Group items tagged

Thinking about thinking to think about learning . The PRACTICAL purposes of learning or ACTIVE outcomes of learning are worth noticing

Useful thinking about thinking resouece

How many times in a class do you say the word 'think"?

David Perkin's keynote address from the International Conference on Thinking. It is quite long (an hour) so I haven't watched it yet but think it should be worthwhile.

It is very interesting especially as he gives a clear overview of the development of the 'teaching thinking' movement. What I found the most interesting is his focus on getting students alert and motivated before expecting them to deal with thinking tools (starts at 39.01) . If anyone is interested in watching this but unwilling to deal with the unreliable Internet at school, I downloaded the file so you can get a copy from my computer.

Well worth a read and visit to the blog that this one is responding to.

I feel like an idiot because I did not understand much of this. I understand that people misapprehend the Thinking Routines as algorithms that simulate thinking instead of visual representations of the internal process of thinking. Despite the author's insistence that he did support his argument, I merely read quotes from Making Thinking Visible without syllogism, dialectics, or exegesis. I just did not see how the case was made other than believe me because I read the book, and the authors said so.

Hi Troy- I think the point was the Webb didn't read the book and hasn't represented VT accurately.

integrating citizenship and 'global education' into a school.

This is a good reminder of why we teach. This is exactly what I wrote my Master's thesis on because education has lost it's inherent citizenship component. It seems as though politicians and policy makers think education only exists as a means of market value, or the market feeds off the exchange of knowledge for capital, thereby generating cultural capital, which can be commodified and further traded. I think people forget that the citizen arrived in the nation state only after the French Revolution and the restructuring of Merchantilism, which could be called proto-neoliberalism. The people revolted to create a center in which the citizen held certain entitlements to life and community built on education that challenged the state through reason, or what Immanuel Kant called, "Sapere Aude", that is, the courage to use your own reason. However, this center has been manipulated by education systems to systemize reason without courage, reason with exchange value, and reason for irrational privilege based on ethnocentrism (the creators of the world system) and technocracy (the maintainers of the world system). Finally, to answer your question, I do think this is an appropriate role for our college. I think education must question the possibility of education, and where it fits in the world we choose to live in. We must support our students and ourselves in the continuous investigation of our citizenship; therefore, our education.

I just read a quote from H.G Wells- "Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe." (The Outline of History, 1920). The quote is at the top of a paper dealing with the role of education in 'mending broken Britain' and how education can contribute to a more cohesive society. The paper was a summary of a national conference held in response to the anarchic riots of 2011 in England. The conference concluded that educational contributory factors leading to the riots were a lack of moral education, deficiency in the creative curriculum and an insufficient priority given to citizenship education. A sense of alienation and disenfranchisement amongst the youth of disadvantaged communities and a more general feeling that their voice is not being heard were also cited as major factors. The overarching conclusion of 'Mending Broken Britain- Educations' response' is clear- that schools play a central role in shaping our youth and in creating moral, constructive, rational, responsible and active citizens who feel included in our diverse and interdependent society- and that if education fails in this fundamental role, we can expect more (and worse) riots and social breakdown in the future.Prof. Gus John gves an interesting analysis of how our youth have reached this stage and cites 'the grotesque influence of the culture of the street' which has displaced the respect for self and for others and he asks the question: 'How? How have we failed to guide and assist our children in standing for something and in letting that something reflect the basic human values of respect, fairness, justice, interdependence, compassion and integrity?'The conference recognised that schools are not merely the means of transferring knowledge and content, to be absorbed and regurgitated for assessment purposes, but are the key vehicles for the development of values, skills and attitudes.

This post adds to my thinking about how we can facilitate classroom discussions appropriately.

This woman's body of research is amazing, especially in regard to Elder and Paul's Critical Thinking Concepts

This article reminds me of Issac Asimov's famous essay about the Eureka Phenomenon. Check it out: http://newviewoptions.com/The-Eureka-Phenomenon-by-Isaac-Asimov.pdf

Thanks, Troy. I hadn't read it before. I was always doubtful of Eureka moments but classifying them as unnoticed thinking makes sense to me.

Interesting discussion about the evolution of the concept of a fact. I think we all probably claim the authority of a 'fact' sometimes, so it's relevant to understand how they are changing. The psychology behind wanting to believe facts is fascinating.

This has some interesting perspectives, but it does little to address belief. The people interviewed seem frustrated by belief, so they take a negative stance. I would like to know more about the experiment where participants had a more open-minded response to climate change after writing an essay about a time they fought for something they believe in. In that case, belief played a constructive role because of their lateral entry. There is a greater thinking level to this issue.

