Final Blog

Our final readings were just as interesting as our previous readings this semester.  There is just so much to learn and consider!  I found the idea of cultural legacies an interesting concept from the Gladwell excerpt.  His assertion to be aware of our own cultural legacies and to give them up if they do not promote learning ties into Bandura’s caution of society’s influence on learning.  Specifically I thought about the values of our modern-day American culture; what do we value?  What values do we expose our children to in our culture?  Overload of media, messages from reality television, idolization of sports players,  – all of these things are creating our cultural legacy and influencing learning.  That’s some intense stuff!

I really enjoyed the Dweck chapter too from the readings this week.  A growth-minded approach to teaching and learning ties in many of the ideals I believe in and want to incorporate in my classroom.  Valuing each student and working with each student to obtain success is critical, as is the knowledge that I, as a teacher, am also learning and growing in the classroom.  As the author states, a growth mindset “has a key role to play in helping us [teachers, parents, coaches] fulfill our mission and in helping them fulfill their potential” (p. 204).  The suggestions at the end were quite helpful and I’ll use those in the future for sure.

My thoughts with regard to the question of how people learn are about as complicated as the issue of learning.  After careful reading and consideration of various theories and learning models this semester, I do not think there is one right answer about how and why people learn.  Learning is a complex and multi-faceted endeavor that should incorporate various techniques from each of these theories and models.  Learning goals and classroom contexts must be considered; as well as the individual learners.  Each learner is influenced by a myriad of things including prior knowledge, motivation, and culture.  Each learner is different and therefore no one approach is sufficient for everyone.  Not only is learning a complex issue, but it is also an extremely important one.  In addition, we have seen how the American educational structure may not be the best one to encourage learning.  Rigid assessments, unrealistic goals and chronic funding shortages all weaken this system.  This complex issue is going to take great minds and complex solutions in order to set our educational system on a better track in the future.

This class was great & I wish everyone the best of luck!

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Random House.

R11: Problem solving, metacognition; self-regulation

Quotes:

“Metacognitive knowledge involves knowledge about cognition in general, as well as awareness of and knowledge about one's own cognition” (Pintrich, p. 219).

“Our current educational system better prepares children to answer questions that are well defined and presented to them in the classroom than it does to formulate the nature of problems in the first place.  Often the skills involved in solving well defined problems are not the same as those involved in recognizing a non-obvious problem or creating a problem. The skills needed clearly to state a problem and to represent information about it in a way that permits solution are also often not emphasized in current classrooms” (Pretz, Naples, & Sternberg, p. 9).

“Any discussion of problem-solving abilities must survey the environment in which an individual encounters a problem. Peers, culture, and even language structure play a role in the recognition, definition, and representation of a problem” (Pretz, Naples, & Sternberg, p.24).

“Rather than educate others to become followers, it is in our best interest to encourage problem solvers to become active problem finders, to stay curious so that they discover and create novel problems, and to think flexibly in the process of solving those problems” (Pretz, Naples, & Sternberg, p. 27)

Question: 

Do you consider yourself a good problem-solver?  If so, what strategies do you employ in order to solve problems?  I like to think of myself as a good problem-solver; I am flexible, curious and generally have motivation.  However after reading the Pretz, Naples, & Sternberg article, I couldn’t help but think about my assumptions and other blockages that probably get in the way of my problem-solving abilities.

Direct Connection: 

I agree with Pintrich’s assertion that metacognitive knowledge needs to be incorporated with different subject areas and taught explicitly.  These skills are often-times lacking in students and should be addressed in classrooms in order to help students learn more about themselves and be better students.  By explicitly teaching, explaining and modeling metacognitive knowledge, teachers are providing students with strategies and skills which will serve them both inside and outside of the classroom.  The ability to think through a problem and employ strategies to overcome the problem is essential tools for everyday living.  I also liked his suggestion for teachers to explain their strategies of metacognition in order to allow students these processes in action.

Indirect Connection:

I thought the connection between creativity (including motivation and curiosity) in the Pretz, Naples, & Sternberg article was an interesting one.   The authors state, “Most research that has attempted to identify the personality characteristics associated with creativity has found a great deal of variability among creative individuals, suggesting that the ability to create problems and solve them in a way that is considered useful and original may vary greatly from domain to domain. For example, the traits that are associated with being a creative visual artist may be very dissimilar from the traits associated with being a creative business manager. For a creative visual artist to transform his or her creative idea into a reality, he or she often must spend long hours in the studio. But a creative business manager will probably need to interact intensely with many different types of people in order to carry out her creative vision for her organization” (p. 23).  This makes me wonder about successful people in various fields; I wonder if the majority of them have these traits?  The passage above exemplifies that different skills/traits/approaches are needed in different fields, so is it that successful people have simply learned the best strategies for their field?

References:

Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory into Practice, 41, 219-225.

Pretz, J. E., Naples, A. J., & Sternberg, R. J. (2003). Recognizing, defining, and representing problems. In J. E. Davidson & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of problem solving (pp. 1-30). New York: Cambridge University Press. 

