In discussing this particular article, I was reminded of a similar (current day) situation presented at a conference I recently attended. The article discusses "who best qualifies as the expert" - historians or practitioners? More recently, in an effort to support the growing number of International students in the post-secondary classroom, some institutions are experimenting with a model of content experts and language experts co-teaching courses. One of the challenges presented was "who best qualifies as the expert" - content faculty or language faculty. An interesting parallel which led me to ask, why does one need to take precedence over the other?
Teaching Philosophy
My philosophy of practice is hard to contextualize because in some ways, it knows few boundaries. What I mean by this is that as an “educationist" (Christou & Bullock, 2012), I practice spontaneously and what guides me, is need. I do as much as I can, for as many people as I can, to the best of my ability and try to remain open to possibilities.
​
Christou and Bullock depict this in The Case for Philosophical Mindedness, they say “A philosophically minded educationist, by contrast, depicts theory and practice as being densely interwoven. (2012)” I see my care for practice as inherent and a part of who I am as a person. I take my role personally and passionately.
​
As such, I would define my philosophy of practice as having three core elements:
​
-
To engage in a mutual (but not exclusive) learning journey with stakeholders as required.
In Moral Education in an Age of Globalization, Noddings discusses the importance of relationship in education. He tells us that, “Emphasis is on the relation, and, by definition, at least two parties are involved. In order for the relation to be properly labeled caring, the cared-for must somehow recognize the efforts of the carer as caring" (2010). It is my belief that learning happens best when there is a trust relationship. Students need to feel that you are invested in the learning opportunity with and that you are just as engaged as they are in the process. As an educator, I wish to “incite rethinking rather than demand it" (Mayo, 2011).
​
-
To participate in the journey with positive intent and an open mind.
The fear of judgement has the capacity to impede growth of new concepts and ideas. We need to ensure safe learning opportunities that give students the freedom to participate and ask questions. I believe we need to participate with energy, regard learning with excitement, and spark student imagination. Ramsey Musallam inspired me when he said, “as educators we need to leave behind this simple role as disseminators of content and embrace a new paradigm as cultivators of curiosity and inquiry.” I recognize that content is relevant, but the greater value lies in having the curiosity to learn more and constantly question why. Rakow taught me that, “The trials and tribulations, in a classroom do not begin and end with the textbook, but include other texts as well: the text that students bring to the classroom about who and what make a good class; the text of received knowledge, the texts about gender and race our students bring with them from their own experience and the “common sense” of their cultural groups (2001)“. It is my goal to consider their contexts with an open mind and with a positive outlook.
​
-
To engage information with transparency and a critical eye.
Christou and Bullock remind us that we need to constantly look for a deeper richer understanding. As a philosophically minded teacher, I never wish to “rest on my presumptions" (2012). It is important that I approach information critically, seeking always to scrutinize the content with a mindset of alternative views. It is my goal to resist the temptation to default to the familiar and give licence and opportunity for innovative concepts and creative ways of thinking when it comes to teaching and learning.
I have come to appreciate that teaching and learning are inextricably related, educators cannot effectively teach unless they are open to learning themselves. Teaching is a living practice, built on relationships and requires self-awareness and an awareness of others. Teaching and learning does not always guarantee outcomes, but rather opens the opportunity for altered perspectives and perhaps a shared consensus. In my philosophy of practice, the journey is just as important as the end destination.
Christou, T. M., & Bullock, S. M. (2012). The case for philosophical mindedness. Paideusis, 20(1), 14–23.
Mayo, C. (2011). Philosophy of education is bent. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 30(5), 471–476. doi: 10.1007/s11217-011-9248-5
​
Rakow, L. F. (2001). Teaching Against the Text. Feminist Media Studies, 1(3), 381-383. doi:10.1080/14680770152649569
Innovation in Teaching and Learning
Definitions
Corinne Whitney
Professional Portfolio
How Is This All Connected?
Innovation, creativity, teaching and learning share much in common. The way I see it, the birth of creativity is reliant on innovation. Innovation is moot in the absence of creativity. Creativity and innovation play an important role in teaching because without them we limit our teaching practice and the learners we seek to influence. Finally, innovation and creativity in learners and learning foster an environment open to endless possibilities. This, for me, is how it is all connected.
