Sublime

complexité des interprétations cognitives et comportementales des activations cérébrales, ainsi que les contradictions entre chercheurs sur ces mêmes interprétations, rendent encore difficiles, voire risquées, les transpositions pédagogiques.

This follows a well-established principle of cognitive psychology called levels of processing: Items that are processed at a deeper level, with more active involvement by us, tend to become more strongly encoded in memory. This is why passive learning through textbooks and lectures is not nearly as effective a way to learn new material as is figuri

IT MAY NOT BE INTUITIVE that retrieval practice is a more powerful learning strategy than repeated review and rereading, yet most of us take for granted the importance of testing in sports.

The traditional classroom consists of a teacher droning on, possibly reading from bulleted slides. This is suboptimal for brain changes, because the students are not engaged, and without engagement there is little to no plasticity. The information doesn’t stick.

the same. To a surprising degree, scoring well on a working-memory test predicts scoring well on a reasoning test, and a poor working-memory score predicts a poor reasoning score. (Working memory is not everything, however – recall that in Chapter 2 I emphasized the importance of background knowledge.)

Cognitive scientist Daniel Willingham observes in his book Why Don’t Students Like School? that people learn fastest when the problem solving they are asked to do requires them to make small and steady leaps, when problems are challenging but not sink-or-swim-ish.

that repetition by itself does not lead to good long-term memory.

First, you should know that much of the time when we see someone apparently engaged in logical thinking, he or she is actually engaged in memory retrieval. As I described in Chapter 1, memory is the cognitive process of first resort. When faced with a problem, you will first search for a solution in memory, and if you find one, you will very likely

A much more dramatic illustration was produced in followup experiments by Gilbert, Tafarodi, and Malone.2 Subjects read aloud crime reports crawling across a video monitor, in which the color of the text indicated whether a particular statement was true or false. Some reports contained false statements that exacerbated the severity of the crime, ot