Module 7: Virtual Lecture - Learning, Memory, Retrieval & Happiness

Daniel Kahneman: The riddle of experience vs. memory

While Daniel Kahneman’s talk begins and ends with a focus on happiness, it is the explanation of what he calls the “experiencing self” and “remembering self” which I believe can be paralleled with regard to learning, memory and retrieval.  Kahneman explains that humans confuse the differences between experience and memory.  He states that we in fact have an experiencing self, which is the present and a remembering self, which is the past.  The experiencing self can be likened to the working memory; the fleeting, quick moments that are oftentimes forgotten.  Whereas the remembering self can be compared to our long-term memory.  This is the part of ourselves which is a storyteller and ultimately makes decisions.  He states, “our memories tells us stories” and it is from these stories which we make decisions.  This distinction is important for learning as it demonstrates how our memories of something (especially when we classify them as good or bad) can influence our present selves and future decisions.  Thus the connections and associations we put on memories will influence the future and this is important for education.  As we strive to make learners aware of how the present can influence the future, this talk can be used by our remembering self.

About the talk:

colonoscopies, Nobel laureate and founder of behavioral economics Daniel Kahneman reveals how our "experiencing selves" and our "remembering selves" perceive happiness differently. This new insight has profound implications for economics, public policy -- and our own self-awareness.

R10: Cognitive load & Multitasking

Check out this article from MSNBC.com "Will teen multitasking give rise to ADD?"

Quotes:

“When we talk about multitasking, we are really talking about attention: the art of paying attention, the ability to shift our attention, and, more broadly, to exercise judgment about what objects are worthy of our attention. People who have achieved great things often credit for their success a finely honed skill for paying attention. When asked about his particular genius, Isaac Newton responded that if he had made any discoveries, it was ‘owing more to patient attention than to any other talent’” (Rosen, p. 109).

“For the younger generation of multitaskers, the great electronic din is an expected part of everyday life. And given what neuroscience and anecdotal evidence have shown us, this state of constant intentional self-distraction could well be of profound detriment to individual and cultural well-being. When people do their work only in the ‘interstices of their mind-wandering,’ with crumbs of attention rationed out among many competing tasks, their culture may gain in information, but it will surely weaken in wisdom” (Rosen, p. 110).

Question: 

My question this week comes from the article on minimal guidance during instruction: I have always considered constructivism more of a theory of learning versus an instructional theory or method.  This article seems to list constructivism as a method of instruction and is critical of this method.  Is constructivism a theory of learning or a theory of instruction?

I think what bothered me about this article was the generalization regarding constructivism.  The authors seemed to lump together several different approaches to instruction (discovery learning, experiential learning, scaffolding, etc.) and dismissed these approaches as inferior to directed instruction.  I definitely do not agree with the notion of completely unguided instruction as a practical approach to learning, especially with novice learners.  Taking my example from last week with sailing & experiential education; I think it is absurd to think an appropriate (constructivist) approach to learning how to sail would be to place a novice sailor in a boat and say “go for it!”  Instead, a constructivist (experiential) approach for a novice learner would be to first have guided instruction from an expert, then allow the novice learner to experience the lessons in-person.  This experience is a key part of the learning as it would not be very beneficial to only have the novice learner sit and watch the expert sail the boat while explaining the techniques, procedures, conditions, etc. to the novice learner.  The novice learner must take the helm and experience these things in-person to truly begin to learn the skill of sailing.  Anyway, I just didn’t like this article very much.  Anyone else feel the same way?  Anyone else love it and want to comment on my take of it?

Direct Connection: 

I could definitely relate to Rosen’s article on multitasking as that is something I do on a daily basis, especially on workdays.  I find myself divvying up attention between several tasks/technologies at once.  I can definitely tell as I am doing this that not one particular thing has my full attention and this lack of attention to each item is detrimental to how I am performing.  But it seems to be such a commonplace in our society today; such an expectation to get “more” done in each day.  It is overwhelming and distracting to say the least.  I wonder if perhaps this is one of the reasons I enjoy outdoor activities so much, as those are times where I can focus on one item at a time (or at least fewer items).  I don’t know and I can’t think about it too much right now (I’ve got a text to answer, dinner to finish cooking, laundry to switch over and more reading to do … haha!).

Indirect Connection:

Rosen discusses children today and how their multitasking habits will alter their lives in the long run in a detrimental way.  Virtues of patience, moments of silence and the like are uncomfortable for children who constantly multitask.  I am not around children very much so I don’t know if I can agree with this assertion or not, since I’ve not seen any examples to support it or not.  I do wonder though if this constant multitasking isn’t such a good thing, but not just with technologies.  I also consider children’s multitasking to be part of their packed schedules which include multiple extracurricular activities, heavy course loads (and heavy homework assignments), etc. as being a detrimental part of our multitasking society.

References:

Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41, 75-86.

Rosen, C. (2008). The myth of multitasking. The New Atlantis, 64, 105-110. 

