Unlocking learning potential: the power of retrieval practice according to Barbara Oakley

Barbara Oakley is a renowned researcher and professor at Oakland University whose long and unconventional career is difficult to sum up. Initially, she intended to become a linguist before enlisting in the U.S. Army and studying Russian. After serving as a Signal Officer and rising to the rank of Captain, she transitioned to studying engineering. Oakley then obtained a B.A. in Slavic Languages and Literature from the University of Washington and later earned a B.S. in Electrical Engineering. Apart from her studies, she has also worked as a Russian translator on Soviet trawlers, and as a radio operator at the South Pole Station, where she met her spouse Philip Oakley. With an impressive academic background, including an M.S. in Electrical and Computer Engineering and a Ph.D. in Systems Engineering, she has published ground-breaking research in esteemed publications such as the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the Wall Street Journal, and The New York Times.

She has also made significant contributions to the field of neuroscience and social behaviour and visited Rīga Stradiņš University (RSU) to give a seminar titled "Using Neuroscience To Understand And Motivate Our Students - And Us!".

Your biography reads almost like a novel! How do you explain your journey and your driving force?

I'm just going to say I’ve grown comfortable with the feeling of being uncomfortable.

This means that when new opportunities rise, even when they're in very different areas, even though I might be very uncomfortable and nervous, I am open to them. I often find myself doing these very different things, and I'm terrified! But at the same time, I just do them.

When you travel and give lectures, do you notice any regional differences in the questions that lecturers ask you or the response you get from people?

Oh, definitely. If I'm in Asia, then it's a given that retrieval practice is a good approach [a learning technique that involves actively recalling information from memory – Ed.]. If I'm in Sweden or Finland, on the other hand, it's not necessarily the consensus that it's a good approach.

What are some contrasting aspects of the Soviet style of teaching and Western teaching approaches? Is the Soviet legacy something bad that we need to work to eliminate within education?

In the Soviet style of teaching, you weren't afraid to put your students through their paces. If you're asking people around the class, you're expecting and demanding an answer from them, whereas in Western countries the perception is that doing this puts students in a stressful situation. Actually, it turns out students learn much better if they are called on in class spontaneously. There's good research evidence for that.

I was in Nepal once and there was a teacher who was raised in Russia who couldn't understand why she would get bad evaluations. I had watched her teaching, and she was good, but she would teach in the Soviet style. She was very firm and stern and didn’t have an excited and open expression. She didn't really realise that while she was teaching really well, she was communicating with a very stern and unforgiving face. This made her seem inapproachable. She actually was really quite approachable, but she had just come up through that Russian way of teaching.

So ultimately, the legacy has good and bad sides and shouldn’t be eradicated blindly. Don't be afraid to put a little stress on your students and have them perform in class, but it doesn't hurt to have a happier face.

What was your experience today at Rīga Stradiņš University like?

I am impressed by individuals who show genuine interest in factual information rather than seeking validation or making others feel good. When it comes to receiving a diagnosis from a doctor, for example, I prefer someone who is knowledgeable and capable of analysing the facts to arrive at conclusions. The people I encountered here displayed a sincere curiosity for the facts. Their questions were remarkably perceptive, and the comments I received reflected a genuine attempt to understand complex concepts and uncover the actual truth. Being in their presence today felt like a treasure, as I sensed a shared passion for discovery. They were willing to ask questions regardless of whether or not I knew the answers. I once taught a class of fourth graders, and their lack of knowledge about what they could or couldn't ask made them the most challenging audience I have ever addressed. On the other hand, I once spoke at the Santa Fe Institute, where most attendees were physicists, and my friend had warned me about their toughness. However, they turned out to be gentle and posed relatively easy questions.

Here, in the best possible sense, I found an open-minded atmosphere where people had the uninhibited ability to question without preconceived notions. It was incredibly refreshing, and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

What are some misconceptions about your field that you encounter?

Misconceptions about my field often involve misconstruing the value of repetitive learning and memorisation. In certain western parts of the world, there is a tendency to diminish the importance of drill and practice, labelling it as ineffective or detrimental. However, extensive practice can lead to the ability to perform tasks effortlessly and without conscious effort. It's crucial not to disregard memorisation entirely, as understanding alone is not sufficient if one cannot remember what they've learned. We've gone so overboard on the fact that understanding is the only important thing in learning that we forget that if you can't remember what you've learned you still really don't understand it.

Another misconception revolves around the belief that active learning is the sole key to effective learning. While students do construct their own knowledge, teachers play a vital role in providing nuanced guidance and facilitating learning through a combination of direct instruction, like lectures and explanations, and active learning. 

Is it the responsibility of universities and higher education institutions to support the adoption of new teaching practices, or is it primarily up to individuals?

It is largely up to individuals. However, integrating learning-oriented initiatives within educational institutions could be beneficial. For example, introducing an orientation course that emphasises effective learning strategies for students could be highly effective. Additionally, encouraging professors to participate in specialised courses on effective teaching methods and encouraging students to take advantage of free learning resources like "Learning How to Learn" on Coursera can further support this goal. Can you imagine that we stuff learning down students' throats for twelve to sixteen years, and yet we never give them a course on how to learn!

How do you feel about the effects that AI is already having and will continue to have on teaching and learning?

The genie is out of the bottle. The bottom line is, you cannot forget that

learning means making changes in your own brain.

We shouldn’t be thinking that because ChatGPT can write essays, we somehow need to pose questions at an even higher level.
 
You want people to learn to write. Just thinking you can have students write at a higher level without getting basic writing skills is wrong. We made that mistake with learning maths thinking that as you can just use a calculator there was no need to learn the multiplication tables. What happened was that students didn't internalise the patterns of numbers. You can see that countries where memorisation of the multiplication tables is really important do a lot better in maths.

I think ChatGPT and artificial intelligence is really exciting. There's going to be a lot of new stuff coming out of it. We just can't forget that the basics will still always be important.

Sounds like you're more excited about it than scared.

Maybe I'm so foolish that I don't know enough to be scared, but I see a lot of exciting cool things coming out of it. It's going to be a really interesting world here the next decade as this begins to develop. It’s good to remember that there was a similar discussion about the dangers and opportunities of technology in the 1980s when laptops and computers started to come out.

If you could eliminate one harmful practice in the field, what would it be?

I would eliminate the idea that you don't have to remember things because you can always look it up. Expertise develops in part by what you've got in your memory. I couldn't speak Latvian if I was only using Google translate, could I?

What core message do you want everyone to take away from your seminar?

That retrieval practice is really valuable. It's important because when you retrieve an idea, you think very deeply about it. You're thinking about what the proof is for a certain fact and the more you retrieve it, the more you start making it more concrete within your own mind. This helps you see new ways of tackling that proof.