​
Bodies of Work
History of Teaching and Learning
Discussion Post - July 2017
Historical Context/Argument Being Explored
In this particular article, Rury examines the role historians over the years and across a number of fields – scientific historians, economist historians, lawyer historians and finally historical educational researchers.In response to this article, I’ve chosen to highlight Rury’s discussion related to the internalist versus externalist historical viewpoints. It is clear that each field held a critical lens with regard to “who” best qualified to as a historian in each of the fields. I am not convinced that one particular sect (historian versus practitioner) was better over the other. I see that each brought strengths to the process and ultimately, having both content experts and historians involved led to a more well-rounded body of work.
Rury begins his discussion with historians of science and explains that they were not always well received by the larger historical profession, as they were seen as not well trained in history and historical methodology. Even as late as the 1980s, after the inception of dozens of doctoral programs and courses related to the history of science and the establishment of organizations such as the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences (AAAS), the History of Science Society (HSS), the American Historical Associations (AHA), training for historians of science was still viewed as too narrow or provincial (Rury, 2006).
​
He goes on to reflect on two camps of thought, “the internalist view” and the “externalist view.” Proponents of internalist viewpoint saw the development of science (the history of science) as more logical and fact based with a more linear/chronological progression. Individuals of the externalist camp seemed to have a more holistic historical view, seeking to document historical science within a larger social and cultural context (2006).
​
In looking at economist historians, it was clear that there was a good basis for each viewpoint. From an internalist standpoint, the field of economics was data driven and rife with statistics and concrete theories to support a more introspective approach. However, the 1960s and 1970s saw a burgeoning new concept in economic history called “new economic history” (Rury, 2006) and this shifted historical thinking to a broader “externalist” view. Fogel, a leading economic historian, began to use data and statistical information to better interpret economic growth. Rury describes the work of economic historians today as, “guided by some extent by a research agenda informed by the greater economics profession.” (2006)
​
Lawyer historians were not dissimilar to scientific historians. Early in history, most legal historians were lawyers and the law was portrayed with a very narrow view, with little or not thought given to the wider social context. The 1950’s saw the beginning of change and Willard Hurst, a leader in the field, argued “that the law was both a reflection of the social issues at play in a given period, and a factor that helped shape the larger society (Rury, 2006). This of course resonates even today, when one considers that the law is continually in flux to keep current with social issues like same sex marriage, or issues related to privacy and the internet.
​
Last but not least, in considering educational history. Early historians were again accused of having a very traditional, narrow view and not seeking to document the wider impact of educational history. Individuals such as Bailyn and Cremin were critics of the limited and predictable view of history of education and called for “a more expansive understanding of the educational process and a careful explication of social influences on learning” (Rury, 2006). In looking at the broader context, we begin to inform ourselves more thoroughly. While a part of education is most certainly data driven, I would argue that, to a greater extent, education requires us to adopt a more holistic approach. It is vital that we review the past in order to better navigate the future of education.
How does this article address/frame the following terms?
​
In considering how this article addresses or frames innovation, creativity, teaching and learning. I think that in implementing changes to the way history was recorded in terms of content and breadth of information shows innovation. Creativity lies in the eyes of the critics who were always questioning historical research and seeking to deepen and broaden the scope of research development. In teaching and learning, each field boasts a myriad of organizations devoted to the development of historical data and research that seek to train and inform researchers in the field of science, economics, law and education.
What questions do you have of the author after having read the article?
My question for this particular author would be:
In a fast-paced competitive world, how does informed research keep up with the need for education to be current and relevant without rushing the process?
​
Rury, J. (2006). The Curious Status of the History of Education: A Parallel Perspective. History of Education Quarterly, 46(4), 571-598. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20462103
This blog post was a discussion related to thoughts expressed by Ken Osborne in A history teacher looks back, aand ideas expressed in a Ted Talk by Sir Kenneth Robinson. Osborne and Robinson share similar views, proposing that educators need to invoke critical, creative thinking and ignite a student's passion for learning.
BLOG POST #3: CHANGE AND INNOVATION - HISTORICALLY SPEAKING
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
Osborne believed the study of history should incorporate some experience of source work, and he speaks about his search for other publications and collections that would liven up his teaching in the classroom and provide a basis for source work exercises for his students. This is what he describes as ‘teaching against the textbook” (2012).
