Engagement of video games has ‘become a Pandora’s box containing bait for the reptilian brain to feast on’
“The incessant warfare (the child) takes part in is not virtual to the child, it is his reality…at a superficial cognitive level they’re aware the game is only a virtual reality, but at a deeper, emotional level they know it is not. After all, it is happening to them”, says Csikszentmihalyi.
Csikszentmihalyi is clearly a world renowned expert in motivation, happiness and creativity. You likely know his work on ‘flow’. In fact, you are perhaps a real believer and apply it in your educational practice with students.
Csíkszentmihályi described flow as “being completely involved in an activity for its own sake. The ego falls away. Time flies. Every action, movement, and thought follows inevitably from the previous one, like playing jazz. Your whole being is involved, and you’re using your skills to the utmost.”
“To achieve a flow state, a balance must be struck between the challenge of the task and the skill of the performer. If the task is too easy or too difficult, flow cannot occur. Both skill level and challenge level must be matched and high; if skill and challenge are low and matched, then apathy results.’” Wikipedia
Many schools have ‘flow’ rooms or, at least, try to design educational experiences to engage students in the ‘zone’ – or a state of flow.*
“We are headed for ‘a quantum leap into an abyss of insubstantiality’.”
Csíkszentmihályi fears that ‘in one or two generations children will grow up to be adults unable to tell reality from imagination’. We are headed, he suggests, for ‘a quantum leap into an abyss of insubstantiality’.
What do you think?
*Note: It has been central to my ‘way of being’ in classrooms for many years. I even had my most recent classroom – and, indeed, have this blog called “The Construction Zone’. (‘Zone’ doubles for ‘state of flow’ and for ‘zone of proximal development’ (ZPD).
Respecting the Student’s Desire to Know
Or, can we afford not to?
I would suggest that respecting the student’s own ‘driving questions’ is a major strategy in the achievement of those standards. Following this assumption, we need also to provide the tools for investigation and to create a school or classroom culture of support and expectation. In order for this model to work, students must learn the requisite metacognitive skills.
“If students are not able to assume control of their own learning, we do them them a serious injustice.”
Where is the ‘locus of control’?
I have always been amazed at the arrogance with which we as a society assume control of a child’s learning as they enter school. From birth and before entering school, children are immersed in a complex, unstructured learning environment. And assuming supportive caregiving, these children learn a wealth of information. They learn the major part of a language (or even more than one!), much about mathematics, science and the world around them.
“Please consider the amount a child learns before s/he enrolls in school.”
How do they do this? Inquiry. Natural inquiry. Curiosity. Questioning. Problem solving. Resolving discrepancies. Trial and error. They are in charge of their own ‘curriculum’. They set their goals…ask their questions… generate their strategies… invoke them… and consider the outcomes. This is obviously an extremely powerful recipe for success. Please consider the amount a child learns before s/he enrolls in school.
What is learning? Cognitive and…?
Think of learning, if you will, as having two major distinct aspects. One is cognitive. The other is ‘other aspects of self’ – including social and affective. In this latter area I would include passion and motivation… the ‘heart’… the ‘fire’. Often learning has been divided into ‘process’ and ‘product’.
However, I wish to propose that we consider both the ‘product and process’ as ‘content’ – in some ways the cognitive aspect. Perhaps we as educators still spend too much time on the ‘product’ aspect of this false dichotomy, yet we do acknowledge and attend to the ‘process’ to some degree. We do address to some extent ‘how to learn’ and we teach strategies for this to students.
We turn process into product!
The humorous part of this, of course, is by the very nature of doing so, we turn ‘process’ into ‘product’ as well. It becomes something else to be tested and measured. Please understand that I do not negate the importance of high standards for either product or process. I have incredibly high expectations for students and would expect high quality results in both these areas. It is how we get there which I question. And the theft of the locus of control for learning in order to focus on curriculum delivery is not the way to get high standards in either the short term nor, in fact, for our larger goal of life long learning.
