Intelligent and Effective Learning Based on the Model for Systematic Concept Teaching - Abbreviated Version

Chapter 1

Introduction and overview of the framework for Systematic Concept Teaching (SCT), research on effects, a general evaluation from outside the SCT community, what kind of children can benefit from this educational approach and case studies

Introduction to Systematic Concept Teaching (SCT)

The Abbreviated Practitioner’s Manual and the lessons for Systematic Concept Teaching

Intelligent learning and intelligent teaching

Nyborg’s framework for educational thinking, planning and teaching practice

What is Systematic Concept Teaching (SCT) — what, how and why

The research on effects of Systematic Concept Teaching (SCT) and on the many reports on SCT

Some general evaluations from outside the Systematic Concept Teaching (SCT) community

What kind of population can benefit from Systematic Concept Teaching (SCT)

The importance of example cases, lessons and video clips/film

Introduction to Systematic Concept Teaching (SCT)

Systematic Concept Teaching (SCT) is an educational as well as a metacognitive approach. Moreover, Systematic Concept Teaching is also a method that supports and enriches the teaching/learning of school subjects and skills in most content areas. The leading developer of Systematic Concept Teaching was the late Professor Magne Nyborg from Norway.

The Abbreviated Practitioner’s Manual and the lessons for Systematic Concept Teaching

This present Abbreviated version of the Practitioner’s Manual consists of 11 chapters. These chapters reference the intervention program based on Systematic Concept Teaching (SCT), located in the password-protected resources on the companion website to the Manual, The Systematic Concept Teaching Resource ( https://sctresource.com ). This intervention program consists of 56 lessons for SCT based on the principles of the Model for Systematic Concept Teaching (abbreviated: The Concept Teaching Model or, the CTM). Each lesson plan incorporates various hands-on activities together with sets of animated slides that are effective for teaching each of the Basic Conceptual Systems and the related Basic Concepts (conceptual vocabulary) they encompass. Each lesson also contains Home Practice Worksheets for follow-up cooperative learning between the student and her/his parents. In addition, there are several more SCT resources on the SCRT website, cf. the introduction to the resources on the SCTR website in Appendix F and to the website itself.

Intelligent learning and intelligent teaching

The first word in the title of the present Manual is intelligent … (learning). In the following, some comments are given concerning Nyborg's notion of ability to earn transferably and to what Nyborg terms as Intelligent teaching and intelligent learning. Below the reader will find the word intelligent put together in a combination of intelligent teaching and intelligent learning. When dealing with the notion of intelligent teaching and intelligent learning, it is important to understand the concept of intelligence in relation to the ability to learn within Nyborg's theory of learning and overall framework, cf. the mention of the models below. Nyborg defines intelligence as the ability to learn (in a transferable way). In this sense, this ability is understood as:

… A designation for a high degree of an acquired, current capacity to perceive, learn, remember, think, solve problems, act, etc., without necessarily considering to what degree/extent this capacity is rooted in and reflects original aptitude or potential.

(Nyborg, 1980, p. 259, translated from Norwegian)

The fact that this ability to learn can and has to be acquired through upbringing and teaching is central in Nyborg’s theory of learning. Thus, it should be evident that Nyborg looked on the ability to learn dynamically, implying that the ability to learn is not fixed, but changeable and malleable as a consequence of what he terms intelligent teaching and intelligent learning. Intelligent teaching and intelligent learning should be taken to mean:

… Teaching that produces good understanding during learning. And what is clearly understood (Latin: intelligere — understand), is usually remembered very well too. It also denotes teaching conceptual knowledge which can be integrated in many different ways into conceptual systems, principles, etc., all of which lend themselves to transfer of learning; i.e., a process that may accelerate further learning for all persons.

(Nyborg, 1993, p. 488)

It is both Nyborg's as well as the present authors' view that Systematic Concept Teaching can lead to the results described above. It should not be difficult to notice that intelligent learning as a result of intelligent teaching, describes outcomes that may be characteristic of what can be termed as intelligent functioning.

The dynamic view on abilities implies that there is a continuous change of pre-requisites for learning in the person as new experiences affect the brain. This is a view that is clearly supported by recent research on (the brain's) neuroplasticity, which — very simplified expressed – is about how the brain continually is reorganized or rewired as new experiences are made (e.g., Doidge, 2007; Taylor, 2008; Costandi, 2016).

Nyborg’s framework for educational thinking, planning and teaching practice

As previously stated the principal researcher and developer behind the educational approach referred to as Systematic Concept Teaching was the late Professor Magne Nyborg (1927─1996) at Oslo University, Norway, who for many years did extensive research on learning difficulties. He developed a comprehensive theory of learning and corresponding educational practice. The latter was developed in close collaboration with colleagues, including Dr. Andreas Hansen, Norway, the first author in the present book, who has followed up Nyborg’s research and, over the years, undertaken various projects with Systematic Concept Teaching focused on children with and without learning difficulties.

