPTZero, can "quickly and efficiently detect whether an essay is ChatGPT or human written."

GPTZero is at gptzero.me. I was able to attend an online demo of the app now that it has been released as a free and paid product, and also communicated with Tian.

Because ChatGPT has exploded in popularity, it has gotten interest from investors. The Wall Street Journal reported that parent company OpenAI could attract investments valuing it at $29 billion. But the app has also raised fears that students are using the tool to cheat on writing assignments.

GPTZero examines two variables in any piece of writing it examines. It looks at a text's "perplexity," which measures its randomness: Human-written texts tend to be more unpredictable than bot-produced work. It also examines "burstiness," which measures variance, or inconsistency, within a text because there is a lot of variance in human-generated writing.

Unlike other tools, such as Turnitin.com, the app does not tell you the source of the writing. That is because of the odd situation that writing produced by a chatbot isn't exactly from any particular source.

There are other tools to detect AI writing - see https://www.pcmag.com/how-to/how-to-detect-chatgpt-written-text

Large language models themselves can be trained to spot AI-generated writing if they were trained on two sets of text. One text would be AI and the other written by people, so theoretically you could teach the model to recognize and detect AI writing.

Report: AI and the Future of Teaching and learning

ronkowitz@gmail.com (Kenneth Ronkowitz) — Mon, 16 Oct 2023 12:12:00 +0000

I see articles and posts about artificial intelligence every day. I have written here about it a lot in the past year. You cannot escape the topic of AI even if you are not involved in education, technology or computer science. It is simply part of the culture and the media today. I see articles about how AI is being used to translate ancient texts at a speed and accuracy that is simply not possible with humans. I also see articles about companies now creating AI software for warfare. The former is a definite plus, but the latter is a good example of why there is so much fear about AI - justifiably so, I believe.

Many educators seem to have had the initial reaction to the generative chatbots that became accessible to the public late last year and were being used by students to write essays and research papers. This spread through K-12 and into colleges and even into academic papers being written by faculty.

A chatbot powered by reams of data from the internet has passed exams at a U.S. law school after writing essays on topics ranging from constitutional law to taxation and torts. Jonathan Choi, a professor at Minnesota University Law School, gave ChatGPT the same test faced by students, consisting of 95 multiple-choice questions and 12 essay questions. In a white paper titled "ChatGPT goes to law school," he and his coauthors reported that the bot scored a C+ overall.

ChatGPT, from the U.S. company OpenAI, got most of the initial attention in the early part of 2023. They received a massive injection of cash from Microsoft. In the second half of this year, we have seen many other AI chatbot players, including Microsoft and Google who incorporated it into their search engines. OpenAI predicted in 2022 that AI will lead to the "greatest tech transformation ever." I don't know if that will prove to be true, but it certainly isn't unreasonable from the view of 2023.

Chatbots use artificial intelligence to generate streams of text from simple or more elaborate prompts. They don't "copy" text from the Internet (so "plagiarism" is hard to claim) but create based on the data they have been given. The results have been so good that educators have warned it could lead to widespread cheating and even signal the end of traditional classroom teaching methods.

Lately, I see more sober articles about the use of AI and more articles about teachers including lessons on the ethical use of AI by students, and on how they are using chatbots to help create their teaching materials. I knew teachers in K-20 who attended faculty workshops this past summer to try to figure out what to do in the fall.

The U.S. Department of Education recently issued a report on its perspective on AI in education. It includes a warning of sorts: Don’t let your imagination run wild. “We especially call upon leaders to avoid romancing the magic of AI or only focusing on promising applications or outcomes, but instead to interrogate with a critical eye how AI-enabled systems and tools function in the educational environment,” the report says.

Some of the ideas are unsurprising. For example, it stresses that humans should be placed “firmly at the center” of AI-enabled edtech. That's also not surprising since an earlier White House “blueprint for AI,” said the same thing. And an approach to pedagogy that has been suggested for several decades - personalized learning - might be well served by AI. Artificial assistants might be able to automate tasks, giving teachers time for interacting with students. AI can give instant feedback to students "tutor-style."

The report's optimism appears in the idea that AI can help teachers rather than diminish their roles and provide support. Still, where AI will be in education in the next year or next decade is unknown.

Push and Pull Learning

ronkowitz@gmail.com (Kenneth Ronkowitz) — Fri, 04 Aug 2023 08:11:00 +0000

Recently, a former colleague asked me what I thought about push versus pull learning. I knew the terms more from social media marketing but hadn't really used them in learning situations. In marketing, examples include whether to decide to subscribe to a newsletter by email or snail mail (you pull that information by choice) or a newsletter that comes to you automatically (it is pushed at you).

In general, I think people prefer to pull (choice) over having it pushed at them. Companies might prefer to push, but that probably comes with the option to stop that push (unsubscribe.)

Moving these approaches - or just the terms - to education makes some sense.

In a push approach, teachers decide on the information, approach, delivery method, and speed of delivery. It is how education has been done for centuries. It tends to start with what Bloom and his taxonomy would categorize as knowledge-level remember and understand questions. These would build toward more critical and creative thinking. With pull, students enter into creating, evaluating and analyzing that requires them to seek knowledge and understanding.

This conventional classroom-styled learning is not the only approach in the 21st century. Pull learning allows learners to access information at the point of need, the way they prefer (in some settings) at the speed they find comfortable. I think that the initial surge of MOOCs back in 2012 is a good example of learning that learners pulled as needed.

Pull puts learners more in control It flips the teacher-centered learning setting. However, we must acknowledge that learning in school at all levels is still very much push learning. Fortunately, the idea that students should be able to pull some learning as they feel they need it is gaining more acceptance and is being incorporated in instructional design planning.

Currently, pull learning experiences are probably best suited to workers who have learning needs based on job roles, personal knowledge, and advancing their career interests.

Ideally, learning is "push-pull" with appropriate information provided by a push and additional information required to complete tasks and goals pulled as needed. This is not really a new approach. When you were a student, you were certainly pushed information, but you might well have gone beyond what was provided and pulled additional information that you felt you needed.

MORE
https://www.responsiveinboundmarketing.com/blog/the-difference-between-push-and-pull-learning

https://www.teachthought.com/education/push-teaching-vs-pull-teaching-thinking/

https://barkleypd.com/blog/pushing-or-pulling/