|
Български
Deutsch
English
Français
Ελληνικά
Polski
Português
Romãnã
Pyccкий
Tagalog
http://www.scn.org/mpfc/index.htm
Pruébalo, nosotros (tu comunidad) te apoyaremos
Quick Links
Mi perfil
OER (Recursos Educativos Abierto)
Collective
My Sandbox
Featured L4C Participant
Los sermones de Phil
Si el entrenador realiza las flexiones,
El atleta no se hará más fuerte
Mis pensamientos ocasionales sobre el WikiEducador y su comunidad
Traducido por
- ► Education versus Socialization – Should OERs venture into socialization issues? Do we know where to draw the line?
- ◊ Both education and socialization are processes of learning. At one time in the past the difference between the two was very distinct, but as time passes that boundary becomes more blurred. Furthermore, as we shift to a "gardening" approach to education (as advocated in our community), we will pay more attention to the values we teach and the kinds of things that were historically left to socialization rather than included in the educational curricula.
- ◊ Socialization is the process of learning to become human. It is the way that society-culture perpetuates itself. It was originally distinguished from education in that it was ad hoc, informal, and unplanned. It focused more on values and acceptable behaviour than on information and knowledge. Then schools began spending more time on teaching little children basic life skills, like how to put on rain gear, paying attention in class, when and where to go to toilet, being nice to others. As time passes. topics once left only to informal methods are being taught as part of the educational curriculum, for increasingly older students.
- ◊ Life skills courses are now being taught for people of disadvantaged situations. These include prison inmates, and include aboriginals and other ethnic minorities (who often have statistically disproportionate representation in prisons). Apart from mechanical skills, such as opening a bank account, using a fork, and writing a cheque, they teach social skills.
- ◊ Eye contact, for example, can be one of those. In all other animals, including primates, making eye contact is a sign of aggression, and is avoided so as to avoid conflict. In most cultures and societies around the world, similar symbolism is or was practiced, ie avoiding eye contact as a sign of respect. In Western societies, in contrast, eye contact is seen as a sign of honesty and transparency. It is not biologically "natural" (instinctual), but is socialized into us. Many investigators, police officers, social workers, teachers, see the avoiding of eye contact by people of some ethnic minorities as a sign of dishonesty, when it is a sign of respect. Guilty by ethnocentric miscommunication.
- ◊ Socialization is (or historically was) distinguished from education by being informal, ad hoc and unplanned. It is the process of learning to be human. From birth to death. We can also distinguish between primary and secondary socialization. The first one starts at birth, the other whenever our social environment changes and we need to adjust. Anthropologists sometimes use the terms enculturation and acculturation.
- ◊ Today, many things that are not exactly academic are included in the curricula for pupils at the lowest levels, Some of those are for very practical reasons, such as when and where to defecate and urinate (not in the classroom, please). Others have to do with safety coming to school and going home. Dressing for snow or rain before returning home is included.
- ◊ Is there a place for such life style training for older students? It is increasing, whether we agree it should or not. Anyone who has had young men in the back of the class – full of their hormones and a desire to be macho, feet up, leaning back, arms folded across their chests – may well agree. But what about other topics? Is school a place to teach values, beliefs and social graces (or other aesthetics)?
- ◊ If so, should we in WikiEducator set up a course or topic in socialization, how at teach it, to whom to teach it, what to teach at different ages and educational levels? I think the answer would be yes, and if so we need to set up a collaboration page on which we can all contribute. --Phil Bartle 05:22 2 nov 2009 (UTC)
earlier rants:
- ► Ageism, Sexism, Racism – What is the role of education in the struggle against prejudice, bigotry and discrimination? Is this a valid concern for Open Educational Resources (OERs)?
- ◊ We are biological creatures; animals, to be more specific. That means our bodies vary over time, and we are products of the genetic contributions of our parents and their predecessors. There are three biological characteristics that everybody has, and they each have social consequences – how we treat one another – our age, our sex, and our inherited physical characteristics.
