Tag Archives: book

July 28, 2015

Biesta (2014) risk of education

Biesta, G. (2014). The Beautiful Risk of Education. London: Paradigm Publishers.

The beautiful risk of education (2013) adds to ideas Biesta presented in his previous books Beyond Learning (2008) and Good education in an age of measurement (2010).  Biesta maintains that schooling has three aims: socialization, qualification and subjectification (i.e. becoming a subject). In this latest book, Biesta proclaims that education needs to embrace risk rather than reduce risk, and he discusses this with reference to creativity, communication, teaching, learning, emancipation, democracy and virtuosity.  Current educational policies aim to make education stronger, more secure, more predictable, and risk-free. However, Biesta asserts that policy-makers oversimplification of learning is potentially damaging and veer away from what education ultimately means. After all education is not a simple transfer transaction between machines. Education is a complex social-interaction between human beings and slow, difficult, out-of-comfort-zone learning that pushes boundaries is the powerful learning that sticks. Instead of seeking to reduce risk, education needs to embrace risk as an essential part of teaching, learning and schooling.

Biesta voices concern over the relatively recent paradigm shift from the traditional teacher as an authority to the constructivist teacher as a facilitator of learning.  Biesta interprets constructivism as a theory of learning not a theory of teaching, and he makes a clear distinction between learning from (leren van) and being taught by (leren aan).  A teacher should not be reduced to an agent that speeds transfer of knowledge from one vessel to another.  Teachers are essential in a learning environment to empower learners to reach beyond their immediate known grasp.  Biesta reminds us that we need to remain aware that teaching does not necessarily result in learning and indeed we cannot predict any of the effects of teaching.

Biesta also discusses teacher education. He declares teacher education has become over-simplified by structuring programs on narrow pre-defined competencies. To be qualified to teach, learner-teachers merely demonstrate achievement of separate competencies. Biesta sees it as insufficient to have knowledge and skills of separate parts of teaching because teachers must be able to perform multiple tasks in complex learning contexts with multiple conflicting factors.  Teacher education also provides a role modelling function so that learner-teachers become aware of the social expectations and shared traditions of teaching. It is this apprenticeship role within an active Community of Practice that Biesta values.  Biesta proposes an alternative to current competency based teacher education, that develops virtuosity and replaces narrow competencies with teachers’  judgements. Biesta states that learner-teachers can learn virtuosity by studying the virtuosity of others. But who is judged as being a virtuoso? Which contexts allow virtuosity to be seen?

July 27, 2015

Glaser & Strauss (1969) Grounded Theory

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of Grounded Theory. Chicago: Aldine.

Used to explore unexplained phenomenon, Grounded Theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) is a qualitative research methodology derived from pragmatism (Mead, 1967)  and symbolic interactionism (Blumer, 1969). Grounded Theory was designed as “a reaction against … ‘grand’ theories produced through the logico-deductive method of science” (Denscombe, 2007), i.e. speculative theories that are neither grounded to research nor to the real world, so can lack validity and be irrelevant to the people they concern (Layder, 1993).  Grounded Theory does not test hypotheses nor merely describe phenomenon. Through empirical fieldwork in social settings, Grounded Theory explores participants’ perspectives and actions to generate theory grounded in the complexities of the real world. Researchers strive to be open-minded and theoretically sensitive.  Data is not forced to fit any preconceived ideas.

Grounded Theory has an emergent structure.  The research questions, literature, sampling, data collection, coding, categories, concepts all remain open throughout the cyclic and cumulative research process so that emerging concepts can be explored further.  Grounded Theory is not random, but follows lines of enquiry in consistent but yet flexible ways.  Research processes and interpretations are recorded in memos to provide an audit trail. The social setting is clearly defined.  The research questions focus on “What is happening… ?” and “How are…?”.  The literature review is an ongoing process.  Representative sampling is not used, and instead flexible theoretical sampling (purposive and criterion sampling) is used to explore concepts further.  Everything is considered data, e.g. semi-structured and unstructured interviews, focus group interviews, transcripts, observations, journal/blog entries, questionnaires, professional documents and academic literature.  During interviews, open questions are used to empower participants share experiences and perspectives. Data is coded using gerunds to remain close the participants’ words and actions. However, the data does not speak for itself (like in ethnographical research), but instead is analysed through cycles of constant comparative analysis, which compare data to data to identify emerging categories and concepts. Cycles of constant comparative analysis continue throughout the research process until a point of saturation is reached and new data fits into existing codes and categories.  Although sometimes not accepted in more traditional research settings where quantitative experimental and statistical analysis still reign, Grounded Theory is recognised as authoritative empirical research rationale. Grounded Theory is interpreted.  Researchers can identify with a Glaserian or Straussian version, or follow first or second generation theorists.

