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 Successful students copy, memorize and reproduce (soon outdated) knowledge, but are not prepared for our messy complex real-world.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 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.