- ◊ Socially, we tend to portray each of these as having distinct categories with identifiable boundaries between them. Biologically the characteristics are far less distinct. Socially, we think of only two genders, masculine and feminine. Biologically although we use two words, male and female, there is a range of sexes. Our population has far more than two sexes. We differ biologically in age very little from day to day, yet we use arbitrary calendar dates to make important distinctions between infants, children, adults and seniors. Socially, we think of races as distinct categories, yet we use variables that are inconsistent, are contradictory, and are ranges without boundaries, to create those arbitrary racial categories. Biologically, there is no such thing as race.
- ◊ What is important here is that we use these arbitrary and inconsistent social variables, age, gender and race, to label people differently, and to think of and treat people differently in an unfair way, based on those invalid distinctions.
- ◊ Most studies show that children are able to distinguish among these variables, but take them as given and natural, and do not make value judgements based on them. They have to be socialised to become prejudiced. To counteract that we need to use our educational institutions to teach values of acceptance, tolerance, flexibility and fairness. These need to be designed for the abilities and knowledge of the students, which are usually correlated with their ages.
- ◊ The analysis sketched above, which is a core part of first and second year university social science courses, may be too sophisticated for elementary school children, but is not for adults at any level of subject, and certainly can be included in middle and secondary school curricula. A simpler approach, one of acceptance of all of us (including our selves) as valuable no matter what we look like, might be more appropriate at elementary level. There is a wide range of approaches between those two.
- ◊ This is not the place for a "paint-by-numbers" prescription, for we want to encourage educators to create new and appropriate methods and topics. It is important, however, that teachers are aware of the arbitrariness and superficiality of racist, sexist and ageist ideas, and that they are not based on scientific (including biological) facts. (I had a secondary school biology teacher who expressed his opinion that Hitler was right).
- ◊ Treating people unfairly (eg access to education. to employment, to housing, to club membership, to voting) for any reason is unfortunate; when it is based on bigotry, it is criminal. Our whole educational system, orthodox and non orthodox, is a major tool for preventing and mitigating it.
- ◊ We need to have an answer to those who accuse us of destroying their traditional culture, where discrimination is practiced. Far from it. Culture is not static, and if we try to preserve it, we pickle it; kill it. Culture is a living organic entity, and must grow and change to live. What we are doing, then is helping to make it stronger by adapting to the evolving world social environment.
- ◊ As we develop Open Educational Resources, it is our responsibility to include this topic wherever appropriate throughout the whole range of subjects. Most obviously it should be included in social studies courses. Less obviously it should be included in science courses such as biology and zoology. Debunking the notions that there are distinct categories of race, sex and age is the responsibility of the biological sciences. A wide range of other subjects can easily have appropriate places for adding the topic. Taking the "Gardening" approach to education, where "the taught" should be considered before "what is taught," should encourage us to consider the needs of societies and communities when designing and presenting educational resources. --Phil Bartle 14:23 16 oct 2009 (UTC)
Earlier rants:
- ► Methods of Learning are not the Same as Methods of Teaching: We encourage alternative and non orthodox methods of learning, and this affects how we present them to the learners, but they are two different things, and we must be careful not to confuse the two. At first this sounds too obvious, but when we are creating alternative and non orthodox processes, it can become easy to forget.
- ◊ Recall that among other ways of learning, including watching and listening, we recommend "doing" as the usually most effective method of learning.
- ◊ When we set up a learning session for the students to play roles in a particular scenario, for example, it is the students who are engaged in the "doing" to learn. The teacher is creating the context for that to happen. There is not one single way to create it. When the teacher organizes a literacy class into a planning meeting to decide on a project such as going on a field trip to collect fish prices information then come back to construct signs to indicate the prices of fish, it is not the teacher who engages in the doing, the students do, and the teacher creates the context for that to happen. The teacher can choose among many ways to create it, and design new ones.
