The ThoughtStretchers Podcast

Drew Perkins welcomes neuroscientist and acclaimed author Jared Cooney Horvath to dissect his new book, The Digital Delusion, which provides a rigorous, evidence-based critique of edtech.

Links & Resources Mentioned In This Episode

Horvath doesn't mince words, arguing that the majority of student-facing, internet-connected devices should be removed from schools. He reveals that over 60 years of consistent data supports his claim that the integration of digital tools is fundamentally detrimental to effective learning. This isn't a Luddite's complaint; it's a detailed exploration of the Neuroscience of Learning.

The harm is explained through three primary biological mechanisms, which Horvath asserts are unfixable with software. First, screens train students to multitask, leading to a constant, detrimental battle for attention in a learning environment. Second, the use of devices inhibits the essential human-to-human interaction necessary for empathetic synchrony—the mirroring and mimicking critical for deep cognitive and social development.

Finally, we discuss the profound problem of Transfer of Learning. Horvath explains that by learning skills in an "easy" digital context, the ability to transfer that knowledge to a more complex, real-life (analog) task is significantly diminished, making the learning "slower, worse, and less deep." The data suggests tech only works in highly narrow contexts, primarily for surface-level "drill and kill" facts or basic remediation, often through intelligent tutors.

The conversation then shifts to the persistent educational conflicts, notably the ongoing tension between Explicit Instruction vs Inquiry and Project-Based Learning (PBL). Horvath connects the rigidity of entrenched positions to a "sunk cost" phenomenon, where individuals find it too "costly" to change their public stance, even when facing opposing evidence. We delve into the complexities of teaching, noting that both traditional and progressive approaches are valid at different points in a student's journey, but both are fundamentally flawed when they adhere rigidly to a single philosophy.

Furthermore, we explore the nature of Critical Thinking Skills and creativity. Horvath clarifies that while the mechanism for critical thinking is innate across all ages, its output is heavily constrained by the individual's available domain-specific knowledge. The science of learning, he argues, has nothing to say about specific pedagogy (such as direct instruction versus exploratory learning); it only describes the biological constraints of how the brain learns. Therefore, neuroscience should serve as a powerful tool to inform and improve any existing pedagogical approach, not dictate a single one.

Horvath offers a vision for the ideal classroom, suggesting elementary spaces should be "basically outdoor," focused on play and minimal tech. For older students, he advocates for a high level of control, confining computer use to specialized lab settings—much like woodshop or physical education. This perspective provides an essential counter-narrative for any K-12 educator or administrator struggling to balance modern tools with effective, long-term student success.

To continue exploring innovative, evidence-based strategies, subscribe to the ThoughtStretchers Podcast on your favorite podcast player!

Timestamped Episode Timeline

Time Segment/Topic [00:00] Introduction of Jared Cooney Horvath – Teacher-turned-neuroscientist, focus on "human learning" and applying neuroscience to educational practices. [01:28] Jared's Educational Background and Views on Pedagogy – Describing his K-12 experience as a "mishmash" that didn't adhere rigidly to "traditional" or "progressive" labels. [03:45] The Digital Delusion Book & EdTech Critique – Introducing the book and its core argument: edtech fundamentally harms learning, advocating for reducing/eliminating non-essential computer use in classrooms. [07:18] EdTech and Learning Outcomes/The Swedish Example – Advocating for removing student-facing, internet-connected devices; citing Sweden's ban on general tech use in schools (confining computers to a lab). [08:09] Exceptions for Technology Use – Tech only works effectively in narrow contexts: self-adaptive "intelligent tutors" for surface-level (drill and kill) learning and remediation. [09:46] Mechanisms of EdTech Harm (Biological) – Outlining the three primary ways screens harm learning: Attention, Empathetic Synchrony, and Transfer. [12:29] Transfer and Complexity in Learning – Discussion on how learning in an easy digital context makes skill transfer to a harder, real-life analog context almost impossible. [15:54] AI, Pedagogy, and Creating Learning Tools – Drew's example of using AI for quizzes; Jared's counter that learning is "slower, worse, and less deep" than if the student created the tools themselves. [18:07] The Ideal Classroom – Jared's vision for elementary (outdoor, play-focused, minimal tech) and middle/high school (human-element focus, highly controlled tech use in a lab). [20:17] Critical Thinking and Metacognition – Discussion on the definition of critical thinking, with Jared suggesting metacognition is a more accurate term for the process. [23:02] The Role of Knowledge in Critical Thinking – The mechanism is universal, but the outcome of critical thinking without knowledge is "very very narrow or pointless." [27:43] Creativity and Questioning – Defining creativity as "rearranging of your current memory structures." The role of knowledge and safety/context in the ability to ask good questions. [35:47] Tension Between Traditional and Progressive Education – Observing the acute conflict in Australia/UK; asserting both approaches are correct at different points but wrong when they are too rigid. [40:34] Science of Learning and Pedagogy – Stressing that the science of learning only concerns biological mechanisms and should inform teaching, not dictate a specific pedagogy. [43:08] AI Model Training and Pedagogical Parallels – Drew's question on parallels between AI's "symbolism" vs. "connectivism" and educational philosophies. [44:15] Critique of AI and Cognitive Models – Jared's view that AI conceptualization has mistakenly influenced brain understanding and that current AI models may be at a peak without a new theoretical framework. [46:02] Book and Contact Information – Sharing website (www.lmegglobal.net), new book (The Digital Delusion), and YouTube channel. [46:47] Closing Remarks – Final thoughts on recognizing the "gray zone" in complex educational issues.

