Carrie Ann’s Reading Log 2/22
Changing the Pathways in the Brain
Though we will be discussing in more depth our assigned books in class this week I would like to share with you all a brief summary of The Art of Changing the Brain.
Take a pinch of Piaget, add a touch of classroom techniques, and a cup or more of neuroscience and you will have The Art of Changing the Brain by James E. Zull. This book looks into how the science and the biology of the brain can affect your students learning style, how they process information, how they synthesize the material into other aspects of learning. As Zull takes you through the brain by breaking it down into three distinct sections 1) Foundations, 2) Knowledge, Neuronal Networks, Change, and Recommendations for the Teacher, 3) Using more of the Cerebral Cortex to deepen Learning- you as an educator will see how the biological structures of the brain can be “changed” by your teaching methods to make more meaningful connections in student’s learning.
Though loaded with discussions and terminology dealing with neuroscience and how the brain functions, the terms that Zull presents are easily understood by the reader since they are supported by real-life teaching experiences by the author that support the topic at hand. As I was reading, I saw some of my students in the stories that Zull presented and now I have a better understanding of how their brain might be processing the information and how I should present material to make the brain/neuron connections stronger with the way I disseminate the topics in class. Tomorrow I will discuss this book in more detail with all of you, but I can say wholeheartedly that this is a book that all educators need to read because you really change your student’s brains and the unique ways that they learn.
Aracelie_Reading Pt II_23 Feb_”Making Their Own Way…”
Making Their Own Way: Narratives for Transforming Higher Education to Promote Self-Development by Marcia B. Baxter Magolda
The second portion of the book, Promoting Self-Authorship in Higher Education, takes the observations her interviews with the participants in their 20s and presents an actual framework for use with higher education. It is a “framework consisting of three core assumptions and three principles for educational practice to connect the assumptions to students’ development”. The core assumptions are that knowledge is complex and socially constructed, self is central to knowledge construction, and expertise is shared mutually in knowledge construction. The three accompanying principles are to validate learners as knowers, situate learning in learners’ experience, and define learning as mutually constructing meaning.
After the overview of the framework, the author discusses the experiences of the participants within higher education institutions. She begins with the participants’ graduate education experiences and highlights many of the differences the participants found when they compared those experiences to their undergraduate years. Many discovered they were afforded opportunities to apply their experiential knowledge and to share their opinions and beliefs. “Critique, feedback, and ongoing evolution of perspectives were mainstays in their experiences” (p 211).
And with that I must continue reading, because the book is much larger than I anticipated…
Aracelie_Reading Pt I_23 Feb_”Making Their Own Way…”
Making Their Own Way: Narratives for Transforming Higher Education to Promote Self-Development by Marcia B. Baxter Magolda
This book is broken into two parts – The Journey Toward Self-Authorship and Promoting Self-Authorship in Higher Education. Self-authorship is defined as “the ability to collect, interpret, and analyze information and reflect on one’s own beliefs in order to form judgments” (Baxter Magolda, 1998, p.143). Baxter Magolda covers the lives of participants from the time they entered college in 1986 until (for the 39 who continued with the study) the age of 30. She presents her discussion of her longitudinal study using narratives from interviews she conducted with the participants throughout this time period.
The first section of the book, The Journey Toward Self-Authorship, starts by identifying three core questions that the author found affected the participants during their 20s – “How Do I Know?”, “Who Am I?”, and “How Do I Construct Relationships with Others?” She equated each of these to dimensions for which literature already exists – the epistemological, intrapersonal, and interpersonal dimensions, respectively. Reading the book, one finds that the epistemological dimension is what the participants mostly experienced in their college years, and the other two dimensions began to develop more after college. Within the discussion on the college years, there are four types of knowing covered that are referenced throughout the rest of the book. They are absolute (right or wrong), transitional (uncertainty is discovered, but only exists in particular areas), independent (sources of authority are now in question, uncertainty grows), and contextual (consider all perspectives, research answers, and integrate own opinions). Contextual knowing became more prominent in the interviews after the participants graduated from college.
Upon completing college, the participants embarked on finding careers, continuing education, and starting relationships. However, because most weren’t yet in the stages of contextual knowing, they began their journeys through the four phases to self-authorship – following formulas, crossroads, becoming the author of one’s life, and internal foundation. Two points developed through the phases are the participants’ internal voices emerging and the reduction of the impact of external influences on the participants.
Aracelie_Reading Log_16 Feb 10
“How Do I Design My SoTL Project?” It seems like a straightforward question to ask. But then one begins to read McKinney’s chapter six and realizes designing a project is almost as complex as determining a single of SoTL. Thankfully, she addresses general decisions regarding quantitative/qualitative and timeframes before describing the “numerous possible specific methodologies for reflecting on and studying teaching and learning”.
Anyone that has ever taken a course that involves experiments probably has at least some vague recollection of the data that is “quantitative” and “qualitative”. Quantitative data is typically equated with “numerical” while qualitative data is generally defined as “verbal”. McKinney presents more detailed descriptions and with application to SoTL. Qualitative data, she states, “more directly reflect the voice of the participant”. Keeping in mind my own question of veterans transitioning to higher education institutions, I find myself leaning more toward qualitative data rather than quantitative for this reason. Although I firmly believe numbers are our friends, I do not think trends and and statistics alone would reveal as much as the actual thoughts and words of the veterans. A combination of the two types of data, however, might be worth pursuing.
In McKinney’s discussion of timeframes, she calls attention to “cross-sectional” and “longitudinal” designs. I am having a harder time understanding the use for the former which takes information as a “snapshot” or single point in time. Maybe that is because of my analytical job. When I take a “snapshot”, it is typically to compare it to something else done in the past or to be completed in the future. I suppose that my confusion makes sense, though, because McKinney does say cross-sectional designs are not ideal for viewing changes over given periods of time.
The deeper we go into McKinney’s book, the more I appreciate it. It serves as not only a welcome to the world of SoTL, but also gives guidance on how to tackle SoTL projects and questions. On the first day of class, when we did our cubing exercise, I was thinking, “Uh-oh. What is he really talking about? Am I going to be able to apply any of this? More importantly, what would I apply it to?” The nine Getting Started questions posed in chapter three serve as a great template to build upon. Having answered them last week allowed me to relate the specific methodologies McKinney discusses in this chapter to my own research question. As such, the focus groups and questionnaires, observational research, and content analysis seem to be the first avenues I would explore for my SoTL project.
Jason’s Reading Reflection 2/7/10
I wanted to take the time to reflect primarily on the new conversations about teaching article. I was very impressed by the Authors ability to efficiently sum up and link together what many different fields can tell us about teaching and learning. It was also refreshing to see the mention of cross cultural studies (kind of a pet peeve of mine). We can really get into trouble when we start to generalize about learning (or any process/interaction/belief system/etc) and forget the importance of culture in framing our experiences.
The criticisms of our educational system found in the article I’ve been exposed to before and I continue to agree with. We do primarily promote memorization in our classrooms, for a number of reasons. It’s easier and cheaper to measure especially in large classrooms (which are also a money issue), and most importantly to me, it is how we think of intelligence culturally. People on jeopardy are very smart, children that can recite all of the presidents are impressive, knowing the right root word on the SAT’s means you’re a better student (Higher number = more knowledge!) As long as we continue to reward and glorify memorization, obsess over test scores, frame intelligence as an inherited ability, and attempt to fuel education with cut throat competitiveness in the classroom, we will continue to produce students that learn to anxiously cram for exams, memorize lots of facts, and forget everything when the course is over.