​
I found myself asking, what does “teaching against the textbook” mean in the broader context? How do we recognize and apply it to the classroom and to other disciplines?
​
Let me introduce to you, Sir Ken Robinson and his Ted Talk video “How to escape education's death valley.” I really appreciated his take on provoking thought and not controlling it. His analogy that education is not a mechanical system; it’s a human system resonated (2013)!
Robinson outlines three principles crucial for the human mind to flourish. The principles he discusses are as follows:
​
People are naturally different and diverse. Educational systems need to embrace a broad curriculum that engages students across a spectrum of skills and talents.
​
Curiosity is the engine of achievement. Robinson proclaims that teaching is a creative profession and that as educators we are not just there to pass on information. He says, “what great teachers also do is mentor, stimulate, provoke, engage.” He further adds, “You see, in the end, education is about learning. If there's no learning going on, there's no education going on.”
​
Human life is inherently creative. People create their personal paradigms by imagining alternatives and possibilities for themselves, and it is the role of education to diverge from standardization and allow for creativity.
​
While he makes no direct reference to teaching against the textbook, I would argue that his ideas are very similar to Osborne's in that he recognizes the importance of student engagement and empowerment. Like Osborne, he recognizes that there is a place in education for facts and standardization, however the should not be the central component. Teachers must be central to a movement toward change and encourage others in this movement.
I feel as though there is more to this train of thought…stay tuned!
Here is the link to the Ted Talk: How to escape education's death valley.
​
References
​
Osborne, K. (2012). A history teacher looks back. The Canadian Historical Review, 93(1), 108–137. doi: 10.3138/chr.93.1.108
​
Robinson, K. (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2017, fromhttps://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_how_to_escape_education_s_death_valley/transcript?language=en...
​
This week, I spent time thinking about change and innovation from a historical perspective. I enjoyed reading, A history teacher looks back, and learning about Osborne and his life as a history teacher. Looking at Osborne and his career, I would say he is a great representation of change and innovation.
​
Throughout the paper, he speaks largely about teaching historical thinking and the importance of engaging and empowering students to think critically. He refers to “teaching against the textbook”, which piqued my curiosity, and so, this entry is dedicated to exploring this innovative concept.
Historical Thinking
Discussion Post - July 2017
The articles reviewed in this post truly helped me solidify concepts related to historical thinking. I connected to the ideas expressed and was inspired to further explore what it meant to "teach against the textbook."
Historical Context/Argument Being Explored
​
The two articles recount very similar views related to teaching students to learn historical thinking and not just historical facts. Seixas & Peck, as well as Osborne both relate the importance of teaching historical thinking to students and define elements of historical thinking.In Challenges and prospects for Canadian social studies, I recognize all too well (from my own experience in history class), Seixas and Peck’s reference to history instruction taught as facts with little explanation for the reasons why, nor little requirement for students to interpret events or assess their impact (2004).
Osborne emphasized the importance of teaching understanding of history and not just facts. He spoke about his own efforts as a teacher to paint a picture for his students, asking them “to see the past through the eyes of the people they were studying” (2012). In reading Osborne’s take on seeing the past through the eyes of the people, I am reminded of my affinity for period dramas such as “The Crown” and “Call the Midwife”. Both depict a time in history, but a much more engaging version of events and the people involved.
​
Seixas & Peck’s elements of historical thinking were also of note and there are certainly parallels drawn by Osborne. They are as follows:
Significance in Historical Thinking
​
A part of historical thinking is the ability to determine significant events. So what qualifies as significant? According to Seixas & Peck, significant events are those that have had the greatest impact on people and the environment, both then (in the past) and now (in the present). It is both the impact and relationships these events have had on people and events of past and present that are a determiner of significance. Osborne references this as well; in A history teacher looks back. The Canadian Historical Review, he speaks about students making two-way connections between past and present and having the capacity to draw parallels and see how events are connected.
Epistemology and Evidence
​
I would liken this particular concept to the idea of critical thinking. In teaching historical thinking, students need to question the validity of information and decide which sources they choose to believe. Students need to discern accounts of history and consider the viability of the account. They need to consider bias and measure information for authenticity. Osborne references Gutman’s observation that, “the ‘central value of historical understanding is that it transforms historical givens into historical contingencies’ so that we come to realize that the way things are is not necessarily the way they have to be, a realization that opens up the possibility of “creative and critical (or radical) thought.