In this episode of the ThoughtStretchers podcast, host Drew Perkins talks with Dr. Barbara Oakley, distinguished professor of engineering and co-instructor of the celebrated Learning How to Learn course, to discuss her critical opinion piece: Censorship Hurts Our Brains: Why Neuroscience Confirms the Importance of Free Speech. They dive deep into the neural mechanisms behind free expression, the challenges facing K-12 education, and the dangers of sacrificing liberty for perceived order.

Links & Resources Mentioned In This Episode + Video Podcast

Show Notes & Main Discussion Points:

• Neuroscience and Free Speech: Dr. Oakley explains that exposure to differing viewpoints is essential for cognitive flexibility and how emotional upset literally impedes rational thought when we engage with challenging ideas.
• The 'Cult of Safety': We examine how the modern pursuit of "safe spaces" can ironically lead to a heightened acceptance of hostility toward people with different political views.
• K-12 Education & Free Speech: We explore the difficulty of promoting civic thought in K-12, noting the tension between academic freedom and the need for interventions to overcome ineffective educational practices.
• Critique of Constructivism: Dr. Oakley argues that pure constructivism in education is "completely opposed... to neuroscience," and suggests a balanced "knowledge-rich inquiry" model, guided by Socratic questioning, as a more effective path to true learning.
• Order vs. Liberty: Finally, we discuss how a perceived loss of public safety and order can make a population more willing to compromise essential liberties, including free speech.

Time-Stamped Highlights:

• The Neuroscience of Free Speech (00:07:01): Dr. Oakley explains how engaging with opposing viewpoints—especially through her free Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) on the neurocognitive perspective of free speech—is vital for building cognitive flexibility.
• The Cult of Safety (00:20:17): Barbara Oakley discusses the "cult of safety" and how the swift transition from the pursuit of safe spaces to the acceptance of hostility toward people with differing political beliefs is a worrying trend.
• Emotional Upset vs. Rational Thought (00:23:15): A key takeaway from the neuroscience perspective is that emotional upset makes rational, conscientious engagement with an upsetting topic extremely difficult. The best approach is to manage emotions and seek to understand why people hold their beliefs.
• The Dilemma of K-12 Civic Education (00:10:59): Drew Perkins highlights the struggle to promote civic thought and enlightenment tradition principles in schools, noting that the lack of connection to test scores often pushes these initiatives aside.
• Government Intervention & 'Paradigm Cartels' (00:13:37): They discuss the tension between academic freedom and the occasional necessity of legislative intervention to overcome entrenched, ineffective beliefs in education, citing the "reading wars" and the mandate of phonics instruction as an example.
• The Dangers of Anti-Liberal Movements (00:30:52): Drew Perkins explores the growing "post-liberal and/or anti-liberal" movements on both the political right and left, expressing concern that these forces are dangerously pushing against the fundamental issue of free speech.
• Constructivism vs. Neuroscience (00:39:41): Dr. Oakley argues that the pervasive influence of pure constructivism in K-12 is "completely opposed... to neuroscience," citing negative learning outcomes in places like New Zealand, where a student-centered approach has been extensively applied.
• The Power of Knowledge-Rich Inquiry (00:45:29): They align on a knowledge-rich inquiry model, where a teacher uses Socratic questioning to narrow the "potential solution space," leading the student to the final 'aha' moment and strengthening the neural connection, which is a key part of effective teaching.
• Loss of Order and Compromising Liberty (00:38:40): The conversation concludes by linking the loss of public order and stability to a population's increased willingness to sacrifice liberties, like free speech, in exchange for a feeling of safety and for the metaphorical "trains to run on time."