“The theft of the locus of control for learning…is not the way to get high standards.”
Don’t steal. It’s not nice! :-)
It seems that what we need to do is more fully support the project-based learning model. It is a ‘natural’ model that can be improved and enhanced through some formalization at school. But we shouldn’t rob those children of the most powerful and necessary attributes of learning – those of passion and being in charge of self… of all the meta aspects… of all the ‘fire’ and intrinsic reasons to learn.
So imagine a child as she moves from a world in which she has been the author/producer/director and actor of her own learning to that of mere actor… taking direction from others as to what to learn… to say… to perform. And it is for the next 12 or more years that this is the case… except for glimpses when she is asked to ‘do a project’.
“Children enter school as question marks and leave as periods.” (Neil Postman)
Lest you think I am some sort of wide-eyed radical who would like to see the curriculum tossed out the window, let me assure you, that is not the case and it would be simplistic to dismiss me as such. It is not I who is the radical one. It is, on the other hand, radical to take a healthy, inquisitive, self-motivated learner and to institutionalize that learner to the extent that robs them of their passion and motivation in the name of ‘curriculum delivery’.
“It is not I who is the radical one. Those who institutionalize healthy, inquisitive, self-motivated learner are radical.”
Curriculum as a landscape to be discovered
Do I disagree with the curriculum content that exists in government documents? That is a question for another discussion, but for purposes of this article let me answer ‘no’. I believe it is necessary to have this breadth and depth of a knowledge base articulated and available in some organized fashion. It provides a landscape to be discovered, explored and understood through the school life of a student.
Who manages the learning?
What worries me is the way in which it is approached. Let me continue with my previous description of kids before school. Before kids enter school they essentially command both aspects of learning – ‘cognitive’ and the ‘other’. Upon entering school, the ‘cognitive’ is the focus. The ‘other’ is essentially taken over by the teacher. The management of learning is under the teacher’s jurisdiction. It then becomes necessary to contrive activities to engender ‘motivation’ or ‘passion’. And this gets to be the case progressively as the student proceeds through the grades.
Things people assume about me.
- Don’t assume I negate the benefits of ‘direct instruction’.
- I am not laissez faire. I expect and demand high quality work.
- Don’t think I let kids run amok. I am a strict disciplinarian… in that I do not tolerate ‘slacking off’. But I do like a certain amount of ‘chaos’ in my classrooms. But that chaos relates more to ‘active learning’ than to ‘fooling around’.
So… how do we do it?
So how do we start towards this vision? As I suggested, we need to perhaps further adopt a project-based learning (PBL) model. And I believe that students’ driving questions are at the heart of many types of project-based learning. This blog contains many posts related to PBL, questioning, the zone of proximal development and the role of information and communications technologies:
- PBL – Who IS in Charge? What Tools can Help?
- PBL – the New Worksheet
- Scaffolding for Deep Understanding
- PBL? Am I Doing it Right?
- Metacognition: A ‘Way of Being’ in the Classroom
- The Science of Passion-Based Learning
Just how powerful is the role of one’s own question in learning? It may be the single most important factor in learning… both in school and outside school. Passion – the emotional force of a driving question – raises one’s motivation, increases energy and focus, carries one through uncertainty and difficulty, and heightens one’s own expectations.
“Once you have learned how to ask relevant and appropriate questions, you have learned how to learn and no one can keep you from learning whatever you want or need to know.”
Neil Postman and Charles Weingartner//
Here are MY Reasons!
The title of this post might lead you to think that I question the benefit of kids coding or programming. No. That’s not it. I am just hoping that you have developed your own good reasons why you want kids to code. Then, in support of those reasons, you set the wheels in motion for your students to achieve those goals.
In brief, my reasons revolve around ‘students being in charge of their own learning’. These include:
- student agency (locus of control)
- scaffolding a cognitive partnership where students come to deeply understand learning through the development and application of metacognitive skills
I invite you to tell your stories. Why do you want your students coding?