Continuity and Change
​
Change and continuity is the ability to appreciate the degree of change over a period. One’s ability to contemplate significant versus subtle changes (degree of change). Of course, age is a factor. When one has lived over a number of years, they have a larger window with which to draw from. The ability to understand this type of change can also be impacted by an individual’s historical location; particularly if someone has experienced war, immigrated to a new country or experiencing a significant technological event (such as the internet). Osborne account of his experiences as a history teacher are an example of someone who is able to comment on the degree of change and expresses a degree of hopefulness.
Progress and Decline
Inextricably linked to the concept of continuity and change, this particular facet of historical thinking speaks to the evaluation of the changes. In recognizing that change has taken place, a historical thinker explores whether the change has had a positive impact. Examples of the standards that they might measure against could be economic, political, environmental, or a myriad of other aspects.
Empathy
​
Simply put, empathy is framing historical events in the eyes of the individuals involved – walking a mile in their shoes. Osborne believes that storytelling is an important part of a history teacher’s toolkit. Throughout his review, he speaks of the importance of painting a picture and engaging student’s in the people they were studying.
How does this article address/frame the following terms?
Innovation
Innovation – to implement, alter, or improve a product, process or situation. In considering historical thinking, I would ascribe the innovation to be the implementation of strategies to improve student’s ability to think historically.
Creativity
Creativity - imaginative thoughts or unique concepts that set the foundation for new thinking. Certainly, in considering the elements for historical thinking we see a much more creative approach to processing historical facts. The approach to the subject matter (historical events) is much more creative in nature and attempts to engage students in critical thinking.
Teaching
Teaching is the act of sharing learned knowledge, past experiences and expertise with the intent to enlighten and support learners in acquiring information. I would argue that teaching is much broader under the auspices of historical thinking. In teaching historical thinking, teachers need to be enveloped in the subject matter. In addition to the actual events, they need to guide students in framing the events and asking critical questions related to their impact.
Learning
Learning is described as the process of engaging in inquiry and having the curiosity to explore, analyze and frame new information for personal/professional improvement. Students who engage in historical thinking challenge historical events. They question information provided and build relationships to both past and present. They frame this new information to better understand the change that has occurred and how that change has impacted their present day life.
Questions?
One particular idea that Osborne speaks about is “teaching against the textbook”. He describes it as a way, to get students to think historically, using sources that contradicted textbooks. In doing so, it opened opportunity for debate and discourse related to events and historical information. I would ask Mr. Osborne about wider applications of “teaching against the textbook” and his thoughts on whether other areas of study would lend to such an idea.
​
References
Osborne, K. (2012). A history teacher looks back. The Canadian Historical Review, 93(1), 108–137. doi: 10.3138/chr.93.1.108
Seixas, P., & Peck, C. (2004). Teaching historical thinking. In A. Sears & I. Wright (Eds.), Challenges and prospects for Canadian social studies (pp. 109 – 117). Vancouver: Pacific Educational Pres
​
Historical Thinking
Blog Post - August 2017
I was inspired to further explore the concept of teaching against the text. Although the concept was familiar, I was compelled to know more about it.
BLOG POST #4: CHANGE AND INNOVATION - RAGE AGAINST...
​
So this week, I want to explore the concept of teaching against the text and consider how this form of inquiry impacts openness to change.
​
For me, “teaching against the text” conjures up images of a mutinous teacher (perhaps Johnny Depp) refusing to adhere to a rigidly planned, outdated curriculum mandated by a faceless administration.
​
Theatrics aside, teaching against the text is not quite that melodramatic, but what is dramatic is the opportunity it offers students to explore, engage and align content to their own context. If you think about it, the act of pursuing other perspectives, new sources of information and seeking to develop a more refined perspective is the work of someone quite enlightened…not someone subversive.
​
​Lana Rakow, a professor at the University of North Dakota, writes of her experiences teaching against the text in her feminist courses. When asked (by a student) why she still uses a textbook that is seemingly so flawed, her reply is “students need to know what is received knowledge in an area in order to understand its critique and alternatives” (2001). She goes on to say that, “The trials and tribulations of a feminist and otherwise critical scholar in the classroom do not begin and end with the textbook…” There is little question, that as teachers we need to look outside of the context of the textbook and require our students to also search for alternative answers.
