Hi Karen, Your intuitions about me as a teacher based on your reading my rushed scribbles to FW ( I'm teaching 200 students in 5 different classes this term) are 'right on'- doesn't that date me?! Much of my teaching is anecdotal. Stories, parables, fables, songs, poems,pictures,playing are ancient ways of initiating our young into our culture. I personally find them much more inspiring than DIRECT INSTRUCTION which the behavioUrists preach. Need I remind FWers of the cover of TIME magazine where B. F. Skinner said "I was wrong". A reading example: My favoUrite picture books are H. A. Rey's Curious George books. I loved them as a child and I read them, along with many others, over and over again to my children, Amy and Luke. I vividly remember one night long ago reading Curious George Takes A Job (future work!!) for the umpteenth time to Luke. I had just finished reading where George had said "I'm fed up". I had read these very words many times before to him. For some reason, which behavioUrists can't explain, Luke asked "Dad, what does 'fed up' mean?". I gave him a number of examples that related to past experiences that he could, perhaps, connect with. We then proceeded to finish the book. I then tucked him in with his Curious George stuffed animal and went to my room to read the paper. I then heard my son talking to his George and using the expression'fed up' in a variety of different play contexts. Enough said?
Take care, Brian ps how did all you FWers begin to develop your concept of 'fed up'. I collect these anecdotes to enhance my repetoire. Wittgenstein taught me the importance of how concepts begin to become US. =============================== Karen wrote: > Pinker wrote: "Finally, a better understanding of the mind can lead to > setting new priorities as to what is taught. The goal of education > should be > to provide students with new cognitive tools for grasping the world". > > Brian and Selma, I read Pinker's NYT piece after both of your posts, > and > tried to find something argumentative or provocative in it to see some > disagreement. Although I agree that we should be teaching more things > than > traditional subjects, for the life of me, I could not find much to be > excited about. In fact, I have been going to bed with Pinker for a > few > weeks now, but alas, he has not been able to keep me awake. However, > I am > determined to see this through (The Blank Slate) because I want to > learn it > and I am hoping that the subtitle The Modern Denial of Human Nature > will > keep me awake soon. > Which brings me to the emotional reaction I have to this kind of > educational > debate: Pinker is approaching the subject of getting into a student's > mind > from his practice as a theorist from science. Well, not quite. I > know he > is a linguist and know something about the study, but that's the best > I can > do right now. > Brian, a teacher's teacher, I perceive as approaching the subject of a > student's mind from the tangible experience of seeing what works, > watching > light bulbs go on in minds all the time. Pinker, as a technician who > presumably does not spend as much time in classroom activities as > Brian > does, concentrates his search on what goes wrong as a way to find what > is > right, and Brian hopefully experiences much more of what is right > while > coming across instances where things don't work right. > If I haven't lost everyone there, let me put it another way. We have > made > many other things sexy. Why isn't education? We make becoming older > and > wiser the province of the ancient and wrinkled. At least in the West > , it > seems, we confine sensuality just to the bedroom when it belongs in > the > kitchen and the living room, the library and the garden, and we > worship the > visual pleasures of art and beauty, and the aural pleasures of music > and > song, but we seem to confine the Joy of Learning to a geekiness for > which > too few young minds are seduced. > Now, I am not going to write here in a tantalizing way just to make my > point, although that would be fun. But I don't know everyone on this > list, > and I've written a few things in my time that didn't read as well > after I'd > sent them as when I typed them and heard it in my head, so I'm not > going to > become an educational voyeur online. > But I have found some wonderful books for preschoolers that are > absolutely > joyful in what they urge the child to discover. I absolutely love it > when a > certain four year old turns to me after I've read him a book with an > interactive voice and he hugs me with joy on his face at what he has > just > unleashed in his little inquisitive, active, turned on brain. When do > we > lose that for older students, especially when their minds are becoming > more > sophisticated? > A friend sent me an amusing story about an old dog the other day with > the > lesson that adults miss too much joy from everyday learning. We make > classroom education tedious for young people who are drowning in > hormones, > we hide creativity as if it belongs to a few special and unique > individuals > who are burdened with the task of enlightening us to our own artistic > natures. We imply that only by going to exotic locales or by watching > unreal Reality TV can we be refreshed and "stimulated". We have > mass-marketed everyday and classroom learning into dehydrated vacumn > packed > rations. > Why can't learning be more sensual? > Karen > I will cloak myself in my cape now, and retreat to the convent until > such a > time as I have vanquished this hedonism from my thoughts, sipping only > green > tea and walking barefoot over sharp stones in penance. > Like hell I will. > > Hi Selma, > I saw Pinker on TV the other night and my reaction then has been > reinforced by this piece. I wonder what experiences Pinker has had > helping kids learn to read? He says: > > > We already know that some methods of reading instruction work > >better than others, yet many schools still use methods proved > >ineffective like > >"whole language" techniques. > > How does one respond to such inaccurate statements? The work of Ken > and Yetta Goodman on miscue analysis in reading might cause him to > stop and ponder. Or if he really wants to ponder children's minds > then he should read Margaret Donaldson's book "Children's Minds". The > great Piaget had to rethink much of his opus because of this book. > > "A little learning is a dangerous thing" > > Take care, > Brian > > >This article from NYTimes.com > >has been sent to you by [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >As always, what one chooses to think is important