“What can I do with this computer?”
When I started using computers with kids, in 1977, there were no applications to speak of! In fact, I didn’t even have a desktop computer. I rented a dumb terminal and ran a telephone line through the classroom ceiling to a phone in the school library.
Why did I go to such trouble? It was about power. Locus of control. Social constructionism. I really wanted the students to ‘take charge of their own learning’ – but not just from a student agency perspective – but I also wanted them to develop magnificent metacognitive skills and to ‘fall in love’ with their ability to learn.
Now for a little trip down memory lane.
You know, I never thought I would use computers with kids. Back in the 70’s I was a ‘humanist’. OK – I still am! But computers were so mechanistic – however I decided to take a course with Ron Ragsdale at OISE.
I kept asking myself, “What can this computer do for me? What can it do for me?”
After a few nights I realized I was asking the wrong question! I had the wrong expectation – the wrong belief!’
It’s not ‘what the computer can do for me?’ but rather, ‘What can I do with this computer?’
“What can I do with this computer?”
It was 1977 so I went and rented a dumb terminal for a month – for 70 dollars – and took it into my Grade One class. I hooked it up to a telephone line connected to OISE. I taught some grade ones to do simple programming in BASIC.
Print “Janine 10 times”
You should have seen their faces!! They squared their shoulders… head their heads high. And they wanted to struggle some more!
They wanted to try new things… to fail more… so that they might succeed! (Just like Nintendo or PlayStation!)
Did they each have a computer? No! Was that a bad thing? No! It was a social event. It was a ‘happening’. It was shared. They all had a stake in it… not just in what they did… but also in what the other kids did.
Then came Logo!
Let me demonstrate a little Logo – a constructionist tool that has been around for a few decades. Kids teach a turtle to behave as they wish. For example, let’s teach it to make a square. You type in fd 100 and the turtle draws a line 100 turtle steps long. Type rt 90 and the turtle turns right 90 degrees. Do that three more times and it draws a square. You see – if you do that, the turtle will have turned a total of 360 degrees because it made four 90 degree turns. 4 X 90 = 360 This can be all said in one command – repeat 4 [fd 100 rt 90]
Similarly, an equilateral triangle can be made by having the turtle turn 120 degrees three times. 3 X 120 = 360 Or, repeat 3 [fd 100 rt 120] For a pentagon - 5 X 72 = 360 so repeat 5 [fd 100 rt 72] will do it! And so on.
Total Turtle Trip Theorem
This simple arithmetic is the basis for the total turtle trip theorem.
“If a turtle takes a trip around the boundary of any area and ends up in the state in which it started, then the sum of all the turns will be 360 degrees.” Seymour Papert in Mindstorms, Basic Books, 1980*
So, as an advance organizer or a ‘minds on’ as we might say today, I asked my grade twos, to write a story about a total turtle trip before we explored this ‘powerful idea’ on the computer.
Leeanne, aged 8 wrote…
Once there lived a turtle. He was very curious. He wanted to take a trip. So he said to his mother, I’m going on a trip.” “Oh, but what if you fall and land upon your back?” his mother asked. “I won’t do that.” And off he went. When he was walking along he met Father Bunny. “Where are you off to on this fine spring morning,” Father Bunny asked. “I’m going on a trip around the world.” “But what if you…” Turtle didn’t hear. He was halfway down the road. He started down a big hill but he tripped and tumbled down, down, down the hill and landed on his back. And there he stayed. Meanwhile Turtle’s mother got worried and went to find him. She found him on his back. She helped him to his feet. And he said, “I guess I took a total turtle trip!”
Did she understand the concept? Let’s see. I asked the kids to make any polygon.