Drew Perkins welcomes Gary Schiffman and Jon Bassett of 4QM Teaching to the podcast to discuss their new US History curriculum and the principles behind their innovative Four Question Method.

Links & Resources Mentioned In This Episode

This conversation explores the gap between traditional inquiry-based learning and the need for explicit instruction in historical content and disciplinary thinking. Gary and Jon explain how their curriculum is designed to support "ordinary teachers" and build students' capacity for civil disagreement by grounding critical thinking in a robust body of knowledge.

• Key Takeaways & Discussion Points The Power of the 4QM Method: We detail why 4QM Teaching shifted from consulting to developing a full curriculum, recognizing the need for a practical vehicle to implement their teaching framework in the classroom.
• The Four Question Framework: Learn the four core questions that anchor every lesson and build specific historical thinking skills:
  • Q1: What happened? (The skill of Narration and Storytelling)
  • Q2: What were they thinking? (The skill of Interpretation of documents)
  • Q3: Why then and there? (The skill of Explanation and causation)
  • Q4: What do we think about that? (The skill of Judgment and civil discourse)
• Knowledge-Rich Inquiry: Jon and Gary firmly assert their position in the "knowledge first" camp, arguing that deep critical thinking is domain specific. They share why "structure is liberating" when students are equipped with a strong base of historical facts.
• Teaching Civil Disagreement: Discover how separating the "judgment" question (Q4) allows students to practice the art of civil disagreement in a structured, reasoned way, even when addressing controversial historical topics.

Time-Stamped Topics Key moments in the discussion:

• 06:52 - The origin story and philosophical foundation of the Four Question Method (4QM Teaching).
• 10:41 - A detailed breakdown of the four questions: Narration, Interpretation, Explanation, and Judgment.
• 14:20 - Why 4QM Teaching finally decided to write a full US History curriculum.
• 21:45 - How Question 4 teaches the "art of civil disagreement" (and the related work of Natalie Wexler).
• 36:14 - The argument that critical thinking is entirely domain-specific in advanced fields.
• 52:09 - Simplifying the curriculum to reduce cognitive load with four transparent lesson types.

Is the core of teaching history about memorizing history facts, or is it about critical thinking? And what is the role of knowledge-rich inquiry in the history classroom?

Drew Perkins is joined by history educators Lauren Brown, Jonathan Dallimore (author of Teaching History: A Practical Guide for Secondary School Teachers), and Professor Aaron Astor for a frank, dialectic conversation on these essential questions. They discuss the necessity of foundational knowledge, how to promote historical thinking, and the biggest threats to historical understanding in the age of AI and social media.

Links & Resources Mentioned In This Episode

This deep dive into history pedagogy covers:

• Why college students are showing up "fact-deficient" and the need for better long-term memory retention through context.
• The difference between simple chronology and the power of periodization as a critical thinking tool.
• Why the fundamental historical critical question is "so what."
• Bridging the gap between knowledge building and inquiry-based learning to equip students with "reality-based community practices."
• The argument for why historiography (understanding different interpretations and debates) is a crucial form of shared cultural knowledge.

Key Themes & Time-Stamped Highlights

(00:14:18) The Problem of Forgetting: Professor Astor notes that college students often lack basic knowledge, not because they were never taught, but because they forgot previously learned information. He emphasizes the need for repetition and context to make facts "stick".

(00:18:17) The Multiplication Analogy: The panel agrees that some foundational facts, like multiplication tables in math, must be fluent to prevent cognitive load when performing higher-level tasks, such as understanding complex military strategy or migration patterns in history.

(00:23:07) Efficiency of Explicit Instruction: Jonathan Dallimore explains that concrete, explicit instruction (such as teaching geography on a map) is necessary to efficiently inject context, preserving limited class time for richer, deeper historical conversations (inquiry).

(00:27:37) The Case for Foundational Facts: Lauren Brown supports teaching foundational facts (like the 50 states) at a young age to build knowledge systematically and improve overall literacy and comprehension of diverse texts.

(00:36:56) Context is Key to Memory: Drew Perkins points out that facts are more likely to be retained in long-term memory if they are put in context with other information (e.g., connecting a state's location to regional dynamics or Civil War loyalties).