​
In giving students opportunity to research, challenge and question, they are more actively engaged in the process of learning and looking for assertions that have meaning for them. Students are more open to change because they themselves are involved and included in the process.
I would remiss if I did not mention that teaching against the text also requires us (as teachers), to be open to the idea of change. One needs to accept the added work that is required of faculty who teach against the text. Rakow warns, “It is more work and it is more painful to “teach against the text” of the media, the classroom and the textbook" (2001). Teachers need to be present and prepared to engage in new information put forward by students who challenge them and be open to scrutinizing new viewpoints in assignments submitted for grading.
While teaching against the textbook may not be as theatrical as first represented in the blog, it is clear that it can create a dramatic difference in terms of learning and broadening student engagement.
References
Rakow, L. F. (2001). Teaching Against the Text. Feminist Media Studies, 1(3), 381-383. doi:10.1080/14680770152649569
Philosophical Thinking
Discussion Posts - August 2017
I was able to relate to Nodding's idea of the "carer". Particularly relevant for me, was that I was able to relate the ideas back to my own workplace and a cultural diversity awareness program implemented by senior leadership at the college.
​
I have included my discussion post in response to Illich's Why We Must Abolish Schooling. It was an important response because his idea's related to education as forward thinking, however they were very representative of historical indigenous teaching practices and I felt it important to highlight this parallel.
In Moral Education in an Age of Globalization, Noddings discusses the idea of care theory, and what it means to implement such a model globally and in the classroom as educators. As someone who works daily with an International student population, I relate well this model and know how very difficult it can be to implement and sustain such ideals.
​
In care theory, the carer needs to be attentive and they must set aside their own values and projects. Second, the carer must either act to either satisfy the expressed need or suggest and alternative goal (Noddings, 2010). It is so vital that there is also a willingness to do so; willingness and openness on the part of the carer and cared for, without this, there really is no chance for care theory to thrive. This is of course where the “relational” aspect comes into play and the idea that both parties work collectively to negotiate the relationship and respond to individual’s needs. The idea of care theory is very commendable, but individuals require a good level of maturity and enlightenment to set aside their own values and put the needs of others before theirs and in some settings – maturity and enlightenment can sometimes be in very short supply in the classroom.
​
Noddings goes on to differentiate between care and justice. I was particularly drawn to his comment that the word justice might be represented as a system whereby our caring responds to the needs of others. I agree that a key element to this is to “establish lines of communication – to listen attentively to the needs expressed and to learn something about how these the others conceive of justice.” I would add that follow through and that continued dialogue is also a key ingredient. Efforts to appreciate and understand each other cannot be isolated pockets of contact with no further action taken. I say this because in reading this article, I thought about our own efforts related to “internationalization” at the college. We spent a lot of money last year to develop a sustainable model for “Cultural Diversity Awareness” training.
The training was mandatory for all faculty and staff at the college and consisted of one single four-hour workshop delivered by PowerPoint. The model has not been sustained, nor has it (in my opinion) raised much awareness related to cultural diversity. I found that in using the term “mandatory” to sell the training, there was already a negative tone. In giving feedback, I have consistently held to the points that the dialogue was one way (no opportunity to discuss before or after). We missed a huge sector of our college community – the students! I also recommended that that there be follow-up workshops to reinforce the concepts related to nurturing a more open climate in the classroom – no response.
​
In terms of teaching and learning, Nodding describes these concepts as a reciprocal relationship. Teaching and learning is more of a negotiation and discussion related to how individuals each view the world and how we can arrive at a common understanding or agree to disagree. Innovation and creativity are also very important to this model in that care theory requires us to be persistent in our dialogue and constantly be cognizant of the behavior we model. I loved his final note that, “Confirmation is among the loveliest of moral gestures” (2010). There is no question that affirmation is a powerful tool and motivates people to be better and do better.
Questions?
In considering the care theory model, I think about the effort required to properly model and support care theory in the classroom. In this day of budget cuts, larger classroom sizes with even greater diversity, how do we effectively sustain a caring supportive environment over the longer term?
​
Students are some of the toughest customers when it comes to acceptance, open communication and being sensitive to others. Sometimes, a few students can really infect the tone of a class, even with patience and understanding they continue to resist. How can we deal with resistant persisters in the class?