Nyborg’s theoretical and empirical work has resulted in the following four instruments for educational thinking, planning, and teaching practice, cf. Figure 1.1, on the next page:

1. The green colored double oval shape at the top of Figure 1.1 symbolizes Nyborg's theoretical model of a learning person in interaction with learning situations — the PSI-model (Person-Situation-Interactions during learning). This model, presented in Chapter 2 is, as previously stated, a depiction of the central parts of his theory of teaching/learning. Language plays a crucial role in learning, thinking, and communication in this theory.

2. The blue colored square shape on the left in Figure 1.1 represents an inventory of Basic Conceptual Systems and their related Basic Concepts – the BCSs. These are concepts related to BCS-Color, Shape, Position, Place, Size, (surface) Pattern, Direction, Number, Temperature, etc., cf. Chapter 3, which contains a short version of the BCS inventory. The BSCs are of great importance for performing Analytic Coding, which means the analyses of and comparing of different objects and events using knowledge about Basic Conceptual Systems and their related Basic Concepts, cf. examples of Analytic Coding in Chapter 2 and 3.

Figure 1.1. Nyborg's framework for educational thinking, planning, and teaching practice (see comments following).

3. The yellow colored double circular shape in the center of Figure 1.1 represents the Concept Teaching Model, the CTM. The CTM is the model developed for the teaching of Basic Conceptual Systems as well as more complex Conceptual Systems rather than only single concepts, cf. Chapter 4.

4. The yellow colored circular shape on the right side in Figure 1.1 symbolizes the Model for the Teaching/Learning of Skills, cf. Chapter 5. The color yellow that is used to represent both the Concept Teaching Model and the Model for Teaching Skills indicates that both of these are teaching models, while the double circle shape denotes that the CTM is the central didactical model.

In addition to the four models comes an educational practice developed over the years with teaching academic concepts and school subjects including skills of different kinds, cf. Chapter 8 (reading), Chapter 9 (mathematics and handwriting) and Chapter 10 (teaching academic concepts and school subjects in general).

A rather large body of teaching projects and formal research projects have been carried out within the tradition of Systematic Concept Teaching; cf. some of them presented through the abstracts of example cases in Chapter 11.

The PSI-model (cf. Figure 1.1 and Figure 2.4), which, as pointed out above, is a depiction of the central parts of Nyborg's learning theory, makes it possible to imagine theoretically what might be expected to occur within a learning person in relation to external observable events, in light of the model understood as an information receiving and processing system in dynamic interaction with its surroundings.

Thus, the PSI-model can serve as an analysis tool for reasoning about what happens when learning in children and young people does not occur adequately, and which educational measures might be implemented to enable children and young people to acquire the appropriate prerequisites for learning; the aim being to improve their ability to learn, cf. the subchapter below with the what, how and why of Systematic Concept Teaching.

The phrase nothing is as concrete as a good theory is something that seems to fit in here. Nyborg's learning theory and framework for educational thinking, planning and teaching practice together provide good (concrete) guidance for how to provide optimum conditions of learning for individuals who may differ widely in prerequisites for learning (Nyborg, 1993, the front page).

As will be obvious from what is stated above and throughout this Manual, there is a close connection between Nyborg's learning theory, the application of his models (cf. the description of these above), and SCT practice. This connection makes it possible to perform precise analyses about what can be done to facilitate learning and development in different areas.

What certainly distinguishes SCT from many other cognitive educational approaches/methods is the generalization and transfer of learning aspect. When working according to the principles of the Concept Teaching Model (the CTM), Basic Conceptual Systems (BCSs) and Analytic Coding (AC) can, in the next stage, be used directly to teach skills and academic concepts, as well as other concepts and conceptual systems in almost every thinkable area. In other words, there is a direct line from teaching children Basic Conceptual Systems, training them in performing Analytic Coding as well as making use of language in their thinking, learning and problem solving, to Systematic Concept Teaching of Academic Concepts and school subjects and skills of different kinds — in principle in most subject areas and at increasingly higher levels.

What is Systematic Concept Teaching (SCT) — what, how and why

Systematic Concept Teaching (SCT) refers to the systematic teaching of Basic Conceptual Systems (Color, Shape, Size, Position, Place, (Surface) Pattern, Direction, Number, Time, etc.) and their related Basic Concepts, which are made verbally conscious through oral language skills. These Basic Conceptual Systems (BCS) and their related Basic Concepts are taught utilizing the Model for Concept Teaching (The CTM) which was initially developed by Dr. Magne Nyborg, Norway, with additional procedures designed later by Dr. Andreas Hansen.

This approach aims to help children who have had negative experiences concerning their learning possibilities develop positive expectations towards learning. Also, it seeks to teach them to direct and take control of their attention, training them in prolonging and expanding their short-term memory (STM) and working memory (WM) by consciously applying language in these processes (outer as well as internalized private speech).