R9: Long-term memory and retrieval

Quotes:

“Today we have books, photographs, computers and an entire superstructure of external devices to help us store memories outside our brains, but it wasn’t so long ago that culture depended on individual memories.  A trained memory was not just a handy tool but also a fundamental facet of any worldly mind.  It was considered a form of character-building, a way of developing the cardinal virtue of prudence, and by extension ethics” (Foer, 2011).

“Rehearsing the cue in the context in which it will need to be recalled is crucial” (King-Friedrichs, p. 78).

Question:  Can you improve your memory capacity?  Williams James discusses memory and its significance in learning.  He claims that there can be “no improvement of the general or elementary faculty of memory” (p. 61).  This assertion is in direct conflict with the Foer article we read this week.  Did Foer improve his memory capacity or did he just learn techniques to actually use all of his memory capacity?  I still do not believe someone can increase their memory capacity (i.e. – muscle) but I do believe you can learn/train yourself to better ways of remembering, just as Foer did in his article.

Direct Connection:  I found Foer’s story fascinating and really enjoyed reading it.  While I was reading it and reflecting upon it I couldn’t help but think about myself and wondered if I could do something like that; I don’t know that I could, I really don’t.  I find it amazing people have trained their brains and memories to be able to remember and retrieve such a vast amount of (random, useless) knowledge.  I have trouble remembering the things I think are important, much less the trivial stuff I hardly pay attention to on a daily basis.  This article reminded me of a class I took directly after high school.  The summer before my freshman year in college, my mom had me sign up for a “Becoming a Master Student” course which was taught at UK.  The course taught us tricks for remembering like chunking and other mnemonics.  It also emphasized good study skills and really stressed the concept of “be here now,” meaning that if your mind is wandering then you won’t pick up on what your professor is saying.  This course was really interesting.  Too bad I didn’t remember all the tips from it!

I think this link will take you to more information about Becoming a Master Student

Indirect Connection: This week’s readings really made me think about the oral traditions which are being lost as we move to rely on more technologies for memory storage.  I thought about how everything used to be passed down orally; recipes, family traditions, business information, records, etc.  Everything we store today in/on a computer used to be shared orally.  This tradition was strong in Appalachia and I wonder if it is being maintained in a deliberate sense anywhere.  The Hindman Settlement School came to mind while thinking on this, but I’m not sure if they focus on oral traditions.  I also thought a lot about the languages that are lost each year.  With the loss of these native languages, many oral histories can also be lost.  I hope technology is helping to save these important (oral) artifacts before they are gone forever.

References:

James, W. (1899/2001). Talks to teachers on psychology and to students on some of life's ideals. Mineola, NY: Dover.

King-Friedrichs, J. (2001). Brain-friendly techniques for improving memory. Educational Leadership, 59(3), 76-69.

Foer, J. (2011, February). Secrets of a mind-gamer: How I trained my brain and became a world-class memory athlete. New York Times. Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/02/20/magazine/mind-secrets.html?hp.

Module 6: Information Processing

As someone who loves experiential education, I think the best source of putting into practice information processing & decision making is the wilderness.  I find that often times actually putting into practice a new skill is a powerful form of information processing.  The wilderness is a place that requires real-time information registry and processing; there are real-time decisions to be made which have real-time consequences.  This type of learning takes into account all of the sensory registers we learned about this week (attention, perception,  sensory limitations,  duration & intensity, impact of imagery, role of context, physical environment, psychological environment, meaningfulness).   So while there isn’t necessarily one source I can use for this assignment, I’ll draw a lesson from sailing and apply it here.  Telltales are small pieces of fabric used on the front sail (usually the jib) which help the person at the helm know how the boat is sailing with regard to the wind.  Learning to sail by the telltales is a very helpful and practical lesson, but learning it in a classroom and on a boat are two different things.  Putting this technique into practice on a boat requires the use of multiple sensory registers and requires real-time information processing as the wind can shift without warning.  But once a sailor knows how to read the telltales, using them is a lesson that will typically be used from that point forward while under sail.  
This video is a great explanation of telltales and their importance:

Advanced Sailing Lessons : Weathervanes & Telltales

Here is a picture of the telltales on my boat, Sundowner, while sailing on Kentucky Lake in WKY.  The telltales are the small piece of red fabric on the orange portion of the sail ...

And here is a picture of me at the helm of a 47-foot Beneteau sailboat in the British Virgin Islands.  In this picture I am controlling the boat solely by watching the telltales, nothing else (don't worry, there were plenty of other folks on board keeping watch for other boats, hazards, etc.).  I believe the expression on my face shows that there is real-time information processing going on!

While this isn’t necessarily a source of information about how humans register & perceive information, it’s definitely something I made a connection to during this lesson; that is the street art of Bansky.  His work takes into account many of the sensory registers covered in this lesson: impact of imagery, role of context, physical environment, psychological environment, meaningfulness and perception are all drawn upon when viewing his work.  Pretty neat!