References
Noddings, N. (2010). Moral education in an age of globalization. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 42(4), 390–396. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-5812.2008.00487.x
Moral Education in an Age of Globalization
Why We Must Abolish Schooling
Illich holds a disparaging view of the traditional school model and argues that the system is flawed, creates a false sense of reliance on schooling for the sake of learning a prescribed set of circumstances (curriculum) and not for the sake of education. He comments, “For both groups the reliance on institutional treatment renders independent accomplishment suspect” (1970). Regardless of funding, marginalization of the poor is inevitable under this system because they “lack educational opportunities which are casually available to the middle class child.”
​
I also found it interesting that later in the article, Illich differentiates between learning and education and proposes that skills instruction, “relies on the relationship between partners who already have some of the keys which give access to memories stored in and by the community. It relies on the critical intent of all those who use memories creatively It relies on the surprise of the unexpected question which open new doors for the inquirer.” To me, it spoke to our earlier reading on historical thinking and how important (and relevant) it is to promote historical thinking and give students impetus to ask questions and seek different versions of truth. In A History Teacher Looks Back, Osborne talks about the importance of emphasizing understanding rather than an accumulation of factual knowledge. He goes on to say that he tried to help students see the past through the eyes of the people they were studying. I think that Illich’s proposal is similar in that he asks that we consider an alternate view of teaching and learning. He recognizes that most learning happens casually and that education needs to be experienced more authentically.
​
Illich sees learning as less intentional and ingrained in an individual’s framework of curiosity. Individuals seeking useful knowledge, knowledge that is useful for them. Creativity and Innovation lie in the freedom to choose what piques their interest and then gather with like-minded individuals who seek answers to the same questions – informal learning circles if you will!
​
Not to get off topic, but in reading this article and Illich’s view of teaching and learning, I kept thinking about the authentic Indigenous approach to learning. I am by no means an expert of traditional indigenous education, but I have had enough exposure to some of the holistic teachings from Elders at Georgian College and I couldn’t help but think about lessons I’ve experienced related to the Medicine Wheel, Talking Circles, Drum Circles and the traditional storytelling that took place. To me, it is an excellent example of learning history and skills in a much more real way. Erica Neeganagwedgin, in A critical review of Aboriginal education in Canada: Eurocentric dominance impact and everyday denial, wrote that “Learning was a continuous process. Adult family members as well as extended family taught what was needed in order for children to become self-sufficient. The extended family of kin and relatives were all teachers, with each member of the family giving something of his/her knowledge to the growing child. This was done so that children would be able to carry on traditions and have the skills necessary for themselves and their community to survive (Aisaican 2001).
​
Questions?
When I think about the intention of the indigenous teaching, I would ask Ilich if this long-standing historical illustration is not an example of the modern day model he is proposing in his article?
​
References
Illich, I. (1970, July 2). Why we must abolish schooling. The New York Review of Books, 15(1), 9–15.
Neeganagwedgin, E. (2013). A critical review of Aboriginal education in Canada: Eurocentric dominance impact and everyday denial. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 17(1), 15-31. doi:10.1080/13603116.2011.580461
Osborne, K. (2012). A history teacher looks back. The Canadian Historical Review, 93(1), 108–137. doi: 10.3138/chr.93.1.108
Philosophical Mindedness
Discussion Post - August 2017
I wanted to highlight one final post related to philosophical mindedness. The article was a great summary of many of the beliefs I hold true. Concepts related to inclusiveness and the idea that learning is not limited to the four walls of the classroom. I also appreciated the reminder that we should not rest on our presumptions, but open ourselves to continuously explore new constructs.
Learning is seen by Christou and Bullock, as an ongoing practice interwoven with philosophical intent. They highlight Hadot’s definition of philosophical mindedness, as “the philosophical way of life….no longer a theory divided into parts, but a unitary act, which consists in living logic, physics, and ethics.’ Being philosophically minded, in other words hinges on educationists conceptualizing philosophy as a way of being rather than as a body of discourse, or as a body of knowledge” (2012). We need to infuse philosophical inquiry into all parts of life, not just view philosophical pursuits as singular acts with a specific outcome.
​
Being a philosophically minded educationist requires an innovative approach. Educationists need to contemplate educational frameworks differently. They need to leave room for exploration and not regard curriculum as the ultimate truth. Of course, they need to present the curriculum, but see the information as “provisionally and tentatively claimed” (2012). It is current truth, until we learn or come to know otherwise.
