The Explorations course has provided a broad foundation of learning about many topics and made me more aware of less familiar aspects of cognitive and neuro-science research. They include, for example, the variety of applications of neuro-imaging, the neural bases of attending, the importance of developing effortful control for learning engagement, and the role of the arts in making learning more effective activating and connecting neural pathways in unique ways. These are all interesting areas I want and need to know more about. Thinking about questions that I would like to focus on throughout the program, however, I keep returning to three questions that emerged for me in our first week:
1.What is perception and what does it mean/take for a student to change his or her perception and be more open to learning?
2. How can a better understanding of the brain help us identify and address the wide range of variables that contribute to “magic moments” of teaching and learning?
3. How does the internal process of learning (memory or sense-making) differ when a student is actively connecting to previous knowledge and extending ideas in creative ways…vs. when a student is memorizing a fact?
Nine weeks later, I feel like have developed some understanding that helps me better define and more specifically consider all three of these questions.
The first question gets at ideas about emotion, I believe. Our work early in the course focused on BT-1 in Hardiman’s Brain-Targeted Teaching Model (2003) – creating that safe, supportive, engaging, empowering environment that can open students to learning. As I wrote in my week 4 post on the ELC: Emotional states can influence the way in which students engage in learning and/or the way in which they access, interact with, and interpret learning. For example, students who are angry, sad, scared, or whose negative emotions crowd their mind may find it difficult to attend – they may not hear or see or understand what is being taught. I think of a metaphor of a force field through which learning can’t penetrate. If learning does “go through” it may be filtered, fragmented, or altered by negative emotions. Positive emotions, research suggests, may have the opposite effect. Immordino-Yang and Damasio (2000) shed significant light on this, suggesting that even discussing cognition and emotion separately may be to make an artificial distinction. Most striking for me in their paper were the claims that 1) learning and recall simply won’t happen in a “purely rational” domain and 2) that by trying to isolate cognition from emotion the result may be that the kind of learning students do develop are those that aren’t applied or transferred effectively.
The second question is somewhat more elusive, but Hardiman’s model is a roadmap that seems likely to help increase the chance that those magic moments will occur. Her model is a powerful reminder of all the aspects that need to be considered and threaded together for effective learning. I connect it to a Six Traits Writing model for writing. Each of the traits can be isolated and skills developed, but only together can they help create a truly effective and beautiful piece of writing. I’m coming to think that the real answer to this question – how do you create magic moments? -- will not only be informed by research, but determined by how effectively we are able to translate it into effective learning experiences. The Brain-Targeted Teaching model itself may be the key to this.
The third question, which may be the one I am most interested in developing and exploring further, gets at how we can define, neurologically or physiologically, the learning differences we recognize when we discuss Blooms Taxonomy. On one level, this idea addressed by Hardiman’s BT4 and BT5 – teaching for mastery vs. teaching for extension and application. By splitting these into two separate strands, Hardiman is recognizing the difference between the two. In discussing mastery (website) she refers to mastery of knowledge, repeated rehearsal and recall. In discussing application and extension she uses words such as induction, deduction, problem-solving and analysis. Her summary suggests that there activities in the classroom that seem to require these different kinds of thinking. However, I still do not have a sense of what those different kinds of thinking really look like in the brain.
So many questions and so little time! I’m not sure I’m ready to narrow my focus too tightly to only a few goals, but I will set the following for myself. First, I will continue to consider all three of the questions I posed in week one. Second, I am specifically interested in the third question, whether/how different levels of thinking…different depths of thinking…are different. This interest intersects with my interests in learners who appear to have advanced potential – gifted and talented students – and also with my interest in creative thinking. As we build networks of ideas on previous networks of ideas, what is it that enables a person to bring together seemingly disparate ideas from distant networks – ideas that haven’t been connected by designed experience – and use those connections to develop truly creative experiences or innovative interpretations of the world? At the end of this program, I would like to be a resource for creating more effective learning experiences that serve advanced learners, including creatively gifted learners, with research-based understanding of how to more effectively foster their talents.
