"History informs you of patterns that will repeat in a different context."
Venkk Sastry (On Facebook)
February 10 at 9:21am · San Francisco, CA · The above was originally posted on Facebook. I found it there one morning on my train ride into the city. For better or worse I sit on the train reading such things. This was one of the more interesting posts. No doubt inspired by the thought of history repeating itself. The above is a variation on that theme. As I write this now Nietzsche's eternal recurrence comes to mind.
That, however, is not what caught my attention. No, I was more inspired by another German, well Austrian, but we will come back to that. For now I return to the quote itself. Specifically, to the reference to patterns and contexts. In history we are informed of patterns. These patterns we are told repeat, and they repeat in various contexts.
This thought haunts me routinely in various situations and contexts. Which is amusing now that I think of it, as I am critical, of that very proposition. Yes we perceive patterns in various domains, not just in history but in science, business, mathematics and beyond, but what is involved here? Are those patterns as obvious as they appear?
On Facebook, the example that Venkk offered to me in response to my query was that a teacher using a chalkboard to teach students, and a teacher using computers to teach the students, are engaged in the same activity, teaching. The teachers and students in each are engaged in an educational endeavor. I disagree. Though both are involving educational endeavors at some level, they are far from identical.
Just staying with this example for a moment, I would argue that teaching with a set of tablets or computers versus a chalkboard are two very different methods, requiring different approaches to class room management, lesson prep, and likewise. In the classroom, teachers will look for those not only drifting away looking out the window, but those who are wandering on the PC or tablet.
If you are the school administrator, you are pondering what does a teacher require in their classrooms. In this tale, we have two very different set of requirements. In the one with a chalkboard you can have a chalkboard, and typically neat rows of desks in front of it.
With the computers, you require not only the machines, or hardware, but larger desks or tables. you will need software. Likewise there are power requirements - do you have twenty plugs or electrical outlets for the PCs? do you have surge protection? Of course tablets are different again and will again require different requirements, including charging stations, perhaps some type of cases to protect them. Perhaps wifi is needed, and the list goes on.
Likewise, what is required before you can teach these lessons to these students. If we are today teaching fractions, all must have their numbers and some basic addition, subtraction, etc.
For the students using PCs or tablets, however, they must be computer literate. They must be able to navigate such a system. For those looking up to the front of the room and listening aa the teacher tries to introduce fractions, the challenge is to stay awake. In both classrooms, student engagement is important but different, For those with PCs or tablets, the focus is on the software with the teacher making the rounds making sure that all are working through the lesson, and I imagine making sure the software has loaded properly and the machines are functioning. The teacher here becomes in part a Desktop Support professional.
The social dynamic is different in the two classes. Again, for the teacher up front, writing on the board, talking; they are trying to engage the class. On occasion he or she might call on a student or retrieve the attention of one who is gazing out that window. In general, though, he or she speaks to the class. The teacher in the class with the PCs or tablets is walking around from desk to desk, checking each student's progress. Perhaps, the teacher has them in groups and then must start the class by setting up the groups and its procedures. One student will be responsible for the computers and the others will do what?
Lastly, what is learned? Here we have talked of fractions. And yes both groups focused on fractions. Will those who have learned on the PC be able to apply that to the world beyond the PC? Will those who learned on the chalkboard be able to apply such on the PC?
This seems a simple question yet, behaviorally the one group learned sitting behind a desk looking up at the teacher as she scribbled on the board. The students learning with the PC or tablet would have to be engaged with the screen or monitor, and manipulating that screen, or mouse and keyboard. Two very different sets of behavioral and cognitive tasks, likewise I would imagine neural processes. And then if the one is in groups versus the rows of desks, we again change the dynamics. All of these effect how and what is learned.
So let us assume that both classes learned their fractions. Cognitively, behaviorally, socially, and I would have to imagine neurologically, however, very different dynamics were involved in each class. The physical requirements of each class differed, For someone involved in education theory, they could probably further slice this tale into various approaches to education. The point is that to see a pattern in multiple contexts is rarely sufficient.
There must be a correspondence between not only pattern, but also context. Rarely, however, will you have both identical pattern and context. On that rare occasion where that does occur, I imagine the response to one's discovery of such is something like, "No kidding." or "Big surprise." So to offer something interesting, there must be differences between the contexts. In fact, the variation and differences in context allow for the pattern to stand out and be recognized.
We will continue this and at some point will get to my Austrian too. Promise.
No comments:
Post a Comment