Banksy's website

R8: Pinker & The Blank Slate

Quotes:

“Language surely does affect our thoughts, rather than just labeling them for the sake of labeling them.  Most obviously, language is the conduit through which people share their thoughts and intentions and thereby acquire the knowledge, customs, and values of those around them” (p. 209).

“I have not hidden my view that this entire line of thinking is a conceptual mess.  If we want to understand how politicians or advertisers manipulate us, the last thing we should do is blur distinctions among things in the world, our perception of those things when they are in front of our eyes, the mental images of those things that we construct from memory, and physical images such as photographs and drawings” (p. 214).

“But we can best protect ourselves against such manipulation by pinpointing the vulnerabilities of our faculties of categorization, language and imagery, not by denying their complexity” (p. 217).

Question:  “Postmodernists and other relativists attack truth and objectivity not so much because they are interested in philosophical problems of ontology and epistemology but because they feel it is the best way to pull the rug from under racists, sexists and homophobes” (p. 202).  I found this assertion pretty broad in spectrum and almost like formalism.  Does it strike you in the same way? 

Direct Connection: I am not very familiar with Pinker’s work but took away several points he was trying to emphasize in this chapter.  The topics of cognition, perception, categorization, language and imagery all play a prominent role in the chapter, as well as the notion of vague boundaries versus concrete boundaries.  As an English language instructor, my favorite part of the chapter is when Pinker wrote about language and its influence our on perception of the world.  I agree with the assertions that language can affect thoughts and it also helps humans transmit their thoughts to others.  Anyone that has learned a second (or third) language can probably relate to the frustration of wanting to express thoughts, ideas, etc. in the new language but being unable to due to the lack of vocabulary and mastery of the new language.  I also agree with the assertion that language is “not the same thing” as thought. (p. 209).  I see this as correlating Vygotsky’s emphasis on the importance of language acquisition as well as with Bruner’s emphasis on the importance of narrative.  Language is a tool we use to construct our realities, it does shape our thoughts but it is not thought in itself.  The emphasis on language is also a tie-in to the importance of making connections within society as referenced by the first quote above.

Indirect Connection: Reading Pinker’s thoughts on relativism made me think back to an Interdisciplinary Studies course I took at Appalachian State University titled “Science and Culture” in which we examined how the culture (and knowledge of the time) directly controls the scientific knowledge of the time.  An example which I distinctly remember is the cholera outbreak in England during the mid 19^th century and the belief that it was transmitted through the air.  A local man (John Snow) investigated the locations of the cholera deaths and determined that a local water pump was the likely cause of the outbreak in this particular neighborhood.  Snow’s use of interviews, maps and deduction literally changed the scientific thinking of the day by demonstrating that there was something more concrete than “bad air” which was causing the cholera outbreak.  This to me is a prime example of the usefulness of relativism in that it demonstrates how knowledge can only go as far as what is out there, what is known at the time.  In this light, couldn't all knowledge be relative, at least to a degree? It seems that what we know (or think we know) at the present moment could be completely changed by the “discovery” of new knowledge.

References:

Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Pinker, S. (2002). The blank slate: The modern denial of human nature. New York: Viking.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1935/1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Article in NY Times

I recommend checking out this article:

U.S. Is Urged to Raise Teachers’ Status
By Sam Dillon
Published March 16, 2011

Let's hope American 'leaders' will respond to this study and the suggestions.

Module 5: Social Constructivism

Q1: Explain in your own words the principal contributions of Vygotsky's cognitive constructivist theory as a theory of learning and compare and contrast the work of Piaget and Vygotksy. 

                Principle contributions of Vygotsky’s cognitive constructivist theory include the importance of collaboration, language and the zone of proximal development.  Vygotsky believed that learning led to development versus the accepted belief of development leading to learning.  The approach of learning leading to development influences both the type of instruction needed to promote learning as well as the level of learning ability available at a given time.  Vygotsky understood that children could do more with collaboration (either from peers or teachers).  Collaboration or working together, on an unfamiliar item meant that the zone of proximal development was shifting.  The zone of proximal development deals with actual development level (as could be proven there on the spot, independently) and the level of potential development (when working in collaboration with others). 

                In addition, Vygotsky promoted the importance of language with regard to learning.  Language is a critical component as it leads to self-regulation.  This is accomplished early in life through play, which Vygotsky also considered to be a very important aspect of learning.  Vygotsky also understood the influence of culture with regard to learning and believed that learning started on the first day of life, not the first day of school.  

Q2: What connections do you see between this article and the chapter you read by Lev Vygotsky?

                There were several connections between this NPR segment and the chapter we read by Vygotsky.  The first connection was the importance of play; and not directed/guided play, but creative/imaginative play.  Vygotsky championed play as important because it can lead to inner-speech.  The NPR segment referred to this as “self-regulation” and explained how developing self-regulation through play helps children learn restraint and self-control.  In the same manner, Vygotsky believed that play and inner-speech helps develop self-instruction.  Along with play, both the NPR segment and Vygotsky supported the importance of imagination and exploration as components to learning.  The NPR segment related to these two components in explaining how guided-play (using specific toys) limits children’s use imagination and exploration.  When a toy is introduced with a specific purpose (i.e. – a light saber) then the child is less likely to use imagination to create a play item or a purpose for the toy, rather the child will use the toy for the purpose in which it is intended.  In addition, both Vygotsky and the NPR segment connected with the importance of interacting with others and collaboration among peers.