March 22, 2014

Fiore (1989) procrastination

Fiore

Fiore, N. (1989). The now habit: A strategic program for overcoming procrastination and enjoying guilt-free play. London: Penguin Books.

 
So we’ve heard it all before: small pieces, set priorities, and JUST DO IT! But it ain’t that simple! Nobody procrastinates due to laziness or disorganization. We procrastinate to relieve stress from negative self-beliefs, resistance to authorities, imbalance of work and play, perfectionism, and fear of success and failure.

Failures to perfectionists are like paper cuts to hemophiliacs. Perfectionists equate average tasks with compete personal failure. However, procrastination protects us from self-criticism because we don’t have time to do our best.

Successes are often rewarded with more and harder work. Like high jumpers who have just cleared the bar, no time to rest, the bar is immediately raised. However, procrastination protects us by reserving energy for subsequent tasks.

Fiore believes that procrastination is a learned behaviour and can be unlearned.

1st. Become aware of avoidance behaviors, e.g. excessive preparation.

2nd. Focus on positive rewards, not negative punishments.

3rd. Reduce imagined risk. Anyone can walk at ground level along planks that are 10m long x 30cm wide x 10cm thick. But procrastinators raise planks high up between buildings, making tasks impossible and freezing with fear. But when buildings burst into flames, procrastinators rush across planks, with less self-judgment. Place safety nets under your planks.

4th. Accept consequences, and choose to do tasks your way.

5th. Improve self-talk. Replace ‘I must finish’ with ‘when I can start’, ‘this project is huge and important’ with ‘I can do one small part’, ‘I must be perfect’ with ‘I may make mistakes’, and ‘I don’t have time to play’ with ‘I must take time to play’!

6th. Plan tasks backwards. Start at deadlines, estimate all parts, including now.

7th. Schedule only play activities. Only record work after 30 minutes of uninterrupted on-task-time. No drinks. No Facebook. Start and complete 30 minutes and then break. I know can do anything I dread for 30 minutes. I say to myself, ‘okay 30 minutes, from now, go’, and then magically several hours pass. This simple mind-trick gets me on-task every time.

If you work with people who procrastinate, encourage choices, praise achievements and avoid criticism (procrastinators self-criticize enough). Ask for commitment not compliance, and express achievable objectives not overwhelming expectations.

I hope that helps. Veel succes.

March 13, 2014

Claxton (2008) inside/outside schools

Claxton Claxton, G. (2009). What’s the point of school? Rediscovering the heart of education. Oxford: Oneword Publications.

I read Claxton for relief from my heavy-going reading list, but Claxton’s comparison of learning inside and outside schools was worth reading.

Claxton says schools offer learning just-in-case for its own sake in narrow pre-graded pieces, with prejudged students achievement levels, and smooth learning that avoids mistakes. Whereas, learning outside schools is just-in-time for real achievement in broad complex ungraded contexts, with gradual increasing skills, and steep zigzagging learning filled with risks. Learners outside schools are curious, collaborative, and seek unknown answers.

Historically, schools are monasteries and factories.  As monasteries, schools preside over knowledge, select knowledge, sever knowledge into subjects, dispense knowledge, and examine knowledge. As factories, schools forge standardized subject production lines for batches of students to manufacture workers who will do the bidding of authorities. Successful students copy, memorize and reproduce (soon outdated) knowledge, but are not prepared for our messy complex real-world. However, Claxton proposes Epistemic Apprenticeships with guides who role model learning and encourage learners to be curious, resilient, balance creativity with logic, handle feedback, approach problems calmly, and be emotionally engaged.  Learners need responsibilities, respect, reality, choices, challenges, and collaboration, which is what I strive for, but many students still demand spoon-feeding and prefer to regurgitate pre-packaged knowledge.

