According to Merriam-Webster, knowing is defined as:
1 a (1) : to perceive directly : have direct cognition of (2) : to have understanding of
2 a : to be aware of the truth or factuality of : be convinced or certain of b : to have a practical understanding of
My life experience of knowing suggests commonalities with this definition. A definition of knowing to me would include: being aware of, or familiar with, by means of a factual experience. Knowing is distinct from understanding. It is possible to know, but not to understand. Through memorization, I know some of the elements on the Periodic Table of Elements. But I do not understand the elements that I know on the Periodic Table of Elements. For me, knowing often is based on a factual basis.
According to Merriam-Webster, understanding is defined as:
1 a : to grasp the meaning of
2 : to accept as a fact or truth or regard as plausible without utter certainty
3 : to interpret in one of a number of possible ways
4 : to supply in thought as though expressed <"to be married" is commonly understood after
My life experience of understanding shares commonalities with this definition. A definition of understanding to me would include conceptualizing by thinking, often as an intellectual act. Sometimes knowing is a component of understanding. But it is possible to understand, but not to know. My friend explained to me how to ride his motorcycle. Even though I understand what he told me, I do not know how to ride his motorcycle. Understanding can often require the ability to place things in context, and synthesizing disparate sources of knowledge.
As this blog demonstrates, definitions of knowing and understanding are tenuous at best. Knowing and understanding are both are components of the learning process. But it might be possible to provide a definition by identification of differences and commonalities. According to Wiggins and McTighe (2005), one way to differentiate knowing from understanding is through the concept of transferability:
Understanding is about transfer, in other words. To be truly able requires the ability to transfer what we have learned to new and sometimes confusing settings. The ability to transfer our knowledge and skill effectively involves the capacity to take what we know and use it creatively, flexibly, fluently, in different settings or problems, on our own. (p.40)
The author Kuhn proposes a commonality between knowing and understanding, by claiming that "one cannot fully understand the processes of knowing and knowledge acquisition that people engage in without investigating their understanding of their own knowing" (Kuhn, p. 7). In other words, to know you must first understand your knowing.
At this early stage in LIBR 250, what I can say definitively about knowing, understanding and the learning process is that it is incredibly complex.
Sources:
Kuhn, D. (2001). How do people know? Psychological Science, 12(1), 1-8. Retrieved September 2, 2010 from Education Full Text.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2006). Understanding by design. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
"Understanding is about transfer, in other words. To be truly able requires the ability to transfer what we have learned to new and sometimes confusing settings."
ReplyDeleteFrom this statement I started to think about the kinds of activities teachers often give students in the classroom. To demonstrate that a student knows the concept he or she might be tested on it, answer questions, or write about the knowledge gained. In relation to learning teachers often say that to show someone knows the information we ask them to perform the task (or assess them on it in the manner described above). To show that they really understand it we ask them to teach someone else. This supports your idea that the skills or knowledge are transferable if truly understood.
The notion of transferability in understanding wasn't brought out in a lot of posts, it was discussed in terms of applying but you are right I think to mention it. Applying in the same context is not enough to demonstrate understanding, it must also be applied in a different context.
ReplyDeleteI like your notion of understanding as the synthesis of “disparate sources of knowledge” and, later, the nod to McTighe’s concept of transferability. In this paradigm, knowledge might be said to be the raw material that our “understanding” has to work with, and our understanding the act of translation. More importantly, understanding implies the exercise of knowledge organization and unification, perhaps demonstrating a higher level of learning and comprehension, though both, as you point out, are components of the learning process. Understanding demonstrates and requires flexibility and adaptation: two essential aspects of the creative process.
ReplyDeleteI also like the reflectivity built into Kuhn’s articulation of knowledge; to know, we must first know ourselves. Our understanding of the way in which we process and utilize knowledge is both an extension and a precursor of our actual ability to know.
I agree with the example you provided about how after a friend describes how to ride a motorcycle you would understand how to do it without really knowing. I am trying to connect that to the ideas Wiggins and McTighe offer about transferability. How would that understanding transfer? Would that be in the ability to begin to understand how to drive a car or ride a scooter? It doesn't seem so. In that regard, I hope that Wiggins and McTighe explore the distinction between these two concepts in greater depth because as you have explained, the concepts blur together.
ReplyDelete