                There were other considerations which I thought of after listening to the NPR segment and while thinking about the authors we have read this semester.  One consideration which came to my mind was the disconnect between the desire to learn something, wanting to learn versus feeling like learning was a chore, something that has to be done.  I wonder if the absence of free/creative/imaginative play has influenced how children view learning over the decades.  By this I mean, if children begin to see play as a chore, as something they have no control over, nor do they have any time for imagination and exploration, much less self-regulation and reflection, could this be influencing how they feel about learning?  If children are not given opportunities to explore on their own and reflect upon these explorations, then can they develop a love of learning?  Or will school seem like another chore, another thing that is guided and already established?  Also, could the high prevalence of attention disorders (as well as behavioral problems) be at all influenced by the lack of self-regulation that is exacerbated by guided-play?

Q3: How are Bruner's ideas to those of the other two constructivist theorists we've read (i.e., Piaget and Vygotsky)? 

There are several connections between Bruner’s ideas and those of Piaget and Vygotsky.  The first connection is that of constructivism; all three believed that knowledge was constructed by individuals internally.  They did not believe that knowledge was an external entity that was simply transmitted to the learner, but rather knowledge was influenced and shaped by the learner’s experiences and prior knowledge.  Nor did they believe learning was a passive activity only consisting of a response/reaction to a stimulus, but rather that learning was an active (cognitive) process.  In addition, Bruner, Vygotsky and Piaget believed that children are knowledgeable in their own right, in other words, children contain knowledge based on their experiences.  In fact Vygotsky believed that a child’s learning began on the day of birth.

                There are even more similarities between Bruner and Vygotsky.  Both espoused the importance of discovery learning.  Vygotsky believed this was first done by play.  Both Bruner and Vygotsky believed that culture plays a significant role in learning.  Culture influences learner’s before formal schooling even begins and shapes the learner in many ways.  In addition, language was another important factor in the constructivist approaches taken by Bruner and Vygotsky.  For Bruner, language was the medium for narrative, which he believed was essential for learning.  Exchange and collaboration also are important considerations for both Bruner and Vygotsky.  I also see similarities between Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development and the spiral curriculum that is focused in Bruner’s work.  Both these concepts build upon prior knowledge and help the learner reach a new level of (actual) development.

Module 4: Piaget

Q1: Explain in your own words the principal contributions of Piaget's cognitive constructivist theory as a theory of learning. Make a list of questions you still have.

Piaget’s cognitive constructivist theory is a theory of learning which places emphasis on the cognitive developmental stages that all humans go through.  Each developmental stage is marked by specific characteristics and cognitive abilities.  During these stages, humans begin to change and mature, which allows them to learn more.  Piaget did not feel as though a child could bypass any stage and that the stages could not be rushed either.  By fully going through each stage, the learner begins to decipher information in new ways and see the world different accordingly.  These changes are both neurological (biological), as well as social, in that the learner interacts with their environment differently depending on the cognitive stage.  When a learner encounters something unfamiliar, the processes of assimilation and accommodation are used for the learner to be able to make sense of the unfamiliar environment.  Assimilation is when the unfamiliar item is fit into the existing knowledge (world view) and accommodation is when the unfamiliar item changes the learner’s existing world view (knowledge).  Through these two processes, the learner regains equilibrium and can continue learning/moving through the stages.  Equilibrium allows the learner to continue constructing a reality while adding new information.  Also, Piaget believed that learning was an active process.  It was one that was done with deliberateness and curiosity.  He believed that learners were in charge of their own learning; this allows them to construct meaning based on their experiences and environment.

Questions:
I wonder if Piaget would have changed the rigidity of the stages if he was aware of the fast-changing technologies that are so prevalent in today’s world.  By this I mean, children are watching videos and interacting with technologies at a much younger age (i.e. – Baby Einstein).  Does this change their cognitive development?  Would it have an impact on the developmental stages of Piaget’s cognitive constructivist theory? Along the same lines, what happens when a child takes longer to learn something?  Is there flexibility in the stages to allow for this scenario?

Q2: Make a connection between Piaget's stages of development and what James argued the teacher should know about cognitive development.

I believe James and Piaget would have agreed on several aspects of learning, namely they both believed that learning was an active process.  To both James and Piaget, the learner plays an active role in learning; the process is not passive for the learner (as in Behaviorism); but rather knowledge is constructed by each learner based on experience, environment, connections and associations.  Connections and associations are another area in which I believe James and Piaget would be in agreement.  Both espoused the importance of making connections with new/unfamiliar information as an important part of the learning process.  In addition, both James and Piaget encouraged a native interest in the topic as an important part of learning.  Native interest leads to motivation and focus which are invaluable tools for learning.