​
Questions?
Christou and Bullock write, “It is far easier for us to reject new suppositions in favour of reinforcing our existing beliefs,” (2012), people feel uncomfortable and immediately seek to discount alternative viewpoints. Why do people (generally) seek to shut down discordant ideas and seek to defend pre-existing presumptions that they’ve been presented with? Why do these presumptions hold more credence?
References
Christou, T. M., & Bullock, S. M. (2012). The case for philosophical mindedness. Paideusis, 20(1), 14–23.
What a great article by Christou and Bullock! The Case for Philosophical Mindedness, is a great review of how philosophy is traditionally held and what it actually could (should) be.
​
Teaching - The article is very encouraging and asks that we view ourselves as “educationists” instead of educators or pedagogues. The term is more inclusive and takes into account the myriad of stakeholders. I liked this because it represents that we are all facilitators of change in some way. Learning is not limited to confines of a classroom, learning has potential in so many ways and in so many different places.
History of Teaching and Learning
Blog Post - July 2017
Other Blog Posts of Note
August 2017
BLOG POST #6: CHANGE EXPLORATION VERSUS CHANGE - WHEREIN LIES THE VALUE?
This week was charged with exploration related to philosophical thinking, as well as philosophical teaching and learning. In reading articles related to the topic, one thought that continuously followed was that the value in change is not really in the change itself, but the journey we take to explore said change.
​
“Have we wasted our time, if no change is actually affected?” I say, absolutely not! There is greater value in the path we take to consider and (potentially) realize change, than in the change itself.
In Philosophy of Education is Bent, Mayo writes, “The forms of indirect communication and partial understanding that derive from interactions across differences may be helpful reminders that everything does not need to be clear and measurable in order to have a positive effect” (2011). In seeking change, we are exposed to new viewpoints, we build greater awareness and establish new relationships. Mayo goes on to say, “Because as close as we may get to one another, we may not come to easy understandings or even enduring concord but at least we’re trying”(2011). The effort to reach a consensus holds value. There may not be unilateral agreement, but in making an making an effort to hear other voices, we build and appreciation for their conceptions and are open up to other possibilities.
​
Noddings discusses care ethics in Moral Education in an Age of Globalization and echoes similar sentiments, “Our task is to work together to forge a concept of justice that both can accept, or to reach an agreement that allows the groups to hold different views of justice without breaking off dialogue” (2010). It would seem once again that change does not need to be the ultimate outcome, but there is growth in understanding and consideration for alternative ideas.
​
One final highlight related to this theme is an article by Theodore Michael Christou and Shawn Michael Bullock called Philosophical Mindedness. In The Case for Philosophical Mindedness, both advocate for a very connected approach to inquiry. They propose we are “educationists” and need to weave philosophical thinking into as many facets of our life as possible. Christou and Bullock go on to discuss Socrates and his belief that a definitive outcome may not always be the end result, but it is the richer, deeper understanding that brings value. “For Socrates, who most frequently claimed no answers but who had no lack of questions to direct at others’ assumptions, the educator’s role was to help students bring forward ides hat were true and just, regardless of their prior convictions”(2012).
​
In looking at all of this, I would rephrase the old addict “Change is Good” to read, “Change is Good, but the Road to Change is Better”.
​
References
Christou, T. M., & Bullock, S. M. (2012). The case for philosophical mindedness. Paideusis, 20(1), 14–23.
Mayo, C. (2011). Philosophy of education is bent. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 30(5), 471–476. doi: 10.1007/s11217-011-9248-5
Noddings, N. (2010). Moral education in an age of globalization. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 42(4), 390–396. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-5812.2008.00487.x
BLOG POST #13: REFLECTING ON GAPS IN LEARNING
​
I read this article while sipping my morning coffee and absolutely loved the idea! What an innovative and creative way to have students self-reflect on gaps in their learning. The idea circles back to Blog Post #10 – Strategies to Promote Reflection. In the blog, I touch on the idea of revisiting test results, as a means of reflection.
​
In “Students Recoup Exam Points by Creating a Video on Items Missed”, Joanne Keefe proposes an excellent idea for student reflection. Keefe teaches an online review course for Family Nurse Practitioner students. She kept telling herself, “It’s not about the grade, it’s about really learning this information for the boards and, even more importantly, for patient care "(2018). As teachers we appreciate this all too well, yet somehow, grades as an overall measure of achievement remain the marker of success.
