Getting into the classroom

All this reflection and reading has been enjoyable and certainly given me food for thought. Spending the last three days working in solitary at home is so separate from the classroom - tomorrow I'm going into a local primary school in the morning for some observation, to reground myself and get my head out of the books, off the computer and into a bit of real life.

Here's a picture of a kitten in a hat and glasses.

You're welcome.

Perspectives on Education

Two brilliant TED talks that have changed my view on education in this age of technology and globalisation. If you're interested in teaching or the human capacity for learning, I recommend you watch these talks!

Sugata Mitra 'Child Driven Education'. Children in the slums of Delhi were given The Hole in the Wall - a computer with access to the internet. Through this and further experiments Mitra has proven that groups of children learn on their own. Their natural curiosity, the control over their learning and collaboration using a computer have proven that this method of learning really works. In The Kalikuppam Experiment 2007. (Published in the British Journal of Education and Technology, 2010) He showed that, left to a computer and their own devices, in two months Indian children grasped some knowledge biotechnology in English. (Oh and, by the way, they don't speak English). "If you have interest, then you have education." I then ask myself, what is the point of having teachers?

Sir Ken Robertson's TED talk 'Changing Education Paradigms' attacks the fundamentals of our education system, a system based on the Age of Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution, where we are told if we do well in schools we will go to university to get a degree so we can get a good job. Why is the educational system based on out-dated models?

Both Mitra and Robinson appear to have revolutionary ideas, but they actually make a lot of sense. We are living in an incredible age where access to information is at our fingertips, we can share our creative thoughts and collaborate across the globe. We are bombarded with video and images in our daily lives. How are children supposed to find education interesting if it does not catch up with the pace of our Internet age? And further to that, why do we divide children up into year groups according to age? Do we do that in the workplace? Why do we assume that our potential for learning is dependant upon of social class? Why is there a view that people are divided into 'academic' and 'non academic'? We have to think differently about human capacity. And what about testing? Why must we test, test and test children - at GCSE's, Standard Grades etc.

Robinson's visual description of the Longitudinal test - a test that tells you if you are a 'genius' in divergent thinking. Have a look at the image starting at the Cod asking the question. Kindergarten children came back with 98% as geniuses in divergent thinking. That percentage reduced as children got older and went to school. Food for thought there. Have I really been part of an education system that stamps out my divergent thinking? At school was I really considered a 'non academic' because I was in the bottom divisions of Maths, Science and English? We are all born as divergent thinkers. Why must we be put through an ancient educational system, where social class determines your abilities and tests are compulsory hoops to jump. We have got to have basic literacy and numeracy skills. I certainly wouldn't be able to sit here writing this without them. Mitra's method allows children to explore their own line of questioning- this makes me think- surely this will cause chaos. Allow children to lead their learning? What a stupid idea, they will never learn anything! What Mitra has proven to me is that children want to learn. Humans by our very nature are curious, and creative. The teacher is there as a guide. We cannot learn by sitting still and not talking. Learning is messy.

There's a challenge as a teacher. The government wants results, parents want their children to succeed. How do I include these revolutionary ideas of Mitra and Robinson when I am teaching, and receiving pressure from parents, management and educational bodies? I don't know. I've not taught one lesson yet, and these are certainly not the only challenges I will face.

In addition, a recent interview with our First Minister 'Our job is to maintain our educational standards for all children'. "My absolute priority... is to make sure that we give every young person, regardless fo their background or family circumstances, the same chances to succeed at school...That's why we have established a £100m Scottish Attainment Challenge, directing extra resources to more than 300 primary schools in our most deprived areas." Nice one, Nic.

Professional Studies TSDA 2, Further Challenge continued.. An Introduction to the Nature/Nurture Debate

Activity 3

"Determinism is the philosophical idea that every event or state of affairs, including every human decision and action, is the inevitable and necessary consequence of antecedent states of affairs." - The Information Philosopher

A synopsis and analysis of the given videos and text.
The video clip from the Centre of the Developing Child at Harvard University gives evidence that at a very early age, biologically the brain is prepared to be shaped by development. Babies brains are preprogrammed to learn language. Abuse/neglect disrupts the circuiting in the brains architecture as it is being built. The argument put forward is to 'get it right early' rather than trying to 'fix it later'. In other words, providing  children with the basic physical and emotional needs such as love and security, making solid foundations for normative cognitive development. But how do we determine what is the 'right' set of needs for an infant? Who should determine them? Is it right that they are determined by anyone except parents?

"Early traumatic experience or sever neglect may have long-term deleterious effects on some individuals... But early trauma and neglect can also result in some children become more resilient." The Deterministic Myth of the 'Early Years' Dr Helene Guldberg (2013). Dr Guldberg goes on to ask; "when the window [of opportuniy] purportedly shuts, after infancy, is it too late to turn things around?" Is it reasonable to determine that a child's cognitive development, their 'nature', is set? From a teaching perspective, certainly not. A child comes into class one day shy, withdrawn and quiet, the next day they come bouncing in. In both the short-term and long-term behaviour of a child, we cannot write-off an individual as a 'bad egg'. In Sarah Jayne's TED talk, she discusses the continued development of the brain beyond the early years and into adolescence. Synapses in the brain are 'pruned away' during this time, brain development continues. "The brain is still more complicated, supremely so, and it is foolish to make predictions about young children's behaviour using current findings from the field of brain research...You need to keep up with ideas about scientific research in the fields of genetic and the neurosciences, but do not be seduced by them." -Understanding Early Childhood;  Issues and controversies, Helen Penn, second edition p92 2008. In extreme cases of initial and continued neglect of a child, child development, in some cases, will be disrupted. A child who comes from an abusive home, without receiving support or intervention, will have significant effect on their learning in the classroom. This does not mean that in the future they will be unable to lead healthy adult lives. We must always be open minded and aware that our understanding and expression of love, support and care are different. "The idea that they way parents...generally intereact with their baby reflects how much they love their baby...is based on prejudice not 'science'. We all have our way for showing love to each other." Guldberg. This introduction into the nature nurture debate has reinforced my thoughts and philosophies. It is certainly important to remember that as teachers we should first understand each child individually, before we begin to teach.

"We cannot change the past, but we can change the future, and we will be much better placed to do that without infant determinism." Guldberg. I agree, but in extreme cases of neglect and abuse, it is with far greater challenges that we attempt to change the future.