                However with regard to cognitive development and what teachers should know about psychology, I believe James and Piaget would have very different opinions.  James believed that teachers did not necessarily need to know a great deal about psychology in order to be effective teachers.  Instead he argued that teaching was an art (whereas psychology was a science) and therefore teachers must use tact to know their students and to engage with them.  This distinction can be summed up with this quote from William James, ““The best teacher may be the poorest contributor of child-study material, and the best contributor may be the poorest teacher” (p. 6).

                In addition, I believe James and Piaget would have differed in their opinion as to the role of the teacher in the classroom.  Piaget’s theory of learning emphasizes the need for teachers to lead students through the cognitive developmental stages.  He believed that students are active and motivated learners who will essentially “take over” from there and work their way through the stages without much guidance from a teacher.  Whereas James believed the teacher should take a more direct approach and lead the student through the process of learning.  He placed a great emphasis on the teacher maintaining the focus of the student.  This focus influences the student’s stream of consciousness and motivation to learn.  James felt as though teachers are active participants in the learning process of the student.

Q3: What would authors Airasian and Walsh have to say about the learning environment in which Bart was placed?  Is this an example of constructivism? What are your own thoughts about constructivism as a theory of learning so far?

                My first reaction to this example of constructivism in the classroom started even before Bart was placed in the special school.  I found it very interesting how the entire scenario was set-up in the first place: Bart (the “typical” student – unmotivated, disruptive in the classroom, etc.) cheated from the test of another student (who was portrayed as very motivated, an active learner but an “outcast” in the social-scene at school).  While watching the episode I was thinking about the message this in itself had; could constructivism really work in schools if most students are like Bart versus the other kid?  In addition, what kind of message is this sending to the students watching The Simpsons and wanting to “be like” Bart?  Anyway, I found the set-up to be very educational in itself.

                  The day began with the “Learning Coordinator” (not teacher) leading a class discussion on free will (I found this humorous based on our class work this semester).  The students were able to “find” their work stations (not desks) on their own.  The desks were round with computers on them and not arranged in any particular order (which was in stark contrast to Bart’s previous school where the viewer saw a classroom of square desks lined in rows, all facing the front of the room).  The students were allowed to work on anything they wanted, without input or guidance from the Learning Coordinator.  Then as the students move to the chemistry lab we see Bart almost blow up the school because he did not understand the reactions (because he did not know what he was doing).  His Learning Coordinator did not intervene and allowed this accident to occur.  In the end, Bart does not feel good about himself in the special school and confesses to cheating on the intelligence test.  The viewer never learns if the motivated student whom Bart cheated off of was ever sent to the special school or not.

                I do not think the authors Airasian and Walsh would think this is a great example of constructivist learning in the classroom.  I do not think the authors would have agreed with the Learning Coordinator not stopping the chemistry experiment accident.  In their article, they very explicitly state that constructivism is not about “anything goes” in the classroom.  Rather they argue that the implementation of a constructivist approach to learning takes more time and consideration than many other approaches to learning. 

                I think a constructivist approach to learning is a valuable addition to the theories of learning.  Without a doubt I think that learning is an active process which is influenced by the learner’s interests and experiences.   I do not believe that there is a good understanding of constructivist learning that can be easily implemented in today’s classrooms.  Instead I think that constructivism currently as a place in today’s classrooms via specific exercises, lessons and sections, versus an all-out constructivist approach.  I also think teachers are important and are needed to do much more than simply guide students in the direction of learning.

Jon Stewart ... a must watch!

A clip from the 3/3/11 episode of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.

Crisis in Dairyland - For Richer and Poorer - Teachers and Wall Street

When will America's teachers follow the lead of Wall Street and start making some sacrifices for the children?

Teaching Philosophy Statement helpful links

I attended the CELT presentation last week on Developing an Effective Teaching Philosophy Statement and thought I’d share two very helpful websites that were used:

The Ohio State University Center for the Advancement of Teaching

Writing a Philosophy of Teaching Statement

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The University of Michigan Center for Research on Learning and Teaching

The Teaching Philosophy/Teaching Statement

R7: Cognitive Constructivism

Quotes from the article “Constructivist cautions”

“The particular version of constructivism one adopts - developmental or social constructivist – has important implications for classroom practices, for the definition of knowledge, for the relative emphasis on individual versus social learning, for the role of the teacher, and for the definition of successful instruction” (p. 445).

“When context becomes an important aspect of knowledge construction, it is logical to conclude that involvement in different contexts will lead to the construction of different knowledge, even if the same set of ‘data’ is presented in the different contexts.  Given a problem or an issue, a context - which is often designated in social, economic, racial, and gender terms -  will influence the interpretations, conclusions, motives, and attitudes of individuals in that context” (p. 446).

“One's task is to find the right balance between the activities of constructing and receiving knowledge, given that not all aspects of a subject can or should be taught in the same way or be acquired solely through ‘hands-on’ or student-centered means” (p. 447).