- ◊ In the common orthodox method, the teacher does all the doing: preparing the content, setting up the props, making the presentation, responding to feedback and questions. The teacher, by doing, learns much about the subject, and sometimes forgets that the learners are not "doing" (just listening and watching), are less stimulated, and are learning less. The teacher can easily become puzzled, even irritated, that the learners are so slow.
- ◊ The teacher must first decide on or plan the learning method(s), and to choose what is appropriate both for the students and for the topic. That comes first. Choosing or planning the approach of the teacher, the methods to use, comes second. They must complement the methods of learning, not duplicate them. There are many possible ways to teach for each method of learning, some not yet known, so there is no automatic formula.
- ◊ In other words, designing a session must necessarily include both the methods of learning and the methods of teaching, and be planned to be complementary to each other. Three separate elements. All too often, teachers plan classes with a focus on one or another, usually how to teach it, rather than with a balanced and complete approach which not only includes both but also how the two relate.
- ◊ As we develop OERs (Open Educational Resources) we must not just parrot tired and worn approaches used in the classroom. We need to provide the best, and that includes a call for more analysis of the needs of the students and of the topics, and a willingness to be creative, novel and experimental.
earlier rants:
- ► Language Learning; a Lesson about Learning: One of our training documents describes a method for learning a language that is unwritten. The method also works for learning a written language . . . without resorting to writing (or to books, to note taking, or to learning rules).
- ◊ The method is based on the idea that how we learned our first language, at ages 1-3, served us well, but the way a second language is taught in school is far different. True, we lose some of our language learning abilities as we get older, especially if we do not exercise them, but it is our methods, not our natural abilities, that are in focus here.
- ◊ When we learned our first language, we did not use text books or notebooks, we did not memorize vocabulary; we did not memories grammatical rules. Oh we did learn grammar, but we did so by learning what felt right, not what the regulations were.
- ◊ The method was designed so I could learn a language in Africa to do anthropological studies there. I later used it for training community workers to learn a language if they were assigned to a community where they spoke a different language. The method is to pretend that you are a three year old, select only words and phrases that are useful in your daily life (Please pass the salt) and train your friends and colleagues (as informants) to repeat the term after you (you must not repeat it after them). Without telling them what you are thinking, you pretend that your informants are your older brothers and sisters, correcting your pronunciation. You choose 1-5 words only each day, no more, no less. You vary the way a word is used (I want water. He has water). Within three months, you aim for fluency, which means the ability to operate in the language, with a limited vocabulary, about a hundred words only (what we tend to use in daily life).
- ◊ Although your ability to learn a new language has decreased, you have burned learning pathways in your brain, and this method takes advantage of them. While you train your informants to not think of themselves as correcting you, just repeating after you, you pretend you are three years old getting corrected.
- ◊ You might think at first a certain fruit is a napple, which can be easily corrected later when you learn how to read and write.
- ◊ I think this method can be adapted to teaching a language to a group of students, even though it was designed for self teaching. I see hints of it in the most up to date methods of TEFL (Teaching English as a Foreign Language) and language immersion programs.
- ◊ What is important here is the degree to which the method can be adapted to teaching other subjects and topics. Using text books and notebooks is efficient and convenient, and encouraged by schools and colleges that are becoming more and more like corporations. unlike an environment that encourages teachers to explore and create new and unorthodox methods. Text books and notebooks encourage conformity, monotony and homogeneity (like McDonald's hamburgers).
- ◊ It may be that the new challenge of not using text books and notes, may not only make it better to learn introductory levels of each topic, but also preparing the learner to learn the more advanced elements better. I would like to hear from collaborators on WikiEducator their thoughts and experiences with unorthodox methods of learning. --Phil Bartle 01:38 1 oct 2009 (UTC)
earlier rants:
- ► Functional Literacy → Functional Anything. In the Community Empowerment methodology, there is a large module about Functional Literacy. In the tradition of "Deschooling Society," it suggests to avoid pre packaged curricula, and make the content of the teaching something practical and useful, and those differ from community to community. It goes further to also recommend that the method of teaching and learning also be unorthodox, and custom designed for the varying needs and interests of each community.