Moreover, it makes children aware of and trains them in the use of language as a tool for further thinking and problem-solving. In short, an essential aim for SCT is to teach children how to be more effective learners. This approach also includes training children in how to apply a precise and decontextualized (or situational independent) language when it is needed in communication, thinking and learning.

Teachers are trained to deliberately apply BCSs and their related Basic Concepts as tools for the teaching of academic concepts and school subjects together with verbal and non-verbal skills of different kinds as children learn more and more Basic Conceptual Systems (BCS) and their associated concepts.

The research on effects of Systematic Concept Teaching (SCT) and on the many reports on SCT

The research within the tradition of Systematic Concept includes three doctoral thesis (Nyborg, 1971; Bócsa, 2003; Hansen, 2006a), as well as approximately 14 master theses that have been completed. Beyond this, about 40 to 50 reports have been produced in Norway, describing projects with Systematic Concept Teaching and its possible effects for children and adolescents at various ages and with different learning problems. Systematic Concept Teaching has also been implemented in a few other European countries than Norway, as well as in Seattle, Washington, USA.

Almost without exception, the studies and reports conclude that Systematic Concept Teaching is an approach that results in children and adolescents learning in such a way that they experience a positive development of their oral language skills and their motivational dispositions towards learning. Most often this corresponds with reports of improved learning of school subjects including real skills when such matters also are evaluated.

The reader is referred to the comprehensive version of the Practitioner’s Manual for SCT and the more detailed presentation of references about the research on effects of SCT.

Some general evaluations from outside the Systematic Concept Teaching (SCT) community

In some cases, Systematic Concept Teaching theory and practice has been compared to other approaches by professionals from outside the SCT community. This happened in 2003 when Hansen and three others were challenged by Dr. Martin Miller to write about mediation, after having participated in a Symposium on the topic at a conference the previous year: The meaning of mediation. Different perspectives. Simply put, mediation refers to the specific role of adults and other more competent individuals in the cognitive development of children as well as how best to promote learning. A. Hansen wrote about mediation from the perspective of Magne Nyborg, Ruth M. Deutsch from the perspective of Mediated Learning Experiences (Reuven Feuerstein), Yuriy Karpov wrote on Vygotsky's conception of mediation, and H. Carl Haywood wrote on mediation within a Neo-Piagetian framework. The articles were published in the Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology (Volume 3 Number 1 May 2003) with M. B. Miller as guest editor for the topic.

In Miller’s discussion of the varying perspectives, he writes about the similarities and differences among the perspectives, with some references to the common historical bases of these varying points of view and, of course, on many important aspects of mediation. When Miller compares the effectiveness of the different theories/models with their methods, he sums up his findings as follows:

It is worth noting that to my knowledge, Hansen shows striking objective evidence of the effectiveness of Nyborgian methods with special-needs children, those with significant intellectual and related learning deficits, in my view more convincingly than I have seen with any of the methods derived from the other models that have been described here, although I do not know the special education literature, if any, on Vygotskian derivatives in Russia. I believe that the effectiveness of the Nyborgian model in special education is explained by the particulars of the teaching methodology that we have read about, at least partially, in Hansen's paper.

(Miller, 2003, p. 84)

As the reader will notice, Miller gives a very positive evaluation of the effective-ness of Systematic Concept Teaching. The reader is referred to two more general evaluations of SCT in the long version of the Practitioner’s Manual for SCT done by Haywood (1997) and Burdon (2009).

What kind of population can benefit from Systematic Concept Teaching (SCT)

Generally, one can say that SCT is appropriate for children beginning at the ages of four and five, who are able to understand oral language information to a certain degree, and who are able to imitate short sequences of words (or signs) with the teacher and other children in a group, as a model. Recently some experiences with a simplified form of SCT (the application of several activities from Phase 1 and some from Phase 2 of the Concept Teaching Model, cf. Chapter 3), indicate that children between two and three years of age might also benefit from SCT.

As mentioned above, throughout more than 30 years, many teaching experiments related to Concept Teaching were carried out by Magne Nyborg, Ragnhild Hope Nyborg, Andreas Hansen, Turid Lyngstad, as well as by many colleagues and students. To summarize these findings, it is possible to say that the following categories of learners have been shown to benefit from this approach to teaching:

Early teaching of typically developing children; that is within pre-school settings and in the early grades of primary school

Children, young people and adults with specific disabilities, including different kinds of language-learning disorders

Children and young people with general disorders of learning, combined with a lower IQ

Children, young people whose primary language is not the dominant language of the culture in which they currently live

Children and young people with "behavioral disorders’, including schizophrenia

Besides, there are good reasons to expect that children and youth with hearing loss can also benefit from the implementation of SCT. The same is the case for children and youth with vision problems, cf. the abstract of Case Study no. 6 in Chapter 11: Experiences from SCT of a young blind preschool boy.

The importance of example cases, lessons and video