I was amazed at what LeeAnne did. Why? Because she not only understood the concept at hand, but realized that she could have the computer do the division (360/11). So her instruction to the turtle was repeat. This made the creation of any polygon really easy! A pentagon was 360/5. An octagon was 360/8.
Cognitive Residue: How Do We Help Kids Build Transferable Skills?**
Can coding lead to knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are transferable to other situations? Or maybe a better question might be, “How can we help students think about coding in ways that will allow for this transfer?”
If you ever wonder at the end of a day just what your kids learned while working at the computers and you are dissatisfied with your thoughts, consider the following simple model. Gavriel Salomon has posed an analysis of the difference between “effects with” and “effects of ” computers.
“Effects with are the changes that take place while one is engaged in intellectual partnership with peers or with a computer tool, as, for example, is the case with the changed quality of problem solving that takes place when individuals work together in a team. On the other hand, effects of are those more lasting changes that take place as a consequence of the intellectual partnership, as when computer-enhanced collaboration teaches students to ask more exact and explicit questions even when not using that system.”
In other words, the ‘effects with’ are the enhanced ability one gets from the use of technology. Salomon elaborates: “The combined product of human-plus-machine yields a higher level of performance.” The ‘effects of’ are the lasting individual changes resulting from the computer-supported collaboration, the cognitive residue, one might say, the transferable knowledge or skills.
So, just how might you go about helping your students experience the ‘effects of’ coding?
Let’s revisit Logo.
In Logo, as in other programming environments, you write procedures (or small programs), which may become part of larger procedures. The included ones, therefore, are called subprocedures , and the enclosing programs are called superprocedures . This is much like a builder using bricks that become part of a wall, which then becomes part of a house. For example, the procedure for creating a square can become a subprocedure inside a superprocedure for creating a flower.To square Repeat 4 [forward 50 right 90] End To flower Repeat 18 [square right 20] End
Jeffrey (a Grade 2 rascal!) made a most interesting leap from Logo to a completely different domain one day.
We were having a discussion inspired by the flight of the space shuttle piggybacked on a jumbo jet. Our Grades 2/3 class had the opportunity to watch the flight. When we return- ed to the classroom, a discussion of space naturally arose. One child asked if Earth was in space, and in asking the question, she determined it must be, because it wasn’t sitting on anything. The discussion continued until Jeffrey piped up.
“You know . . . it’s sort of like Logo.” We stopped and looked at him curiously. “What do you mean?” I asked him studiously. He replied, “Well, Earth is like a procedure. It’s like a subprocedure inside the solar system. The solar system is the superprocedure. And the solar system is like a subprocedure inside the universe. The universe is like the superprocedure.” “Fascinating,” I said, then asked, “What’s the biggest superprocedure?” After a moment he replied, “I don’t know. I guess the universe.”
Well, I was truly amazed at the generalization across domains that Jeffrey had made. He clearly demonstrated significant transfer of a concept from his experiences with Logo to an authentic event. Although Jeffrey’s illumination happened spontaneously, I learned that I could play an important role in helping students to acquire Salomon’s “effects of” by providing opportunities for them to look for these comparisons across subject areas.
I started playing a game with students that I called Metaphoria. I gave them sentence starters such as:
“Programming in Logo is like … ” or,
“Finding a bug in a program is like … ”.
Students have answered: “Programming in Logo is like playing tennis. First, I take a turn, then the computer takes a turn.” “Finding a bug in a program is like looking for a needle in a haystack.”
This is but one example that provides students with a mental model—a model that is durable and independent of coding. It is what Salomon would call a residual effect.
One example of this residual effect became evident after the students’ experience with “bug collecting” during their time with Logo. They had learned that identifying problems in their Logo code meant that they had mistakes, or bugs, in their thinking.
Of course, actively seeking bugs was a necessary component to getting the program to do what they wanted. Bug seeking naturally evolved into bug collecting. Every time a bug was solved, the kids squished it—metaphorically, of course!