I live outside my original learning culture, and even after ten years, occasional culture-clashes surprise me. Here many teachers appear to believe in the fixed intelligence and predetermined achievement levels that Claxton is so against. Beliefs are powerful self-fulfilling prophecies. For me, the basic core of teaching is believing people can learn and then helping people learn. Piaget defines intelligence as knowing what to do when you don’t know what to do. Intelligence is not what learners can do easily: intelligence is how learners respond to unknown and difficult situations. Grit, resilience and perseverance are better predictors of performance than IQ tests. Believing in labels as valid and fixed only encourages people to give up in difficult situations (the Pygmalion effect).

I’ll re-read Building Learning Power soon.

 

February 27, 2014

Whitton (2010) digital game learning

WhittonWhitton, N. (2010). Learning with digital games: A practical guide to engaging students in higher education. London: Routledge.

 

 

I was curious to read Whitton’s ideas because I’ve investigated vocabulary learning in digital games, but I was surprised by issues relevant to my current research.

Whitton disagrees with Prensky (2001) that generations are digital natives or immigrants: labeling generations is not helpful but limiting. Ability to use technology is not fixed: exposure level and time affect competency and confidence. Whitton also reminds us to consider people involved, organizational issues, the learning context, and nature of technology whe using learning technologies. She offers ideas about how to evaluate the suitability of learning-technologies, based on accessibility and usability.

Whitton summarises general and adult learning theories, which I’m listing as a reminder to revise the originals. It’s time to start writing parts of my thesis: general, adult, digital and community learning!

– Knowles’ (1998) theory of adult learning, andragogy, including purpose, control, awareness of diversity, practical applications, and tasked- focus.
– Savery and Duffey’s (1995) constructivism model, including situated cognition, cognitive puzzlement, social collaboration.
– Grabinger et al (1997) and Land & Hannafin (2000) assertion that online learner-centered learning is influenced by constructivism principles, including support taking responsibility, present multiple views, encourage ownership, offer relevant learning, based on real-life experiences, support collaboration, use multiple digital-tools and rich media.
– Kolb’s (1984) Experimental Learning Cycle, including actively planning, reflecting and integrating theories.
– McConnell (2000) and Palloff & Pratt (2003) state that social constructivism facilitates collaborative learning, allows people to work to their strengths, develops critical thinking skills and creativity, validates ideas, and values different learning styles, preferences, perspectives, and skills.
– Vygotsky’s (1978) social constructivism states that learning occurs first socially and the later individually, and the Zone of Proximal Development is between what learners can do autonomously and with support and guidance.
– Lave & Wagner (1991) Communities of Practice are apprenticeships and learning groups’ norms, processes and identity.
– McConnell (2006) discusses online learning communities.
– Boud & Feletti (1991) define problem-based learning as collaborative solving of real-world, multidiscipline problems, where teachers are facilitators not experts.
– Bloom (1956) separates learning into psycho-motor, affective and cognitive domains, and further defines cognitive for step-by-step objectives as knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.
– Anderson & Krathwohl’s (2001) revision of Bloom’s taxonomy is remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating.

February 27, 2014

Kear (2011) online communities

Kear

Kear, K. (2011). Online and social networking communities: A best practice guide for educators. New York: Routledge.

The internet is not transmission and reception. Users are not passive: they learn interactively and create supportive communities using email lists, newsgroups, podcasts, e-portfolios, social bookmarking, media sharing, chat rooms, instant messaging, conferencing, virtual worlds, shared documents, micro-blogging, VoIP, discussion forums, social network, wikis, and blogs. Digital communication is synchronous and/or asynchronous, private or public, and shared one-to-one, one-to-many or many-to-many. Digital tools constantly evolve and converge, are convenient, flexible, collaborative, can mimic face-to-face contact, engaging, community building, and integrative with everyday life. However, digital-technologies can discourage participation, be impersonal, delay responses, and be overwhelming (information-overload/failure to filter). Formal digital-learning is improved by making navigation simple and transparent, encouraging social participation, providing face-to-face meetings, integrating online activities with everyday activities and assessments. Be aware that learners’ ages, attitudes to studying (deep and/or surface), topic, and discussion and skill development affect learning.