Hardiman, M. (2003). Connecting Brain Research With Effective Teaching: The Brain-Targeted Teaching Model. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Immordino-Yang, M. & Damasio, A. (2007.) We Feel Therefore We Learn: The Relevance of Affective and Social Neuroscience to Education. Mind, Brain, and Education, 1(1), 3-10. Retrieved from http:/olms.cte:jhu.edu/olms/data/resource/8038/Week4_ArticleWeFeelThereforeWeLearn.pdf
Monday, December 13, 2010
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Fostering a Mastery Orientation in Students
Our recent discussions about Brain Targets 3, 4, and 5 (Hardiman, 2003) have engaged me in thinking about the extent to which I have a “mastery” orientation in teaching.
• Our work in creating a concept map for BT-3 was extremely helpful; in the past I have developed essential questions as a lesson focus, but have not used a visual representation to clarify the relationships between lesson objectives.
• Readings and discussions about BT-4 have strengthened my focus on providing repeated rehearsals of learning that incorporate a range of perspectives or types of activities that include arts integration.
• This week’s work on BT-5 has refocused my attention on the need to have students get to the place where they can apply new learning. Honestly, I still have questions about how BT-5 fits between BT-4 and BT-6. I think mastery requires application and I realize I have often viewed application as a lens for evaluating mastery. Is it truly a separate stage? I’m still mulling that one.
All of this has supported my own development of a stronger “mastery orientation” in teaching. But is that “mastery orientation” something that students need, too, to enhance their active involvement in learning and their ownership of the learning as long-term memory? And if so, I can I foster it?
I think the answer to the first question is a resounding yes. I think students, especially as they get into the intermediate grades and above, need to be actively involved in the process of creating learning. The more they know about how they learn and what helps or hinders the process can only help them become more self-directed and more successful over time. I spent a great deal of time this week working on my research connections paper linking Habits of Mind with BT-4 and that model is also about students taking more control of understanding and applying thinking skills (Costa, 2000). I think awareness about how content is best absorbed and integrated into learning networks is equally useful.
During the last few weeks I believe I have already started to foster this awareness – more explicitly -- in students. I created concept maps for two new units that we are starting this week and have prepared copies for all students as well as large copies for posting in the classroom. My plan is to refer back to these as we begin and close each lesson so students can see how the learning fits into the larger picture.
In terms of varied practice, in my class we have already started a process – separate from this class – to better understand the non-verbal strengths that are so prevalent. Ninety percent of students in my classroom have non-verbal strengths identified on advanced learning plans and we are working to understand what that means for accessing and demonstrating learning. Within that context, it makes sense for me to specifically talk to students about the range of learning activities I have planned for them, noting which are designed to support non-verbal learning and which, to support other types of learning. I already build a lot of choice into lessons, but I have not been as specific in talking with students about what the choices represent in terms of varied gateways to understanding. Armed with discussions from this course, I am convinced that knowing more about that will help students make better choices about actively engaging in a range of activities.
Finally, a stronger focus on “teaching for application” will lead me to talk about it more explicitly with students. Again, I think I have frequently looked for application of ideas, particularly in an assessment mode, but I am not sure that I have been as explicit as I should be about what it is and why it is important. I have even started to mull the idea of having more open conversations with students about how they think they can apply learning. They may have some great ideas I haven’t thought of that lead us to deeper learning and/or more interesting cross-curriculum connections.
I definitely think this will be motivating to students. As I write this, I am realizing to what extent that I believe that control leads to increased motivation, and giving students more information about why they are participating in classroom learning activities definitely should give them a greater sense of control. From a teacher perspective, the risk of this is that students may ask reasonable questions about why they are “having” to do certain things and…their questions may reveal that there are better ways to develop mastery and apply learning. This might scare some teachers off, but honestly, I find it very exciting. Helping students understand why they are learning the way they are – fostering a “mastery orientation” – is an exciting next step for me in the classroom.
