The Expert Equation

What differentiates an expert from a novice? I unpack a few distinctions in the Principles of Learning Course.

• Novices tend to see the superficial aspects of a problem or text, whereas experts see the problem's deeper structure.
• Novices are still learning the names of things, whereas experts know both what things are called and (more importantly) how things function.
• Experts are capable of creating knowledge, whereas novice's attempts to do so are very basic. E.g.,
  • Novice musicians learn to play music; expert musicians are capable of composing music.
  • Novice historians learn the facts of history; expert historians are capable of creating history through analyzing primary sources.
  • Novice literary scholars are learning the plot and characters of a novel; expert literary scholars can unpack deep patterns and structures in the novel and how those patterns converse with those in other novels.
• Novices must be given lots of scaffolding to achieve quality critical thinking, whereas experts think critically without prompting or aid.

Looking at this list, it's obvious to me that, though my classes contain a vast diversity of student strengths and interests and abilities and preparedness, they're still all novices. (Because of this, one of the first recommendations I unpack in the course is teaching students as if they are novices.)

So, here's another question: What factors lead a person to transition from novice to expert?

To me, it comes down to a simple equation — let's call it the Expert Equation:

Knowledge X Effective Practice X Time = Degree of Expertise

This equation helps me both understand the learning problems I encounter in my classroom and do something effective about these problems.

• If students don't know enough in a given discipline, no amount of practice or time will get them closer to expertise. We think with what we know. This is an inescapable reality of the human learning system.
• If students know a lot but aren't taught how to effectively use (i.e., practice with) that knowledge, no amount of time will get them closer to expertise. Not all types of practice are equal. Some learning strategies work exceptionally well; others don't. Some types of practice are very fruitful; others are not.
• If students aren't given consistent (i.e., daily) opportunities to build knowledge and practice using that knowledge, they'll not move much toward expertise. It takes lots of sessions over lots of days to grow — just like it would take me lots of sessions over lots of days to gain the Chris Hemsworth physique I was made for.

To help students acquire as much mastery (i.e., as much movement towards expertise) as possible in a K-12 education, they need knowledge-rich learning experiences filled with effective practice, lesson after lesson, year after year.

And so, with the lessons you're teaching tomorrow, you can ask yourself: How do my lessons provide students an opportunity to

1. Gain knowledge and
2. Practice effectively?

If only 50% of your lessons do these things or you do these things with only 50% of your allotted lesson time, your students will grow to a significantly lesser degree than if you moved those percentages up to 60% or 70% or 80%.

Something to think about.

Best,

DSJR

P.S. There's a lot to unpack here, isn't there? And that's just what we're doing in the Principles of Learning Course. Are you feeling a need to engage with your practice in a new and fundamental way? Consider joining us today.