Communities were based around locations; however, people linked by shared beliefs, values, purposes, practices and interaction are communities: “network of interpersonal ties that provide sociability, support, information, belonging, and social identity” (Wellman, 2001), and include digital groups (Preece, 2000; Palloff & Pratt, 1999; Renningar & Shumar, 2002; McConnell, 2006). Online communities are groups (mutual commitment) or networks (known/unknown connections) or collectives (aggregations/actions performed by unconnected individuals) (Dron, 2007; Wiley, 2007). Traditionally information is filtered then published; however, internet information is published and then filtered (Shirky, 2008). Digital communities use stygmergy, contributions from many to develop something valuable.

Communities of practice have mutual engagement, joint enterprise, shared repertoire: members share common purposes, initially observe, actively learn through ‘legitimate peripheral participation, and develop identity (Wenger, 1998). Social presence is required to be perceived as real in digital contexts (Gunawardena & Zittle, 1997). Digital learning communities integrate social, cognitive and teaching activities by including open communication, group cohesion and affective responses. Communities of inquiry move through a cognitive trigger-event, exploration, interaction, resolution cycles (Garrison et al, 2000). The Conversational Framework explains dialogue, interaction, and feedback (Laurillards, 2009). The Five Stages Model explains learning with digital-communication: access and motivation, online socialization, informal exchange, knowledge construction, development/reflection (Salmon, 2004).

February 24, 2014

Selwyn (2011) education & technology

Selwyn

 

 

 

 

 

Selwyn, N. (2011). Education and technology: key issues and debates. London: Continuum.

I recommend reading Education and technology: ‘the’ comprehensive overview that questions how technology-use affects education.

Education is formal learning provided by an institution, usually structured, assessed and credentialized (Selwyn, 2012). Formal learning is managed by educational institutes (Rogers, 2003); whereas, informal learning is controlled by learners outside intuitions without external criteria (Livingstone, 2000). Learning is a “means to acquire a new skill or insight” (Illich 1973) and is frequently viewed as a product or process. Selywn briefly explains Behaviourist theories as passive and externally-shaped process; Constructivist theories as exploration and meaning-making; Sociocultural theories as situated within cultural contexts; Bloom’s (1956) psychomotor, affective and cognitive domains;  Situated learning as peers co- constructing knowledge; and Sfard’s (1998) learning through participation. Education is not isolated, but intertwined with families, income, gender, race, households, workplaces,  institutes, communities, cultures, commercial markets, national states and global economies.

Technology in education includes artifacts and devices, activities and practices, and social contexts (Lievrouw & Livingstone, 2002).  Previously, technology was used to seek and access information; however, currently technology enables social interaction, any time any place, and interlinks to other technologies. Information is networked and remains unfinished in a constant state of development by multiple users.

Technology can change learning processes: making learning accessible, affordable, flexible, and active (McLoughlin & Lee, 2008); enabling self-management of learning; encouraging reflective and reflexive practice (Beck-Gernsheim, 1996), promoting critical thinking (Bugeja, 2006), and providing interaction for learning communities. Online communities of practice enable learners to share knowledge in social, informal ways. Learning can now be discovered rather than delivered and negotiated rather than prescribed. We are moving towards user-driven education  (Edson, 2007), where learners seek own learning instead of institutes proving education (Collis & Gommer, 2001).  Learning-technologies may finally challenge persistent educational structures, identified by Illich in 1971, that encourage reliance on educational institutes, discourage self-management of learning, and reinforce societies’ inequalities. Here’s to the future of learning-technologies that may facilitate a change in learning cultures.

