why we learn

John B. Watson said:

Give me a dozen healthy infants, well formed, and my own specified world to bring them up in and I’ll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to become any type of specialist I might select – doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief and, yes, even beggar-man and thief, regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations, and race of his ancestors.

Here’s my problem with this quote. According to Wikipedia, the last sentence has been left out.

I am going beyond my facts and I admit it, but so have the advocates of the contrary and they have been doing it for many thousands of years.

Read more

I’ve just finished reading Rogoff’s¹ book on development. Initially, I had planned to finish much earlier. But, my wife and I had a child, and to be quite honest I needed some time off. I’ll be starting class again on Monday though, and I’m happy to say I feel ready. Two final quotes from Rogoff before I move on…

On development

Cognitive development consists of coming to find, understand, and handle particular problems, building on the intellectual tools inherited from previous generations and the social resources provided by other people. Development involves children’s progress toward local ideals of mature thinking and action, rather than progress toward a universal goal (p. 190).

And on creativity:

First, it must be recognized that such creativity builds on the technologies already available, within existing institutions. A creative idea is in some sense a reformulation of existing ideas; there is nothing completely new under the sun. Something completely new would not even be recognized (p. 198).

1. Rogoff, Barbara. (1990). Apprenticeship in Thinking. New York: Oxford University Press

It’s been a while since I’ve posted. Last week I was working on updating the educators library for the school where I work. And, now I’m working on a final project for my educational psychology class. The basic premise of my research proposal is that if we can use technology, specifically video, to push what would be considered “direct instruction”, e.g., lecture, guided practice, demonstration, online in the video format, we can then use class time to meet individually with students face-to-face in a way that will facilitate a more individualized approach. I’ll post the final presentation when it’s complete, but I was looking through Vygotsky’s “Mind in Society” ¹ and found a great quote.

…even the most profoundest thinkers never questioned the assumption; they never entertained the notion that what children can do with the assistance of others might be in some way more indicative of their mental development than what they can do alone.

I can just imagine bureaucrats’ reaction to the presentation of this idea, in fact some might consider the idea of assessing an individual’s ability in the context of working with another to be un-American.

1. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.

Rogoff¹ on Vygotsky and Piaget’s views on intersubjectivity²

For Vygotsky, shared thinking provides the opportunity to participate in a joint decision-making process from which children may appropriate what they contribute for later use. For Piaget, the meeting of minds involves two separate individuals, each operating on the other’s ideas, using the back-and-forth of discussion for each to advance his or her own development. This discussion is the product of two individuals considering alternatives provided socially, rather than the construction of a joint understanding between partners (p. 149).

Very interesting. Rogoff goes on to describe her interpretation, that these two process are not mutually exclusive, that instead they are useful and utilized in different contexts

1. Rogoff, Barbara. (1990). Apprenticeship in Thinking. New York: Oxford University Press

2. an exchange between conscious minds; shared by one or more conscious mind

I’ve continued reading Rogoff’s Apprenticeship in Teaching¹. A lot of what she is saying relates to culture and context. Everything, every event, every action, and every interaction are contextual, part of a larger picture. And if we, as observers (educators) are unable to perceive this larger picture, we will miss an embedded truth. This line, in particular, reminds me of Miretzky’s wonderful article on democratic schools^2.

If we are interested in understanding the processes by which children grow to be skilled in the activities of their elders, we must take the same approach in interpreting the processes of interaction and children’s activities in families whose outcomes do not have our community’s approval as with those who do. We must consider the circumstances and goals of the family and the community (p. 118-119).

1. Rogoff, Barbara. (1990). Apprenticeship in Thinking. New York: Oxford University Press

2. Miretzky, D. (2004). The Communication Requirements of Democratic Schools: Parent-Teacher Perspectives on Their Relationships. Teachers College Record 105(4), 814-851.