Question:  Do you think constructivism is an educational theory that should be incorporated into every classroom?  Is this even possible with today’s assessments and schedule?  There are many tenants of constructivism that I agree with (although I do lean more towards the sociocultural side of constructivism, versus the developmental constructivism side) there are certainly limitations to its incorporation in today’s classrooms.  I believe this article did an excellent job at highlighting some of these limitations and considerations.  For any of the classroom teachers reading this – can you share an example of a successful incorporation of constructivism into your classroom?

For the direct experience and indirect experience tie-in to this week’s response, I’ll refer to my blog below which I posted last week after reading an excerpt from Daniel Pink’s book, Drive.  This excerpt really struck home with me with regard to my current work situation (direct experience), as well as the American fiscal situation as a whole (indirect experience).

References:

Airasian, P. W., & Walsh, M. E., (1997). Constructivist cautions. Phi Delta Kappan, 78, 444-449.

Pink & Work

Before this week's assignment, I had never heard of Daniel Pink.  I was not aware of him but am very thankful that his presence (and message) has been brought to my attention.  While we are studying portions of his book, Drive, in relation to motivation in the educational realm, I could not help but reflect on the applicability of many of his messages with relation to my work situation.

In my response for last week's class, I mentioned how my employer uses annual performance evaluations as a basis for employees' raises.  I also mentioned how we (the employees) have not been given a raise in three years, not even a cost of living adjustment in our salaries.  This past Friday was the due date for employee evaluations to be turned into HR (this deadline was posted on the HR website for everyone to see).  Well, my supervisor has been "too busy" to do evaluations for his employees.  Mind you, these are the same evaluations which will gauge how much of a raise I would receive (if raises are issued to employees which I don't think they will be since the new talk around the water-cooler is of a 5% reduction in all departments and therefore possible lay-offs).  However, on the off-chance raises would be issued, they are based on the performance evaluations.  So now there is a chance I wouldn't get a raise because this evaluation has not been done (I doubt my supervisor lives paycheck-to-paycheck like I do, he makes well over $100k a year, I make a fraction of that).  What does this due to my motivation ... well to be honest, it completely lowers it. Thus, Daniel Pink's assertion of using the carrot & the stick as motivators in the workplace connected with my current work situation.  The carrot (a raise) has been removed, even though this carrot has been the incentive put in place to entice employees into better work performance; once that carrot is removed, motivation is as well.

Another connection was made with regard to evaluations, raises (carrots) and motivation.  While employees have not been offered a raise in three years, one employee will be receiving a significant raise this summer.  At the end of this fiscal year, one employee will earn over a 51% increase on his base salary, as well as a bonus upon his retirement.  Wow, that's a pretty good deal for someone already earning over $460k a year.  But what message does this send to the thousands of employees who work for the same company, who have not received even a 1% raise for three years? Not a very good one.  Certainly not a very motivating one as it sends the message of who is important/valued in this organization and who is not.

And finally, all of this led me to think upwards of the business models used in this country with regard to rewards and motivation.  I started this blog thinking of my personal situation but the problem is so much larger than the one establishment where I work.  I feel like it is so ingrained in the American work culture, that it can seem almost hopeless to the people at the bottom.  As I read Daniel Pink's chapter in Drive titled "Seven Reasons Carrots and Sticks (Often) Don't Work . . ." and the following chapter ". . . and the Special Circumstances When They Do," I could not help but think of the documentary Inside Job.  This documentary examines the financial crises of the last few years in the American economy.  Over and over in this documentary, examples are provided of people who took risks and were rewarded, even when doing something they knew was wrong.  Several passages in these chapters echoed facts from the documentary.  This leads me to wonder if the American capitalist culture of greed - of more, more, more - can ever be replaced with the model of autonomy, mastery and purpose. Here's to hoping it can!

Link to Inside Job trailer

Pink, D. (2009). Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us. Riverhead.

R6: Reinforcement and Rewards

Quotes:

“Possibly no goal of education is more important - or more neglected - than self-understanding. . . . Unexamined lives may well be valuable and worth living, but an education that does not invite such examination may not be worthy of the label education” (Noddings, 2006, p. 10).

“We need to ask not only what we believe but why we believe it” (Noddings, 2006, p. 10).

“This is, of course, self-discipline, but what is self-discipline other than discovering and employing one's own motivation?” (Noddings, 2006, p. 20).

“I am convinced that one of the primary obligations of educators and parents who want to promote a lasting commitment to learning is to do everything in their power to help students forget that grades exist” (Kohn, 1993, p. 124).

Question: My question comes from this quote from Noddings, “Students today need help in working through the meaning of achievement” (p. 17).  What do you deem as achievement in school?  Is earning an “A” achievement?  Is passing the class achievement?  Is earning a scholarship achievement?  Or is learning a new concept, a new way of thinking about something achievement?  Is the ability to think critically and examine all sides of an argument achievement?  I would venture, that for me, achievement is the latter of these questions.  Achievement deals more with learning and critical thinking, than it does grades and scores.  Achievement, for me personally, is more about interest in a topic, introspection and reflection however achieving these things in each course can be impossible.  I think though that for many people, including parents, achievement is measured by the grade earned at the end of a course.