​
Keefe decided a new strategy was warranted that would help students maximize learning while still feeding their obsession for final grades. Her new approach offered students the opportunity to augment their mark and bridge learning gaps. Students were given the opportunity to submit a video demonstrating or explaining a concept that they had missed on an exam. Keefe set up very specific guidelines for the number of videos students were permitted to submit per semester, as well as the length and content of the video. Feedback from the students was outstanding.
​
What an exceptional idea! Students were not forced to do the review; they had autonomy to choose how much or how little they wished to review. The task challenged students to recognize the gaps and source information to build knowledge and bridge those gaps. I can only imagine the sense of empowerment a student felt as they began to assimilate information and make better sense of it. Finally, as an added bonus, they got a few extra marks for their efforts!
​
Thinking as a teacher, I would also imagine that the feedback received would help to identify gaps in our own curriculum and give insight into areas that required additional focus.
Here is the link: Reflecting On Gaps In Learning
References
Keefe, J. (2017, August 18). Students Recoup Exam Points by Creating a Video on Items Missed. Retrieved August 18, 2017, from https://www.facultyfocus.com/
​
BLOG POST #9: TIME OUT FOR REFLECTION
​
I recall when time outs were a convention (they may still be) to provide children an opportunity to reflect on their behaviour. One has to wonder if forced reflection really works, “You sit down and think about what you’ve done!” Can you imagine a similar strategy in the classroom after a lesson plan? How would that play out?
​
In Defining Reflection: Another Look at John Dewey and Reflective Thinking, Carol Rodgers summarizes key criteria for reflection. The criteria is based on beliefs articulated by John Dewey, that are still very relevant today. I’ve taken the liberty of connecting Rodgers analysis to similar of thought expressed in our course readings. Rodgers summarized Dewey’s criteria for reflection as such:
​
1. Reflection as a meaning making process.
Reflection gives us the opportunity to frame new experiences and new information and put them into a context that has meaning. According to Kliebard, “Paradoxically, enabling children and youth to function effectively in the world they now inhabit by equipping them with the intellectual tools to make sense of that world may turn out to be, as Dewey (1916) suggested, the best preparation for that unknowable future (1995).
​
2. Reflection as a rigorous way of thinking.
There are any number of passages we’ve read that support reflective thinking as a way of life. Kliebard again, discusses this practice in Why History of Education. He suggests that the study of history of education is valuable in that it ingrains a pattern of reflection. “Principal among these is the habit of reflection and deliberative inquiry, which is holding up the taken-for-granted world to critical scrutiny, something that usually can be accomplished more easily in a historical context than in a contemporary one. ldeas and practices that seem so normal and natural in a contemporary setting often take on a certain strangeness when viewed in a historical setting, and that strangeness often permits us to see those ideas and practices in a different light” (1995).
​
3. Reflection in community.
Group reflection is remains a powerful means of reconciling new information. Mayo speaks of reflection as a community and says, “There are imaginative possibilities that arise in the process of learning together and that shift people, challenging who they were and moving them into places and ideas they hadn’t anticipated (Mayo, 2011).
​
4. Reflection as a set of attitudes.
The Case for Philosophical Mindedness is a great article filled with much advice related to the importance of reflection. Christou and Bullock introduce ideas shared by Michael Oakeshott and Jane Roland who explain that “education is the development of intellectual and moral habits through the give-and-take of the conversation that ultimately gives ‘place and character to every human activity and utterance. Education—the conversation—is the place where one comes to learn what it is to be a person” (Christou & Bullock, 2012).
​
It is fascinating to think that Dewey constructed these concepts more than one hundred years ago and at the core, they are solid principles still supported today. Many of the readings we’ve shared in this course echo similar sentiments. In my next blog, I will look at strategies to foster reflective practices.
​
References
Christou, T. M., & Bullock, S. M. (2012). The case for philosophical mindedness. Paideusis, 20(1), 14–23.
Kliebard, H. M. (1995). Why history of education? Journal of Educational Research, 88(4), 194-199.
Mayo, C. (2011). Philosophy of education is bent. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 30(5), 471–476. doi: 10.1007/s11217-011-9248-5
​