Editing Transfer

== '''Overview''' ==
Transfer is the application of knowledge/skills learned in one context to a novel context. <ref name=":0">Martinez, M. E. (2010). Theories of knowledge. In Learning and Cognition: The Design of the Mind (pp. 92–116). Boston: Merrill.</ref>. It is considered vital to learning <ref>Perkins, D. N. (1992). Transfer of Learning. ''International Encyclopedia of Education''.</ref> since educators want learning to have positive effects that extend outside the original learning context. Transfer tests have been used as an essential measure to evaluate learning experiences.<ref name=":1">Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. L. (1999). Rethinking Transfer: A Simple Proposal With Multiple Implications. ''Review of Research in Education'', 61-100.</ref> Different types of Transfer need to be considered before using them to measure the effectiveness of learning experiences.

== '''Types of Transfer''' ==

=== '''Near and Far Transfer''' ===
Near Transfer is where the new context is closely related to the original learning context.<ref name=":0" /> For Example, learning how to search on Google and applying that while searching on Bing. Far Transfer is where the new context is dissimilar to the original learning context.<ref name=":0" /> For example, players apply the information they learned in urban design class while designing a city in a sandbox game, such as Sim City.

=== '''Positive and Negative Transfer''' ===
Positive Transfer occurs when learning in one context helps learning in a new context. However, Negative Transfer is where the knowledge/skills learned in the original context hinder learning in a new context.<ref name=":0" /> For example, Learning Softball after learning Cricket. In this case, the skills learned for Cricket are an active hindrance to learning Softball.

=== '''Horizontal and Vertical Transfer''' ===
Horizontal Transfer happens across situations, and Vertical Transfer happens within a situation when a skill is learned by Transfer of learning from the subskills. For example: Learning how to swing before learning how to march.

== '''Evidence''' ==
Evidence for Transfer should be considered from the perspective of the learning evaluations it has been used for. The first instance of this is by Thorndike and Woodworth in 1901<ref>Thorndike, E., & Woodworth, R. (1901). The Influence of Improvement in One Mental Function Upon the Efficay of Other Functions. ''Psychological Review'', 247-261.</ref>, who wanted to challenge the then-prevailing assumptions about learning evaluations. Thorndike showed that while learners could do well in tests aligned to the original learning context, they could still apply what they learned in new situations. They helped establish the Transfer as something vital to learning.<ref name=":1" />

=== '''Example of a Transfer Test''' ===
While testing the effectiveness of Multimedia Learning in 1989, Mayer used transfer tests. Learners learned about how breaks work from a booklet containing printed text and illustrations or from a booklet that only had printed text. After reading the booklet, the students took a transfer test that consisted of five questions. (a) “Why do brakes get hot?” (b) “What could be done to make brakes more reliable, that is, to make sure they would not fail?” (c) “What could be done to make brakes more effective, that is, to reduce the distance needed to bring a car to a stop?” (d) “Suppose you press on the brake pedal in your car but the brakes don't work. What could have gone wrong?” (e) “What happens when you pump the brakes (i.e., press the pedal and release the pedal repeatedly and rapidly)?” <ref>Mayer, R. E. (1989). Systematic thinking fostered by illustrations in scientific text.''Journal of Educational Psychology, 81''(2), 240–246. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.81.2.240</nowiki></ref>

== '''New Perspective''' ==
Research indicates that Transfer is not easy or dependable<ref name=":0" />, that it is too hard to find, and that there are too many cases of transfer failure.<ref name=":1" /> However, changing how we perceive what constitutes a compelling demonstration of Transfer will help evaluate learning better. We should look at learning as a Preparation for Future Learning (PFL) rather than assess it with a one-shot static transfer test. Instead of looking at knowledge as a binary have/have not, we should look at it as a continuous process. This is where PFL comes in. PFLs are dynamic assessments that help detect immature forms of knowledge/small changes in learning that eventually lead to expertise.<ref name=":1" />

== '''Design Implications''' ==
Transfer tests are essential for evaluating a learning intervention's effectiveness. They have to be considered right from when learning goals and the criteria for the success of a learning intervention are decided with the client. They should also inform the assessment design. Setting up the proper test is vital for assessing the learner's progress. While setting up the transfer tests, we should consider this new perspective of PFL.

== '''Reference''' ==
<references />