The class had built a large papier maché turtle, and one of the students suggested that perhaps when a bug was solved it could be fed to the turtle instead. This was delightful and useful in and of itself, but the transfer of this model became clear as I overheard two students working on a traditional paper math task. They knew their answer wasn’t right.
One student said to the other:
“There’s a bug in here somewhere. We’d better find it!”
I believe it is important to maximize the opportunity for the acquisition of these skills as your students are coding. Do not leave it solely to the use of the computer. Be explicit in building the bridge—in making the connection of this skill to other domains. Discuss them in class. Have students describe other situations where these skills might be used.
In fact, take it one step further. Ask your students to think of particular aspects of that give them generalizable skills. In this way, you are empowering them to take more responsibility for their own learning.
Other Memorable Moments
Lego Logo – Way before the ‘Maker Movement’! :-)
Have you any idea of my excitement in 1987ish whenever Seymour Papert, Brian Silverman, Mitch Resnick, Steve Ocko and others came up with the idea of Lego and Logo being used together to create a great robotics environment for kids? It was called Lego/Logo*** and was the precursor to Lego Mindstorms.
I quickly purchased several dozen Lego Logo kits for use within North York Schools. We had some ‘hard fun’.
At about the same time, the folks at MIT Media Lab were working on developing an intelligent brick – a lego brick with a programmable chip inside it so that you could ‘send’ the Logo instructions to it and then disconnect all the cables! Then the robots were wireless and unencumbered. Some years later (1998), the first-generation programmable brick became available from Lego. You can read lots more of this history in Robots For Kids: Exploring New Technologies for Learning.****
Seymour’s Twinkling Eyes
One of the things I have always treasured in my meetings with Seymour was the twinkle in his eyes as he got energized by ‘powerful ideas’ for kids. One of these moments occurred regarding the intelligent brick. He was so excited about it at one point that he invited me to sit with him and his graduate students as they pondered and played with several of these turtles with embedded intelligent bricks. These turtles, of course, had sensors and lights and the discussion revolved around our creating a simulation of cultural differences.
“People of different cultures are comfortable with differing amounts of personal space. What if we could program these turtles to move around with that in ‘mind’?” Turtles had different coloured lights on them and so the idea was to program each one to move within a specified distance of any other turtle depending on its colour.
It was a fun afternoon.
It was a great ‘problem’ to think about.
It’s a far cry from walking into a classroom full of kids where they all have the same worksheet and are copying the code mindlessly into their computers – all to produce the same outcome into which they had no personal investment.
Look to the Learner
In 1984, I became the president of SIG-Logo – a special interest group for the Educational Computing Organization of Ontario (ECOO). We ran a conference called Look to the Learner.
It was extremely important for us to focus on the learner ‘being in charge’. At that time, as now, the educational computing community was under assault from those who wish to control children and to make them comply with their educational philosophy. It was the era of CAI – Computer Assisted Instruction. Or, as I called it – Computer Assisted Institutionalization!
Another famous book of the time The Computer in School: Tutor, Tool, Tutee by Robert Taylor (1980)*****spoke of the computer as a tutor, tool or tutee – as the title suggests! The computer could tutor the student. The computer could be used as a tool – e.g., wordprocessing, graphics, etc. Or, the computer could be the tutee – and be taught by the student. To do this, the student must learn and understand how to speak to the computer in a language it understands – that is, coding!
Here is the agenda for that wee conference – which stands out as a highlight of my years.
Click these images for a larger view of the day’s sessions.
Current Notable Books you MUST Get
This is a spectacular book by Sylvia Libow Martinez & Gary Stager. These pioneers have a long and significant history with kids and effective computing which places kids firmly in charge of invention and learning. The book suggests that ‘using technology to make, repair, or customize the things we need brings engineering, design, and computer science to the masses. Fortunately for educators, this maker movement overlaps with the natural inclinations of children and the power of learning by doing’.
