R1
Weekly response to readings from William James
Talks to Teachers on Psychology and to Students on Some of Life’s Ideals
One issue I found interesting while reading William James’ (1962) Talks to Teachers on Psychology and to Students on Some of Life’s Ideals, was the gendering of his language. I realize that these talks took place in the 19th century and thus I certainly take this into account. While reading the book, I found it interesting that the teachers were referred to with feminine pronouns and the students were referred to with masculine pronouns, even though he states in the Preface that the talks at the end of the book were from addresses given at women’s colleges. My question is this, does this gendering bother you as you read? Do you even take notice of it? If so, what are your reactions, feelings, etc. on it? If you do not notice, do you gender your language?
I particularly enjoyed the passage on page 13 that began with, “No truth, however abstract, is ever perceived, that will not probably at some time influence our earthly actions. . . We cannot escape our destiny, which is practical; and even our most theoretic faculties contribute to its working out.” That entire paragraph was noteworthy in that it discussed the important of action, of conduct. I found it notable as well that James was referring to action in the “widest sense,” not just motions, but rather thinking, speaking, reactions, etc. I find truth in this passage; that even if our actions don’t immediately change based on a “truth” we learn today, chances are in the future our actions will be influenced by what we learn today.
In the next paragraph, James states, “You should regard your professional task as if it consisted chiefly and essentially in “training the pupil to behavior” (p. 13). Throughout this chapter (The Child as a Behaving Organism) I thought about learning and applying learning with actions. This particular passage and quote struck me and reminded me of learning how to sail; particularly learning what to do in a person-overboard situation. I thought back to how it was to learn the maneuvers to rescue someone overboard and how different it is to learn it inside a classroom versus on the water. Learning the maneuvers in the classroom cannot fully prepare one for what to do when you actually have to use those maneuvers. It is with these actions that the learning is applied; and it is here that the teacher has indeed trained the pupil to behavior – or at least hopefully so!
James’ passages concerning reactions is one I would like to connect with Elliot Eisner. William James describes how learners have return waves of impression that then influence future behaviors. This cycle made me think of Elliot Eisner’s Forms of Representations. Eisner’s belief is that knowledge is not static. As a learner internalizes new conceptions of knowledge, beliefs are transformed. This transformation manifests itself when this new knowledge is externally presented. There will be inherent limitations to the external representation of knowledge based on the learner’s background, ability, language, etc. However as the learner then internalizes new knowledge this process starts all over again. Through this cycle, knowledge is transformed and acquired. By using all of the senses, the learner is able to participate in this cycle more fully. It is this cycle, or return waves of impressions as James’ would call it, that influence behavior and reactions. After our class discussion I would not make the same parallel between what James was saying and the Forms of Representation as presented by Elliot Eisner. I no longer believe the concept is the same. Instead, I believe James’ waves of impressions have to do more with assessments and gauges of what was learned; what was impressed upon the learner. Grades and evaluations are part of these gauges and James stresses that these are necessary to complete the cycle as learners often times want to know how they performed on a task or exam.
No comments:
Post a Comment