- ◊ If there is more interest in the content and method by the teacher than by the learners, then something is unbalanced.
- ◊ Although it suggests to the participants that they design each course themselves, it gives a few examples to illustrate. In a fishing community, for example, where the learners are illiterate adults, the classroom becomes a planning meeting room, and the learners choose fish and their various prices as the content, and choose to go on a field trip to look at fish being bought and sold. They decided that they would make signs to post in public, although they had considered making a pamphlet with the prices. After the field trip, they returned and made the posters, learning words for fish and their varieties, and learned numbers as they applied to fish prices, almost as a secondary result. They did not learn an alphabet, or grammar rules, or lists of useless vocabulary. ("useless" in the sense that they would not be functional for them in their community).
- ◊ This approach is tested and vetted. The challenge is, in the context of developing free and open educational resources, can it apply to topics other than literacy? If so, how would we go about this? What topics are better than others?
- ◊ What constitutes practical and interesting topics may be surprising to some educational specialists. Shakespeare, for example, is often seen as highly impractical, except for teaching the finer characteristics of the English language. When I taught in rural Ghana, 1965-7, the staff and students put on a Shakespeare play every year. It included a narrator who translated the material into the local vernacular. The series was very popular, and the auditorium was filled over capacity by peasant farmers each year. If nothing more, this should serve to illustrate that we should be open and tolerant to many different unorthodox and unexpected approaches.
- ◊ The lesson we should be learning here is that we must be strong and resist formula planning of classes, and often stop and put the objectives and purpose at arms length from us and ask if there is another way, or ways, to plan content and means of educating. Although mistakes will be made, this approach leads to the best quality of education, what we need to develop as part of the OER (Open Educational Resources). --Phil Bartle 18:12 27 sep 2009 (UTC)
earlier rants:
- ► Alms, Altruism and Strength. In the Community Empowerment methodology, there is an apparent paradox in that we argue against alms and other forms of charity which weaken the recipient community or organism. In contrast, when we identify the sixteen elements of strength of an organization or community, altruism is at the top of the list (alphabetically).
- ◊ The major element in the difference is whether the organism is giving or receiving the charity. Giving is not only easier than receiving; it makes you stronger.
- ◊ For over half a century, bilateral (government to government) aid to Africa was based on charity and the result has been increased poverty, more dependency, a climb in corruption, and a decline in good governance. When you give alms to a beggar, you train her or him to be a beggar. In community work, in contrast, when you encourage a community to find its own resources, to plan its own future, and to act, then it becomes stronger and more self reliant.
- ◊ How does this relate to open and free education? Or is it more than one way? Some people might argue that if you provide people with free education (like those teachers who have had people sitting in the back of the class with their arms folded, their feet up and daddy is paying the bill to babysit them until they know what they want in life), that if you give them free education they will think it is worth every penny they spent on it. In my varied teaching career, I have taught students in a penientiary and I have had students at different levels in Africa and it was so noticable that those students demonstrated more respect, and they did so much better in their studies.
- ◊ We aim to provide educational resources for every level from K to PhD, vocational, professional and academic. Does this mean we are providing charity and weakening or that we are making opportunities and assisting in providing strength? Does OER contribute to strength or weakness?
- ◊ The answer to this dilemma comes from our animal characteristics, that our offspring are born or hatched weak and helpless. They need nurturing and the opportunity to play so as to learn how to survive and thrive. It also looks like that it applies at all ages, not only the young. In a complex social system as we have in human society, education is an important element of that play. When we play and learn, we become stronger. If society as a whole takes on the responsibility to provide the environment and necessary utensils for that play, then we become stronger. OER takes the provision of educational resources out of the hands of profit oriented organizations, and makes it available to all of us. We all get stronger.--Phil Bartle 16:20, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Previous rants:
- ► Alms, Altruism and Strength. In the Community Empowerment methodology, there is an apparent paradox in that we argue against alms and other forms of charity which weaken the recipient community or organism. In contrast, when we identify the sixteen elements of strength of an organization or community, altruism is at the top of the list (alphabetically).