Costa, A.L. (2000). Habits of Mind. In A. Costa (Ed.), Developing Minds: A Resource Book for Teaching Thinking (3rd Ed.) Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
Hardiman, M.M. (2003). Connecting Brain Research with Effective Teaching: The Brain-Targeted Teaching Model. Rowman and Littlefield Education: New York.
• Our work in creating a concept map for BT-3 was extremely helpful; in the past I have developed essential questions as a lesson focus, but have not used a visual representation to clarify the relationships between lesson objectives.
• Readings and discussions about BT-4 have strengthened my focus on providing repeated rehearsals of learning that incorporate a range of perspectives or types of activities that include arts integration.
• This week’s work on BT-5 has refocused my attention on the need to have students get to the place where they can apply new learning. Honestly, I still have questions about how BT-5 fits between BT-4 and BT-6. I think mastery requires application and I realize I have often viewed application as a lens for evaluating mastery. Is it truly a separate stage? I’m still mulling that one.
All of this has supported my own development of a stronger “mastery orientation” in teaching. But is that “mastery orientation” something that students need, too, to enhance their active involvement in learning and their ownership of the learning as long-term memory? And if so, I can I foster it?
I think the answer to the first question is a resounding yes. I think students, especially as they get into the intermediate grades and above, need to be actively involved in the process of creating learning. The more they know about how they learn and what helps or hinders the process can only help them become more self-directed and more successful over time. I spent a great deal of time this week working on my research connections paper linking Habits of Mind with BT-4 and that model is also about students taking more control of understanding and applying thinking skills (Costa, 2000). I think awareness about how content is best absorbed and integrated into learning networks is equally useful.
During the last few weeks I believe I have already started to foster this awareness – more explicitly -- in students. I created concept maps for two new units that we are starting this week and have prepared copies for all students as well as large copies for posting in the classroom. My plan is to refer back to these as we begin and close each lesson so students can see how the learning fits into the larger picture.
In terms of varied practice, in my class we have already started a process – separate from this class – to better understand the non-verbal strengths that are so prevalent. Ninety percent of students in my classroom have non-verbal strengths identified on advanced learning plans and we are working to understand what that means for accessing and demonstrating learning. Within that context, it makes sense for me to specifically talk to students about the range of learning activities I have planned for them, noting which are designed to support non-verbal learning and which, to support other types of learning. I already build a lot of choice into lessons, but I have not been as specific in talking with students about what the choices represent in terms of varied gateways to understanding. Armed with discussions from this course, I am convinced that knowing more about that will help students make better choices about actively engaging in a range of activities.
Finally, a stronger focus on “teaching for application” will lead me to talk about it more explicitly with students. Again, I think I have frequently looked for application of ideas, particularly in an assessment mode, but I am not sure that I have been as explicit as I should be about what it is and why it is important. I have even started to mull the idea of having more open conversations with students about how they think they can apply learning. They may have some great ideas I haven’t thought of that lead us to deeper learning and/or more interesting cross-curriculum connections.
I definitely think this will be motivating to students. As I write this, I am realizing to what extent that I believe that control leads to increased motivation, and giving students more information about why they are participating in classroom learning activities definitely should give them a greater sense of control. From a teacher perspective, the risk of this is that students may ask reasonable questions about why they are “having” to do certain things and…their questions may reveal that there are better ways to develop mastery and apply learning. This might scare some teachers off, but honestly, I find it very exciting. Helping students understand why they are learning the way they are – fostering a “mastery orientation” – is an exciting next step for me in the classroom.
Costa, A.L. (2000). Habits of Mind. In A. Costa (Ed.), Developing Minds: A Resource Book for Teaching Thinking (3rd Ed.) Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
Hardiman, M.M. (2003). Connecting Brain Research with Effective Teaching: The Brain-Targeted Teaching Model. Rowman and Littlefield Education: New York.