David is also a pioneer in this field. He developed Calliope many years ago. It became Inspiration. He developed the Koala Pad. It was a precursor to the use of tablets. He suggests that ‘learning institutions should offer a balance of Campfire spaces (home of the lecture), Watering Holes (home to conversations between peers), Caves (places for quiet reflection), and Life (places where students can apply what they’ve learned)’. He wants schools ‘that encourage immersive student-centered learning experiences (Holodecks)’.
It is not sufficient to equate ‘being in charge of one’s own learning’ with ‘student agency’.
Hopefully, these stories will afford you two thoughts:
- As we code with kids in 2013, we realize we stand on the shoulders of giants.
- We must have our own deep reasons for wanting our kids to code.
Share your stories!
I suggested, at the outset, that my reasons include both ‘student agency’ and helping kids to deeply understand learning. It is not sufficient to equate ‘being in charge of one’s own learning’ with ‘student agency’. Kids can not be in charge of their own learning if they do not understand the intricacies of learning and, indeed how they learn in different circumstances.
Now, go and tinker!
*Mindstorms: Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas. Seymour A. Papert, Basic Books, 1980
**Transfering Knowledge with Technology, Peter Skillen, Learning & Leading with Technology Volume 30 Number 4 pp 22-27
***LEGO/Logo: Learning Through and About Design, Mitchel Resnick and Stephen Ocko http://llk.media.mit.edu/papers/ll.html
****Robots For Kids: Exploring New Technologies for Learning, Allison Druin, James A. Hendler, Morgan Kaufmann, 2000
******Invent To Learn: Making, Tinkering, and Engineering in the Classroom, Sylvia Libow Martinez & Gary Stager, CMK Press, 2013
*******From the Campfire to the Holodeck: Creating Engaging and Powerful 21st Century Learning Environments, David Thornburg, Jossey-Bass, 2014
On Wednesday, October 16th, 2013, schools and organizations from around the world will once again celebrate Global (GD).
“…every human being has the universal right to lead a dignified life.”
What is Global Dignity?
Global Dignity (GD) (www.globaldignity.org) is an independent, international, non-political and non-partisan organization focused on empowering individuals with the concept that every human being has the universal right to lead a dignified life. Established in 2005, by HRH Crown Prince Haakon of Norway, Operation HOPE Founder, Chairman and CEO John Hope Bryant and Professor Pekka Himanen, GD is linked to the 2020 process of the World Economic Forum, in which leaders from politics, business, academia, and civil society join efforts to improve the state of the world.
2012 Success Story!
Last October, 9,000 students in Canada from Nunavut to British Columbia joined 350,000 students in over 50 countries to celebrate human dignity and to empower all those around us to live with mutual respect, tolerance and kindness. Culminating with a national videoconference on Parliament Hill, which linked 1,200 students from coast-to-coast, we were thrilled with the enthusiasm and support that GD received from all walks of life.
“9,000 students in Canada from Nunavut to British Columbia.”
In this respect, we had the privilege of rolling-out GD with our National Role Models (2012) who included: Founder of TakingITGlobal, Jennifer Corriero, NDP MP Niki Ashton, Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau, Conservative Senator Yonah Martin, Jeffrey Copenace from the Assembly of First Nations, traditional Inuit researcher, Curtis Konek, Ryan Hreljac, the Founder of Ryan’s Well and our national event’s keynote speaker, Wesley Prankard, the Founder of Northernstarfish.
What is Required?
There is no cost to take part in GD and events have been designed to range anywhere from 15 minutes, to two hours, or even a full day. What’s more, GD celebrations are flexible and easy to integrate into any classroom setting. This year’s “Many Faces of Dignity” campaign celebrates the varied and diverse interpretations of human dignity and how these forces play out in our lives. By extension, this provides students with the opportunity to explore issues like youth empowerment, anti-bullying, cultural diversity and beyond.
“GD celebrations are flexible and easy to integrate into any classroom setting.”