(00:45:08) Chronology vs. Periodization: Jonathan Dallimore champions periodization (breaking history into three or four manageable phases) as a more effective tool than simple chronology. He argues that periodization is not only concrete but also serves as a critical tool for later interpretation and debate.

(00:53:10) Knowledge Prevents "Post-Truth Nonsense": The panel stresses that building a sufficient factual architecture is crucial to prevent historical discussions from devolving into unsupported, opinionated "post-truth nonsense".

(00:56:48) The "So What" Question: Aaron Astor identifies the fundamental critical question in history as "so what" — encouraging students to understand why a particular piece of information matters and how it is connected to a bigger force or theme.

(01:07:09) Knowledge as an Indicator, Not the Aim: Drew Perkins introduces Grant Wiggins's idea that "knowledge is an indicator of educational success, not the aim," emphasizing the value of what a student can do with the knowledge (i.e., critical thinking and making connections).

(01:19:02) The Importance of Historiography: Jonathan Dallimore argues that rich cultural knowledge should include an understanding of the big historical debates and interpretations (historiography) to help students contextualize information encountered on social media.

(01:21:53) Navigating the Modern Information Landscape: Aaron Astor discusses how AI and social media (the "anarchy of takes") have destabilized the architecture of information, making it imperative for history teachers to inculcate reality-based community practices to discern fact from fiction.

(01:34:01) The Goal: Think Historically: Aaron Astor concludes that the ultimate goal of history education is for students to "think historically" about their worlds and their times.

Drew Perkins is joined by guest co-host, fourth-grade teacher Melinda Karshner, for a critical conversation with Timothy Shanahan, Distinguished Professor Emeritus at the University of Illinois at Chicago and former Director of Reading for Chicago Public Schools. They discuss the core arguments of his book, Leveled Reading, Leveled Lives, How Students' Reading Achievement Has Been Held Back and What We Can Do About It.

Links & Resources Mentioned In This Episode

Key Themes & Time-Stamped Highlights

(00:10:31) The Flaw in Instructional Level Theory: Dr. Shanahan explains why the long-held notion of teaching kids at their "instructional level" is flawed, noting that research shows this practice often holds students back and reduces their opportunity to learn.

(00:12:37) The Research: Studies show that students who receive "instructional level" treatment often do worse than those taught with grade-level materials.

(00:14:04) The Problem of "Ghost Retention": The practice effectively retains students at lower curriculum levels without informing parents, leading to a disconnect between national assessment results and parental perception of their child's reading level.

(00:16:11) Shanahan's Stance on Phonics: While "very pro phonics," Dr. Shanahan emphasizes following research, noting that a federal panel he served on supported phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and direct instruction in reading comprehension.

(00:20:37) Challenging Text and Equity: Shanahan shares historical context and cites studies showing that ability-based reading groups actually penalized minority students, confirming that the practice of holding kids back is detrimental to equity.

(00:25:28) The Power of Scaffolding: For most struggling readers (a one- to two-year gap), scaffolding grade-level materials is manageable and beneficial, especially from the beginning of second grade onward.

(00:31:13) Optimizing Intervention Time: Dr. Shanahan suggests that for students with basic foundational skills, intervention time should limit decoding practice to about 15 minutes of a 45-minute session, using the remaining time for working on grade-level text fluency and comprehension.

(00:33:44) Fluency & Practice: Having students read challenging text aloud a second time can reduce errors by 50%, making it immediately more accessible for comprehension.

(00:40:31) Student Choice & Motivation: Teachers should involve students in choosing texts among grade-level options (e.g., voting on the next three stories) to dramatically increase engagement and motivation.

(00:43:37) Cognitive Load & Productive Struggle: Dr. Shanahan resolves the tension with cognitive load theory, emphasizing that learning requires a degree of challenge (frustration) to be retained, and the goal is successful navigation of challenging material with support.

(00:51:07) Reforming Teacher Education: Teacher preparation programs need to move away from focusing on matching kids to books and instead focus on training teachers to address texts that outstrip a student's current skills through targeted support and intervention.

(01:00:06) The Four-Part Literacy Framework: Dr. Shanahan outlines a mandated framework for Language Arts instruction: (1) words/parts of words, (2) fluency, (3) reading comprehension, and (4) writing instruction, recommending a quarter of time for each, balanced over time.

(01:03:15) Integrating Content: Integrating social studies or science content into the reading comprehension block provides a "double dose" of learning and exposure to varied text types.