Direct Experience: Reading the Chance & Kohn articles concerning rewards in the classroom as a way to advance (or inhibit) learning made me think about our annual performance evaluations which were due at work last week.  The annual performance evaluation is an example of performance-contingent rewards as they are directly linked to the raise an employee expects to receive annually.  I would not classify it as a success-contingent reward as the employee does not have to reach a certain goal or show a certain amount of progress to earn the monetary raise which is based on the performance evaluation.  In reading these two author’s differing viewpoints in the power of rewards I could not help but think about the long-term effect of tying performance evaluations to employee’s raises since I have not received a raise in three years.  Not receiving a raise has had nothing to do with my work performance, but rather the fiscal status of the university.  In fact, my annual performance evaluations are always excellent and indicate motivation for doing my job well.  This motivation to continuing doing well in my job is internal; it has nothing to do with the prospect of a raise.  I state this since the reinforcement/reward of a raise has been lacking for a long time, the prospect for one this year is slim and yet I continue to be motivated to do my job well.  This lack of motivation based on the prospect of an external reward aligns with Kohn’s argument that using rewards as an incentive to learn (or in my case to work harder) is faulty.

Indirect Experience: All the readings this week focused on questions of motivation and outside influences (rewards) for motivating learning.  Noddings encouraged teachers to reflect upon which theory of motivation they prescribe to, how it influences their teaching style and to ask themselves if they are motivated by test scores.  Motivation from test scores seems to be an all-too-prevalent theme in today’s American education system.  Teachers’ abilities are directly linked to their students’ test scores.  It has even gotten to the point where test scores are the only item analyzed when rating teachers’ effectivity or ineffectivity as noted in Ravitch’s editorial on CNN.com.  Chance (1993) concludes the article, “Sticking up for rewards,” with the quote, “This view of education places responsibility for learning squarely on the teacher's shoulders. Perhaps that is why there is so much opposition to it” (p. 128).  However I believe this narrow approach to gauging teachers’ effectiveness in the classroom is unfair to teachers.  I believe responsibility for learning begins before the student enters the classroom; the responsibility for learning must begin with the student (and therefore the parents of the student).  Ravitch states, “There are many reasons why students do well or poorly on tests, and teachers felt they were being unfairly blamed when students got low scores, while the crucial role of families and the students themselves was overlooked” (2011).  The students and their families do play crucial roles in learning; it is not solely up to the teacher to have responsibility for learning in the classroom.

References

Chance, P. (1992). The rewards of learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 74, 200-207.

Chance, P. (1993). Sticking up for rewards. Phi Delta Kappan, 75, 787-790.

Kohn, A. (1993). Rewards versus learning: A response to Paul Chance. Phi Delta Kappan, 75, 783-787.

Ravitch, D. (2011). Why America's teachers are enraged. CNN.com at http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/02/20/ravitch.teachers.blamed/index.html?hpt=P1&iref=NS1

Noddings, N. (2006). Critical lessons: What our schools should teach. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, pp. 10-35.

Technologies in the Classroom

Thanks everyone for the feedback on my comments regarding incorporating multimedia technologies (specifically video games) into the classroom as a way to align students’ native interests with course material.  I’m certainly not advocating for World of Warcraft or Black Ops to become part of the classroom structure, but rather I am advocating for the incorporation of multimedia technologies that have a specific learning purpose.  While students may be more interested in the video games mentioned above versus learning-centered games, I believe overall they would have a native interest in interactive learning games which could supplement traditional learning structure of lectures and lessons.

However, as a student within the Instructional Systems Design program, I am very aware of the limitations and problems with incorporating technologies into the classroom.  First and foremost, there must be support for the incorporation of technologies; teachers must support the use (and therefore understand the technologies, be comfortable with them and be able to troubleshoot when necessary), the school administration must be supportive as well.  Is there IT help available?  Are teachers responsible for finding their own technology lessons and incorporating them (who then judges if the games are appropriate)?  Another support concern is who will pay for the technologies?  These are questions that should be addressed before the incorporation of technologies into the classroom.

In addition, there is the issue of access to consider.  Can all students use/access the technologies?  What about students with different abilities and learning styles?  Will students be able to access/use the technologies at home?  Not all households have gaming systems or Internet connections (economic issues to consider).  Not all students are comfortable with computers or games (gender issues to consider).

Finally, I definitely do not advocate using multimedia technologies or games to completely replace more traditional teaching methods and classroom structures.  I do not think that is possible in today’s educational system nor desirable.  Children must learn to work together, to interact with others, and to learn in ways that do not involve staring at a screen.  The world is changing and I just believe that educators (both on a personal, classroom level and at the administrative levels) must begin to look at the possibilities which exist with new technologies, all while being aware of the limitations of these same technologies.