February 18, 2014

Rushton & Suter (2012) learning reflection

RushtonSuterRushton, I. & Suter, M. (2012). Reflective practice for teaching in lifelong learning. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Focusing on practical applications, UK policies, and detailed cases, the authors see reflection as a cyclic process that allows teachers to think backwards and forwards to improve learners’ experiences and achievement. They define levels of reflection as technical (daily in immediate learning context), organizational (longer-term in management/organization context), and critical (persistent in social/political context). They consider learning contexts as too complex to apply prescriptive, one-size-fits-all solutions and require teachers to integrate theory and practice (including using action research) to make professional judgments. They identify problems as learner-teachers’ reluctance, low confidence, and ignorance of use of reflective processes; teachers’ tick-the-box attitude and shallow results; and  management’s intermittent and compulsory use.

This book briefly present several theorists:

– Aristotle describes knowledge as techne (to make something), episteme (theoretical knowledge) and phronesis (practical wisdom).

– Dewey (1933) outlines his five steps of feel difficulty, locate and define, suggest solutions, develop suggestions, and experiment, which leads to accept or reject.

– Gadamer (1980) says that individuals are inseparable from their culture and history, and are unable to be objective.

– Schön (1983)asserts that teaching is messy and complex and not easily aligned to theories. Teachers must combine reflection in action, practical and personal knowledge, and knowing in action.

– Kolb (1984) demands that learning should be relevant and use concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation.

– Boud, Keog, Walking (1985) describe experimental refection as replay experience, reflect on experience, and respond to experience.

– Habermas (1987) seeks a democratic society that accepts all stakeholders voices. He defines human interaction as strategic and instrument interaction (focus on success) or communicative action (focus on understanding).

– Tripp (1993) explores critical incidents, questioning what happened, to who, where, and teachers’ reactions.

– Brookfield (1995) discusses critical reflection, including paradigmatic, prescriptive, and casual assumptions, from the perspectives of self, students, colleagues, and literature.

– Carr (1995) explains critical social science as common-sense conformity, applied science research, practical approaches with reflection/professional judgment, critical approaches to increase rational autonomy).

February 16, 2014

Brookfield (1995) critical reflection

Brookfield

 

 

 

 

 

 

Brookfield, S. D. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

I wish I’d read Brookfield 20 years ago: life changing! In just 300 pages, Becoming a critically reflective teacher gives a broad overview of critical reflection and overflows with theories and antidotes that forced me to take my thinking about learning and teaching to the next level.

General reflection focuses on examining assumptions, our taken-for-granted beliefs. Brookfield classifies assumptions at a variety of depths: at the surface casual assumptions (simple predictive understandings, uncovered easily), then digging down to prescriptive assumptions (expected behavior, obligations, processes), and deeply hidden paradigmatic assumptions (appear as objective reality, resist recognition).

Critical reflection examines power-dynamic assumptions and hegemonic assumptions. Power-dynamic assumptions reveal “how the dynamics of power permeates all educational processes” (p. 9) and hegemonic assumptions appear to work favourably for the majority, but in long term hinder them and instead help powerful minorities.

To reveal assumptions, we examine ourselves autobiographically (as learners and teachers), from students’ and colleagues’ perspectives, and through theoretical literature. Brookfield shares strategies to facilitate critical reflection (pp. 71-227) and introduces the reflective-risks of imposter syndrome, cultural suicide, lost innocence and roadrunning (pp. 229-245).

Several ideas are relevant to TESOL teachers working in foreign language learning contexts.

– The development of authentic voice (p. 47) could be hindered if teachers use second languages professionally and are, therefore, disempowered.

– Genuine learning (p. 50) could be common for teachers learning second languages.

– Role-modelling risk taking (p. 102) could be common for teachers learning second languages.

– Critical reflection as a social process (p. 141) could use digital communication and online communities instead of face-to-face communication and contexts.

– Good Practice Audits (including problem formation, individual and collective analysis of experience, and compilation of suggestions for practice) (p. 160) or parts thereof could be conducted informally without instruction.

– Cultural norms that influence identity and experience (p. 214) could be easier to recognize if teachers have been removed from their original cultures.