Posts Tagged ‘thinking’
It is increasingly popular to ‘teach’ thinking skills in schools. A diverse variety of programmes exist to support practitioners in this task, and some research has been gathered on the effectiveness of individual approaches. However, the difficulties when assessing the development of thinking skills are widely documented. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of teaching thinking skills explicitly to 11/12-year olds by infusing thinking skills into the curriculum (i.e., teaching thinking skills simultaneously with subject content). There were three intervention conditions: collaborative, individual and control. The effectiveness of the intervention was evaluated with a combination of standardised and study-specific pre- and post-tests. Results demonstrated statistically significant gains for both the individual and collaborative learning conditions in a range of thinking skills. The greatest increase in performance was seen in the collaborative learning condition. Educational implications for policy and practice are discussed.
Complexity theories have in common perspectives that challenge linear methodologies and views of causality. In educational research, relatively little has been written explicitly exploring their implications for educational research methodology in general and case study in particular. In this paper, I offer a rationale for case study as a research approach that embodies complexity, and I explore the implications of a ‘complexity thinking’ stance for the conduct of case study research that distinguishes it from other approaches. A complexity theoretical framework rooted in the key concepts of emergence and complexity reduction, blended using a both/and logic, is used to develop the argument that case study enables the researcher to balance the open-ended, non-linear sensitivities of complexity thinking with the reduction in complexity, inherent in making methodological choices. The potential of this approach is illustrated using examples drawn from a complexity theoretical research study into curriculum change.
This interdisciplinary work presents an integration of theory and research on how children develop their thinking as they participate in cultural activity with the guidance and challenge of their caregivers and other companions. Consider the relation of guided participation and creativity, and the roles of challenge and sensitivity of other peoples’ support of children’s effort. The author, Barbara Rogoff, a leading developmental psychologist, views development as an apprenticeship in which children engage in the use of intellectual tools in societally structured activities with parents, other adults, and children. The author has gathered evidence from various disciplines–cognitive, developmental, and cultural psychology; anthropology; infancy studies; and communication research–furnishing a coherent and broadly based account of cognitive development in its sociocultural context. This work examines the mutual roles of the individual and the sociocultural world, and the culturally based processes by which children appropriate and extend skill and understanding from their involvement in shared thinking with other people. The book is written in a lively and engaging style and is supplemented by photographs and original illustrations by the author.
How can this theorizing help us in an actual educational setting? The teacher’s task in a classroom, then, in order to get things moving, will become one of providing the appropriate conditions, as Firstness, under which something new would be produced. A classroom permeated with a creative potential of desire, curiosity, trust, and interest towards discovering something as yet unknown, has a possibility to turn into the experimental, beloved by both Dewey and Deleuze, laboratory. All one should ever do when teaching a course, Deleuze says, is ‘explore it [a question], play around with the terms, add something, relate it to something else’.
The saying goes that children are natural philosophers, precisely because children have affects and percepts, posited by Deleuze, in abundance, and here are we, adults, children no more, whose routine conceptual thinking has been reduced to the level of Secondness in the form of solely instrumental rationality. And again, in order to get things moving, teachers are to establish the Firstness, even more—as perpetual, and sharing the inquiry, inquirers—to become Firsts themselves, so as to enable their students to acquire experiential knowledge of the facts, as Secondness, by assigning multiple values of meanings, as Thirdness, to their own experience.
Curtis Ogden at The Interaction Institute provides a very good summary of the differences between network-centric and hierarchy-centric thinking, called Network Thinking:
- Adaptability instead of control
- Emergence instead of predictability
- Resilience and redundancy instead of rock stardom
- Contributions before credentials
- Diversity and divergence
One major challenge in helping organizations improve collaboration and knowledge-sharing are getting people to see themselves as nodes in various networks, with different types of relationships between them. Network thinking can fundamentally change our view of hierarchical relationships. For example, using value network analysis, I helped a steering group see their community of practice in a new light, mapped as a network. They immediately realized that they were pushing solutions to their community, instead of listening to what was happening. Thinking in terms of networks, networks lets us see with new eyes.
On 15 September 2008, Lehman Brothers – then the fourth-largest investment bank on Wall Street – filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. A year later, the world economy was in the depths of its worst recession since the 1930s. This prompted many economic commentators to suggest that a major upheaval in economic thinking was imminent: ‘We could be looking at a paradigm shift’. And yet, three years after Lehman’s bankruptcy, there is little evidence the paradigm has shifted.
In this paper, we seek to understand why, despite the economic dislocations of the last four years, there has been no revolution in economic thinking, and to ask whether change could still occur in the next few years. We do so by first setting out a framework for paradigm change based on the writings of Thomas Kuhn, Imre Lakatos and Peter Hall. We use this framework to take a necessarily brief look at the two major paradigm shifts in macroeconomic thinking in the 20th century: from neoclassical economics to Keynesianism and then from Keynesianism to monetarism/neoliberalism. We then analyse developments over the last three years in an attempt to understand why there has not been a comparable paradigm shift and to gauge whether such a shift is likely over the next decade.
Over the past two decades, the way we learn has changed dramatically. We have new sources of information and new ways to exchange and to interact with information. But our schools and the way we teach have remained largely the same for years, even centuries. What happens to traditional educational institutions when learning also takes place on a vast range of Internet sites, from Pokemon Web pages to Wikipedia? This report investigates how traditional learning institutions can become as innovative, flexible, robust, and collaborative as the best social networking sites. The authors propose an alternative definition of “institution” as a “mobilizing network”—emphasizing its flexibility, the permeability of its boundaries, its interactive productivity, and its potential as a catalyst for change—and explore the implications for higher education.
The Future of Thinking reports on innovative, virtual institutions. It also uses the idea of a virtual institution both as part of its subject matter and as part of its process: the first draft was hosted on a Web site for collaborative feedback and writing. The authors use this experiment in participatory writing as a test case for virtual institutions, learning institutions, and a new form of collaborative authorship. The finished version is still posted and open for comment. This book is the full-length report of the project, which was summarized in an earlier MacArthur volume, The Future of Learning Institutions in a Digital Age.