Another interesting avenue my mind took while reading this was toward Owen Barfield's early 20th century investigation of history in English words. He shows how thinking develops through language. It is a good read if you can get past some of the antiquated language he uses to categorize his thoughts. It is titled, History in English Words. I have a copy if anyone wants to check it out.

@Mike: It may be useful to use this article as an introduction to the New Scientist article in the CCC class as students tend to find that article very difficult. There's also an other article from the same guy where he claims that speaking English causes people to save less money. Follow this link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21518574

This is very interesting. I wonder the extent to which the language itself might well reflect values/way of thinking, though. Perhaps your 'saving' cultures developed language structures like this partly because these structures fit in with their values.

A good reminder of one of the purposes of using thinking routines.

Some great resources if you are interested in making thinking visible. I have a copy of the book "Intellectual Character" if anyone is interested.

Hmmm...thinking I won't share this to the student sites...what do you think???

This article has a great list of questions to uncover thinking beyond 'what makes you say that?'.

This is Ron Ritchhart's website that has some good links to readings about Making Thinking Visible.

"Again, intellectual virtues are the character traits required for good thinking and learning. They presuppose no controversial moral commitments. " Yes. This. An important distinction to keep in mind. If we come in to the classroom teaching moral or even civic character directly, then we rightly run the risk of being accused of educational imperialism. But, if the moral and civic values we may hold have any real worth, then the inherent value of them should be revealed through the application of intellectually virtuous learning and thinking actions.

and if moral/ethical positions are reached (or deconstructed) either in the classroom, or outside, through the sound application of intellectual actions, they have validity. Anything does not go, not all opinions, values etc... are valid unless we can expose the process by which they were reached and allow that process to be scrutinized.

I know this is just a bit of redundancy, but this suggests that not all values are created equal, and they are not. The must have good reason. Good might be defined imperialistically as Jeremy stated, in that a unilateral agency imposes them, but a reciprocal communicative action may prevail, especially within the ideal or virtuous framed by intellectual character. I have been accussed of esoteric comments, but I think this warrants a visit from Habermas: "We can only exercise tolerance towards other people's beliefs if we reject them for subjectively good reasons. We do not need to be tolerant if we are indifferent to other opinions and attitudes anyway or even appreciate the value of such 'otherness'. The expectation of tolerance assumes that we can endure a form of ongoing non-concurrence at the level of social interaction, while we accept the persistence of mutually exclusive validity claims at the cognitive level of existentially relevant beliefs." In other words, Habermas believes you can't just say, "I don't care" or "This doesn't matter" or "This doesn't happen here" and claim tolerance. You must engage to be tolerant, and you must engage in a way that presents your ideas or beliefs in contrast to the other, and that contrast must be relatable, or what Habermas means by "relevant" is communicable in the logical sense that rational ideas are modular, and they may be fitted into intellectual chains of rational arguments and "ongoing non-concurrence" in social interactions. Through this lens, intellectual virtues occupy toleration/tolerance because intellectual virtues "naturally" lend themselves or, as Jeremy stated, display the inherent value of the ideas through engagement and action which must be communicable and reciprocal, i.e. function as tolerant.

I enjoyed how he started, but he lost me when he used Newton under an apple tree and Moses in the wilderness to point out integrated learning. It may have been an homage to myth, but it missed the mark. Also, he conflates the oral tradition with Aristotelian poetics. In general, his interpretation of myth and narrative denies any acknowledge of postmodernity and post-structuralism. It is like he never left his cave after reading Levi-Strauss. I think you could learn more about 21st C. metaphors of cyberspace by skimming a Cory Doctorow novel.

No worries, Kris. I did enjoy his metaphors, but I think he took a bit of license with his appropriation of Native American oral stories. I get heated about this because it is what I have dedicated my life to, especially narrative theory. I have spent hours upon days with people fighting for their narratives - poststructural/postcolonial movement - and who believe a narrative, and all it tropes or figures of speech, unbinds truth, which allows for not just malleability but multiplicity. Cory Doctorow is the new William Gibson or Ursula Le Guin, so might put him in the same league as Philip K. Dick, but all in all, he is a cyberpunk writer cultivating a community neocyberpunks. His literary website is craphound.com, and he is the co-founder of the tech blog boingboing. He has help redefine narrative fiction in the cyber age.

Oop! *has helped