Every now and then i find myself so fortune to stumble onto things that far exceed my general expectations of the human race. Then again, since knowing some of the more vocal and free thinking individuals of this board (i.e. Mr. Collins, Mr. Miller, etc...even though sometimes it is not often seen for awhile), i have laid witness to these breaches of my expectations. To what am i referring to in this particular case? Well, to the idea of emancipated teaching/learning that is currently rattling itself around in the brain of Mr. Collins.
First, i should say that in my current realm of knowledge, there is no such thing as emancipated teaching/learning. To be honest, it is a term i coined to describe what i see Mr. Collins proposing as a style of teaching, and is in fact suggested by many developmental psychologists in the fields of moral and ethical development. I have yet to see it proposed to general education as the way Mr. Collins has described it, though i am not going to say that it doesn't exist or hasn't been proposed.
I'd like to give some kudos to Mr. Collins though for even toying with the notion of emancipated teaching. There are several reasons why i give great credence to the same notion of teaching as described by him. First, it has been show in moral developmental psychology that for most individuals, attainment of the higher stages of moral reasoning, as defined by Lawrence Kohlberg in his description of the six stages/three levels of moral reasoning, comes about at a much more rapid pace when groups of peers and associates involve themselves in something referred to transactive interactions. In these interactions, moral discussions are held in groups, with each participant allowed to equally contribute. The result is that those in the lower stages of moral reasoning are often brought up to par with those of higher stages. Likewise, a gradual shift upward of moral thinking is found within the group. This idea of transactive interaction and the general notion of James' emancipated teaching style have wide spread implications.
His style of teaching holds great promise and possibility for many reasons:
First, it has been shown that those who teach often learn as they do so, because it requires knowledge on the side of the teacher to present information. Also, it is required of a good teacher to be flexible, that is they have to know when the are wrong and be willing to accept other ideas or information. Of course, repetition and regurgitation of information is also a great way to become a retainer of knowledge.
Second, group cohesion and group work has also shown to have a positive correlation between the amount and content that a person can learn. A vast majority of Americans, and indeed those throughout other cultures, employ the use of group learning and group discussion to learn information, gather knowledge, and analyze that knowledge, and often times apply that knowledge in applicable ways.
It is for these reasons that i feel Mr. Collins has stumbled onto quite an interesting idea. His hypothesis of emancipated teaching includes these two very important factors, which should aid in the success of his style. However, there are some drawbacks that come with this style, and he has even pointed one of those out himself.
Domination of the conversation...
One of the important things that must be maintained is that no one person or subgroup should dominate the conversation, and no one individual or smaller subgroup should make others felt isolated or inferior during the "teaching" process. It must be held as a group cohesive project. In order for it to be successful, all must contribute. However, this also means that all must contribute voluntarily.
Formation of Factions...
Another problem that could become inherant in group teaching/learning exercizes is the formation of factions. This can especially happen in groups that become very large, or likewise very small. Factions can cause people to abandon free thinking and free assocation for the bandwagon, jumping onto a "powerful" and "well established" group's thinking, as opposed to saying what they believe, no matter how inane it could be. In small groups, this would virtually destroy the idea of having everyone contribute something meaningful and at the same time different. It would equate to trying to teach to a reflection in the mirror. In large groups, it could easily be compared to the rivarly between political parties in government.
Loss of Purpose...
This is a problem of less concern, but none-the-less can cause issues, depending on the true motivation and general attitude of the group. In some circumstances, a group while be doing fine discussing various issues of importance, and learning valuable material, but then it can go off kilter and at the next instance the group is discussing something of no consequence. This problem is sometimes beneficial though, because what may seem like a pointless purpose can very well result in a discussion of quite an interesting stance.
Despite the way it sounds, these problems are easily adjusted for. For one, here is where Mr. Collins might require what one might dub the "teacher", though for my purposes, and to be more accurate, i would call a "mediator". The mediator would be the person who would keep the group cohesion intact. Some people here would chose someone of higher stance or stature, like an older individual, or higher classman. However this doesn't mean that even a peer couldn't be named mediator. There is a difference though. If mediator is an older individual, he or she should restrain from involving themselves too much, for fear that they would in actuality control the conversation and group direction. A peer mediator by contrast could involve themselves in the conversation, but once again must keep themselves from exerting unnecessary and unwanted control.
Also, in order to keep the other problem, forming factions, from becoming an issue, group dynamics should be kept at a moderate level. A group of less than 4 people may not necessary be advisable, but could still be worked with. Likewise, "nothing in excess". Groups the size of a small classroom would probably be okay, but the general amount should probably be kept to 15, give or take. After that, you might want to consider making two groups.
Anyway though, that is my preliminary input on the subject. I could probably write more, but i suspect that quite the majority of you are swearing at me and wishing me a good deal of unfathomable pain. As for Mr. Collins, i am quite eager to hear as to how this whole emancipated teaching style works out. In fact, i am highly interested in the results. If you could write some observations down, in a scientific-style of unbiased observations, that would be EVEN more useful. You should consider, if this experiment is successful, going to the ASB and forming some sort of "club" so that you could use the school resources for more indepth emancipated teaching. If it does work, i might even be able to give you some backing from up here...though that is still in question. I do guarantee though that a great many of the developmentalists up here would be highly interested in your results if you could pull it off. Hehe, who knows, you might revolutionize the way even a minute number of public schools teach...
As for the rest of you who are indeed dreaming of random acts of violence...i have something for you all who proved patient with my unending rambling...
Here is a select clip of the movie "The Matrix". Using the highly advanced HMT translator (Hyper-Movie-Thought), we are able to decode and display what Mr. Reeves was thinking during the filming of this scene. Imagine the implications of the HMT translator.
Special thanks to Mr. Collins for supplying this image months ago.
One day someone is going to accuse me of using pictures as a reinforcer.
Well, that's all for now.
Oh wait... As for the dummy head in question, yes indeed i would want such a prop. Thanks. I will get it whenever i am down there next time.
All that said, i'm done.
Nice.
No comments:
Post a Comment