In the attached agenda, you will find an overview of GD, complete with learning objectives. Throughout the GD process, students will learn about the importance of dignity in their own lives and the lives of others. From there, they will learn how to express what dignity means for them and they will learn how their own dignity is mutually dependent on the dignity of others.
Students Can Make a Difference!
Overall, it is our hope that by acknowledging existing inequalities, students will see that they have the ability to impact and enrich the lives of others through their own actions and choices, thereby promoting awareness and a social consciousness during a key time in their development.
“…promote awareness and a social consciousness…”
I encourage you to consider championing this global movement and help us to transform young lives, revitalize communities in Canada’s North, and mobilize young people from around the world to act for global change.
Register Your School
and share this invitation with any individuals, groups and organizations who may be interested in supporting, volunteering or encouraging more people to participate in this important movement. Visit www.globaldignity.ca for more info. (New site will be up REAL SOON!!!!)
Thank you for supporting our youth!
- Students will learn about the importance of dignity in their own lives and the lives of others.
- Students will learn to express in their own words what dignity means for them and their lives.
- Students will learn about how their own dignity is mutually dependent on the dignity of others.
- Students will name something they are for and what they want to do during the course of the next year to strengthen the dignity of others.
Connections to Education:
Character development must be a whole school effort.
Character development supports student achievement because it: develops the whole student as an individual (as an engaged learner and as a citizen); contributes to respectful, safe, caring and inclusive school environments that are prerequisites for learning; creates learning environments that are positive and collaborative so that teachers spend less time disciplining and more time doing what they do best – namely, teaching.
The increasing diversity of Canada’s population creates an opportunity for us to determine the beliefs and principles we hold in common. When school boards engage a wide cross-section of their communities in building consensus on character attributes, they are, in essence, engaged in a process of finding common ground.
The principles and attributes of character development are universal, based in equity and transcend differences as well as other demographic factors. Empathy for others and respect for the dignity of all persons are essential characteristics of an inclusive society
Connections to 21st Century Skills:
- Learning from individuals representing diverse cultures, religions and lifestyles in a spirit of mutual respect
Communication and Collaboration
- Articulate thoughts and ideas effectively using oral, written and nonverbal communication skills in a variety of forms and contexts
- Listen effectively to decipher meaning, including knowledge, values, attitudes and intentions
- Use communication for a range of purposes (e.g. to inform, instruct, motivate and persuade)
Global Dignity Principles:
- Every human being has a right to a dignified life;
- A dignified life means the opportunity to fulfill your potential. This means having a humane level of healthcare, education;
- Dignity means having the freedom to make decisions about your life and to be treated with respect with regard to this right;
- Dignity should be the basic guiding principle behind all actions;
- Ultimately, our dignity depends upon the dignity of others.
Global Dignity Day Overview (approx. 2 hours total):
Kindly register your school by October 10th at the latest if you intend to participate.
Sincerely yours,Giovanna Mingarelli Chair, National Steering Committee
Global Dignity Day Canada
email@example.com Peter Skillen National Steering Committee Global Dignity Day Canada firstname.lastname@example.org
- Global Dignity Leaders Announce Global Dignity Day for October 16, 2013 (johnhopebryant.com)
- Dignity and Self-Worth Quote of the Day (johnhopebryant.com)
- News Regarding His Royal Highness Crown Prince Haakon of Norway. (VIDEOS) (royalcorrespondent.com)
“You can’t separate intellect and feelings in the work of the mind. They’re both there all the time. Real learning—attentive real learning, deep learning—is playful and frustrating and joyful and discouraging and exciting and sociable and private all at the same time, which is what makes it great.” ~ Eleanor Duckworth
Know when to memorize. Know when to mesmerize!
If we want students to learn deeply and efficiently we need to understand the role emotions play in different types of learning. We could spend much time discussing what it means to learn. In fact, Seymour Sarason has a whole book called “And What Do You Mean by Learning?”