to do depends upon > >one's values. > > > >For example: of what value to the development of a person's HUMAN > >potential is the study of the classics vs. economics. > > > >Selma > > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >How to Get Inside a Student's Head > > > >January 31, 2003 > >By STEVEN PINKER > > > > > > > > > > > > > >CAMBRIDGE, Mass. - The scant mention of education in > >President Bush's State of the Union address suggests that > >the administration feels its work on the subject is done, > >at least for now. Last year's sweeping bill was a > >significant achievement, but as with most federal > >initiatives, it dealt primarily with administrative issues > >like financing and achievement tests. Little attention was > >given to the actual process of education: how events in the > >classroom affect the minds of the students. > > > >Yet a bit of White House leadership might encourage > >educators and scientists to apply a better understanding of > >thinking and learning to what happens in the classroom. > >Bill Clinton, in fact, did show some enthusiasm for this > >approach - particularly research on the brain. But as > >exciting as neuroscience is, I suspect it will provide > >little enlightenment about education. All learning changes > >the brain, but the changes at the level of brain cells are > >similar in all complex organisms - including mice, which > >don't learn to read, write or add. > > > >Rather, it is the patterns of changes across billions of > >neurons that determine the distinctively human forms of > >learning in the classroom. To understand these patterns, we > >need to apply insights from cognitive science, behavioral > >genetics and evolutionary and developmental psychology. > > > >An important place to start might be in working to apply a > >scientific mindset to education itself - that is, to > >determine as best we can whether various beliefs about > >educational effectiveness are true. Classroom practice is > >often guided by romantic theories, slick packages and > >political crusades. Few practices have been evaluated using > >the paraphernalia of social science, such as data > >collection and control groups. We already know that some > >methods of reading instruction work better than others, yet > >many schools still use methods proved ineffective like > >"whole language" techniques. > > > >The sciences of the mind can also provide a sounder > >conception of what the mind of a child is inherently good > >and bad at. Our minds are impressively competent at > >problems that were challenges to our evolutionary > >ancestors: speaking and listening, reading emotions and > >intentions, making friends and influencing people. They are > >not so good at problems that are far simpler (as gauged by > >what a computer can do) but which are posed by modern life: > >reading and writing, calculation, understanding how complex > >societies work. We should not assume that children can > >learn to write as easily as they learn to speak, or that > >children in groups will learn science as readily as they > >learn to exchange gossip. Educators must figure out how to > >co-opt the faculties that work effortlessly and to get > >children to apply them to problems at which they lack > >natural competence. > > > >Finally, a better understanding of the mind can lead to > >setting new priorities as to what is taught. The goal of > >education should be to provide students with new cognitive > >tools for grasping the world. Observers from our best > >scientists to Jay Leno are appalled by the scientific > >illiteracy of typical Americans. This obliviousness leads > >people to squander their health on medical flimflam and to > >misunderstand the strengths and weaknesses of a market > >economy in their political choices. > > > >The obvious solution is instruction at all levels in > >relatively new fields like economics, evolutionary biology > >and statistics. Yet most curriculums are set in stone, > >because no one wants to be the philistine who seems to be > >saying that it is unimportant to learn a foreign language > >or the classics. But there are only 24 hours in a day, and > >a decision to teach one subject is a decision not to teach > >another. The question is not whether trigonometry is > >important - it is - but whether it is more important than > >probability; not whether an educated person should know the > >classics, but whether it is more important to know the > >classics than elementary economics. > > > >This is not just a question of "relevance" to everyday > >life; these fields are as rigorous and fundamental as those > >in traditional curriculums. Nor is it a question of > >tradition being bad and innovation good - many fad > >movements are just as evasive about setting priorities. > >Even if learning music were shown to enhance math skills, > >that doesn't mean it is as effective as the same number of > >hours spent learning math. > > > >In a world with complexities that constantly challenge the > >abilities nature gave us, serious thinking about trade-offs > >in education cannot be responsibly avoided - by scientists, > >educators or policy makers. > > > >Steven Pinker, professor of cognitive science at > >Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is author of "The > >Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature." > > > >http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/31/opinion/31PINK.html?ex=1045021616&e > i=1&en > =0bcd1a2c6790cc8d > > > > > > > >HOW TO ADVERTISE > >--------------------------------- > >For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters > >or other creative advertising opportunities with The > >New York Times on the Web, please contact > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit our online media > >kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo > > > >For general information about NYTimes.com, write to > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company > >_______________________________________________ > >Futurework mailing list > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > > -- > ************************************************** > * Brian McAndrews, Practicum Coordinator * > * Faculty of Education, Queen's University * > * Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6 * > * FAX:(613) 533-6596 Phone (613) 533-6000x74937* > * e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * > * "Education is not the filling of a pail, * > * but the lighting of a fire. * > * W.B.Yeats * > * * > ************************************************** > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