- ◊ The major element in the difference is whether the organism is giving or receiving the charity. Giving is not only easier than receiving; it makes you stronger.
- ◊ For over half a century, bilateral (government to government) aid to Africa was based on charity and the result has been increased poverty, more dependency, a climb in corruption, and a decline in good governance. When you give alms to a beggar, you train her or him to be a beggar. In community work, in contrast, when you encourage a community to find its own resources, to plan its own future, and to act, then it becomes stronger and more self reliant.
- ◊ How does this relate to open and free education? Or is it more than one way? Some people might argue that if you provide people with free education (like those teachers who have had people sitting in the back of the class with their arms folded, their feet up and daddy is paying the bill to babysit them until they know what they want in life), that if you give them free education they will think it is worth every penny they spent on it. In my varied teaching career, I have taught students in a penientiary and I have had students at different levels in Africa and it was so noticable that those students demonstrated more respect, and they did so much better in their studies.
- ◊ We aim to provide educational resources for every level from K to PhD, vocational, professional and academic. Does this mean we are providing charity and weakening or that we are making opportunities and assisting in providing strength? Does OER contribute to strength or weakness?
- ◊ The answer to this dilemma comes from our animal characteristics, that our offspring are born or hatched weak and helpless. They need nurturing and the opportunity to play so as to learn how to survive and thrive. It also looks like that it applies at all ages, not only the young. In a complex social system as we have in human society, education is an important element of that play. When we play and learn, we become stronger. If society as a whole takes on the responsibility to provide the environment and necessary utensils for that play, then we become stronger. OER takes the provision of educational resources out of the hands of profit oriented organizations, and makes it available to all of us. We all get stronger.--Phil Bartle 16:20, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- ► Agricultural Revolution, Culture and Open Education. Without doubt, the most profound event in the history and development of human beings was and is the Agricultural Revolution. Without it we were gatherers and hunters living in small bands. With it we developed complex social organization, cities, states, industry, the Internet, increasingly faster production of new inventions and technology, and the creation of complex ideas and perspectives.
- ◊ If we look at the classical Greek teachers, we see a frequent reference to education as cultivation (eg Epicurus) using an agricultural metphor to describe and analyse learning and teaching.
- ◊ We usually see the process of education as one of transferring ideas, knowledge, skills and wisdom. Here let us also use an alternative approach which sees education as caring and cultivating. This approach tends to emphasize moral development (although not exclusively) and the idea that our minds are like gardens or farms. We grow and develop organically, and what is needed is the nutrients, sun and water, not a forceful moldling of our ways of thinking.
- ◊ If agriculture has had such a revolutionary effect on human society, think what education, as a form of cultivation, is doing to humanity.
- ◊ If we see our developing of open and free educational resources, not only for the transfer of kowledge, but also for the care and cultivation of the learners, then we will be contributing to a new and incredibly valuable body of knowledge and understanding in this world. Some anthropologists have argued that it was not so much the domestication of plants and animals which transformed us, but our domestication of ourselves. The cultivation of ourselves, as learners, knowing that teaching and learning is best if a two way process, will take us, as they say in Star Trek, where no one has gone before.
- ◊ I see education as a gardening process, and the development of free and open education as a revolutionary process that will have as important an effect on humanity as the agricultural revolution. The force is not only with us; we are The Force.
- --Phil Bartle 12:35 28 ago 2009 (UTC)
earlier rants:
- ► Epistemology: It might be time to add a few questions about epistemology (how we know) to our discussions on WikiEducator. Lots of good debate on "How do we learn?" and its converse (but not its mirror image), "How do we teach?" Now we should ask, "How do we know?" If we learn something, how do we know if and when we know? If we teach something, how do we know if and when the taught know?
