
I explore a belief about learning and teaching that is commonly held in education and society at large that nonetheless is deeply flawed. The belief asserts that mastery of formalisms—specialized representations such as symbolic equations and diagrams with no inherent meaning except that which is established by convention—is prerequisite to applied knowledge. A formalisms first (FF) view of learning, rooted in Western dualist philosophy, incorrectly advocates the introduction of formalisms too early in the development of learners’ conceptual understanding and can encourage a formalisms-only mind-set toward learning and instruction. I identify the prevalence of FF in curriculum and instruction and outline some of the serious problems engendered by FF approaches. I then turn to promising alternatives that support progressive formalization, problem-based learning, and inquiry learning, which capitalize on the strengths of formalisms but avoid some of the most costly problems found in FF approaches.
| citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 82 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