Without getting into it too deeply, we could probably agree that we want students to acquire some knowledge, skills and attitudes. So how should kids ‘get that knowledge’? A constructivist approach would suggest that kids need to assimilate information into existing schema or indeed construct new schema to accommodate new information and ideas. Lev Vygotsky might add that this happens best in a social setting.
Should Students Memorize Content?
Other approaches would involve getting students to memorize content or procedural knowledge. While I believe there are times when this is quite appropriate, rote memorization continues to be an overused strategy that is often implemented without a deep understanding of its nuances. It becomes “memorization of decontextualized facts” rather than “active construction of new schema.”
These days, there is a very vocal anti-memorization movement! We hear about collaboration, project-based learning, student agency, constructionism, and passion. All of which I support. I’ve been a fan of passion-based learning since I started teaching in 1970. Somehow it just seemed a matter of ethics and the culture of the day. Kids should love learning and love school. It was after all, the “love, peace and happiness” era.
Passion Constitutes More than Engagement
Passion-based learning has gained more ground recently. Why? Apart from the anti-memorization sentiments, the main rationale seems to be focused on engagement and motivation. Students are more likely to learn if they are captivated, motivated and engaged with the curriculum or projects in hand. We could unpack types and levels of engagement, but I’m sure we’d all agree on this: if the child is deeply engaged in a task there is greater likelihood that she will attend to it better and build requisite understandings and new schema that serve to increase the base of content and process knowledge desired.
But passion isn’t just about the motivational aspect. It’s deeper than engagement.
There are cognitive processes in the brain that are “turned on” by emotion – be that passion, anger, anxiety or other emotions.
Emotions Impact Cognition
Here’s a sampling of thoughts from some great voices:
Eleanor Duckworth suggests that “…you can’t separate intellect and feelings in the work of the mind. They’re both there all the time. Real learning—attentive real learning, deep learning—is playful and frustrating and joyful and discouraging and exciting and sociable and private all at the same time, which is what makes it great” (in Teaching by Heart: The Foxfire Interviews, Sara Day Hatton, 2005, p. 21).
Paulo Freire, the great Brazilian educator, often suggested that we must teach with both our hearts and our minds, while Lev Vygotsky recognized the limitations of trying to explain ‘superior thinking processes’ without addressing the effects of emotion.
Nellie J. Zambrana-Ortiz in Pedagogy in (E)Motion suggests that “emotions color our ideas, move the reason, and stretch cognition.” She says, “Emotions are related to body as well as mind. There is no cognition without emotions, or emotions outside the limits of a cognitive experience, and progressive explanations of human learning and development must take into consideration the fusion of both.”
It’s real now that “science” says so
Why is it not a widely accepted fact that emotions impact cognition and why is it not central to our educational systems? My guess is that all the psychologists, philosophers and educators who have spoken about the centrality of emotions in learning haven’t been considered ‘real scientists’ by our western societies. We tend to like ‘hard’ science.
Well, now we are getting some ‘hard science’ as a result of breakthroughs in neuroscience research.
Antonio Damasio, a great neuroscientist, has researched this phenomenon extensively in recent years and has discovered that emotions are absolutely necessary in the decision-making process. He describes them as the “engine of the limbic system” – our “emotional brain.”
Priscilla Vail in her article “The Role of Emotions in Learning,” says ‘Emotion is an on/off switch for learning…the emotional brain, the limbic system, has the power to open or close access to learning, memory, and the ability to make connections.’
When students are passionately engaged in their learning – when they are mesmerized by their learning environment or activities – there are myriad responses in their brains making connections and building schema that simply would not occur without that passion or emotion.
Much of what we ask kids to “memorize” has little emotional charge to it. Emotions can significantly alter the creation and recall of memories. People are better at remembering information that is emotionally charged – rather than information that is neutral or flat.
So when you are designing learning environments, remember that mesmerization trumps memorization!