- ◊ In classical Epistemology we have only four ways of knowing: (1) Observing (sensing, empiricism), (2) Logic (calculating, reason), (2) Belief (faith, worldview), and (4) Authority (Mommy said so). While we educators pay much lip service to our students discovering for themselves (by logic or observation), we rely considerably instead on Authority (because we, or the text book, said so).
- ◊ There are issues, problems and criticism for each of the four ways. Observation: we have no way of being certain that what you sense is what I sense, even if we give it the same name, and no objects, including observers, can occupy the same space at the same time, so everyone has a unique observational experience. Reason: There is nothing intrinsic abut two when we see two apples; the "twoness" is in our minds. Belief: If you do not believe in dwarves, that makes you a dwarf atheist. Authority: proselytisers for a particular belief cite some Authority, usually a book, omitting to mention that all books are written by human beings.
- ◊ Now how does all this relate to open and free educational resourses, which is what we are all about? Is learning different for the four ways? Should our teaching be different? I once taught at a seminary and noticed then that the teachers of religion ("our kind" of course) did not like to take a critical and epistemological look at beliefs, like the creed, or that God exists, because Authority and belief have neither logic nor witness to back them up. No wonder they talked about sheep as a role model.
- ◊ We often forget that there is no finite amount of right knowledge, and what we know as a society constantly changes. There is no right answer. Administrators in schools and colleges, however, ask us for a course outline that portrays a finite quantity of information as the curriculum. There is no curriculum!
- ◊ What is the lesson to be learned here? The solution? We should always promote unorthodox methods of learning and teaching on WikiEducator and in the classroom. Those lacking courage and creativity will revert to the orthodox. Not all new methods will work, but a key feature of WikiEducator is collaboration. We can help each other in developing new methods. Let us keep on so long as we are having fun. --Phil Bartle 07:32, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
- ► Education and Empowerment. An important element of the reasoning behind community empowerment is that charity weakens. If we do everything for a poor community, then it does not get stronger. It becomes dependent upon our charity. This is not universal. There are times and places where charity is necessary and does not weaken. During a disaster, emergency response requires charity to ensure the people can survive (but it must end when it should). If a person becomes blind, it would be charity to read to that person, and that does not make the person more dependent. Most of the Aid to Africa, especially bilateral (government to government), in contrast, is based on charity, and it encourages corruption, inefficiency, and it releases more resources for war and oppression.
- When we support open and free education, are we contributing to charity which weakens? We should think about this, because WikiEd and similar endeavors now comprise a major thrust in providing education which is free. I do not think so. There is charity and there is charity. The young of animals need nurturing until they become adults, and the higher up the phylum, the more complex they are, the more nurturing they need. Humans now need education to survive (and to reproduce physically and culturally). Education has been available to the privileged of the world, and it has not weakened them, to the best of my knowledge. If we nurture the young and vulnerable, allow them to play and grow strong and skilled, then they will develop the strength they need to carry on to reproduce.
- The OER (Open Educational Resources) that are made available freely on sites like WikiEducator, provide the tools to allow the young to play and get skilled, no matter in what part of the world they originate and, most importantly, in spite of the historical disadvantages they might have had. --Phil Bartle 03:25, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Archivos
Utilitidades
Son Ias: 2024 noviembre 22, viernes
Hoy es 02:02, Zulu (ie. at Greenwich)
Contactos frecuentes
Nuestra pandilla, y amig@s de Potenciacion Comunitaria
Tips y Sugerencias
Tips y Sugerencias
Comentarios de mis Wikivecinos
Por favor, escribe tus comentarios en la sección de Debates. Pincha en "Debate" en la parte superior de esta página.--Phil Bartle 03:07 3 may 2009 (UTC)
|