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Week 4: Emotions and Cognition
This week’s discussions about BTT #1 have deepened my understanding of the relationship between cognitive and emotional factors in learning. The cognitive and emotional are intertwined and inseparable. Accepting this at a deep level, if I’m honest, is harder than it may seem. It contradicts centuries of philosophy, art, literature, and common thinking about the “objective” versus the “subjective,” the heart versus the mind, the brain versus emotions. (Perhaps a rose truly is not always a rose, but sometimes a thorny symbol of love lost and other times a thrilling hint of love just beginning…) This idea is truly radical at a very deep level, but the evidence for it is convincing. Equally convincing, the risks of ignoring it appear significant when it comes to helping students develop deep, transferrable understanding and the skills to apply knowledge and understanding in novel settings. While I think I have already adopted some practices that reflect social and emotional learning, there are specific things that are new, and important things I need to work on.
Prior to this class, experience had taught me that relationships had to precede learning. As a new, mid-career teacher 7 years ago I quickly came to realize that I am not an imparter of knowledge. The challenge is not to pour knowledge into waiting heads and a teacher can’t be replaced by a jar of knowledge – a book, computer, or canned activity. The challenge is to excite learners to actively incorporate knowledge and understanding, and to be truly effective a teacher must have a RELATIONSHIP with students before that can happen. Greeting students at the door, writing personal comments, acknowledging students’ interests and interacting beyond the school day are all important ways to build those relationships. Engendering trust and being genuine are part of it, too, as is letting students know that they are part of a community where it is safe to share ideas and take risks. Those are ideas that I believe I have been incorporating into my teaching practice – more effectively each year – for a while.
What’s new are some of the deeper and perhaps more radical ideas proposed by Immordino-Yang and Damasio (2007). First, they suggest that learning simply cannot happen devoid of emotion (p. 9). Emotion is not something that is along for the ride and it’s not only about students trusting teachers and having good relationships with them. Emotion is part of the way in which knowledge is understood, memories are made, brain connections are created. My new understanding is that trying to remove emotion from learning is like removing a piece of the track and still expecting a train to go from point A to point B. Hardiman (2003) also talks about this as she traces the path of a visual stimulus going from the thalamus to the neocortex and simlutaneously to the amygdala where emotional relevance is determined (p. 29). This idea tells me that any learning to which I am trying to expose students is being understood through a lens or channel or filter of emotion, and it’s not just me as the teacher that creates that emotion. Students may be responding to self-concepts, peer relationships, home struggles, and social preoccupations, as well as their relationships with me. I have a role in helping the student manage the emotional…lens, but it’s about a whole lot more than a student’s relationship with me.
My second deeper understanding is also based on Immordino-Yang and Damasio (2007). They propose that efforts to teach students only “objective” learning – a misguided effort anyway based on what I just discussed in the last paragraph – may result in the student creating a body of learning made up of knowledge that is inherently less useful – knowledge that doesn’t really transfer to “real-world” situations (p. 9). To me this means that by trying to be objective, to focus on something dressed up as being strictly objective and not personal, is focusing our efforts on teaching students things that does not accomplish what is really important: to “prepare skilled, informed, and ethical students who can navigate the world’s social, moral, and cognitive challenges as citizens” (Immordino-Yang and Damasio, 2007, p. 3).
Specifically, for me, these ideas have specific implications for my own growth as an effective educator. First, I need to broaden my lens of what it means to create a positive, emotional climate. How do I help students understand themselves emotionally and help them develop the skills to self-regulate and ensure that they are open to relevant, important learning? Second, I need to adjust my own view of what I am teaching. I’m not saying that I will reinvent content standards – I accept the responsibility to teach what my state tells me I must teach. However, I may need to delve deeper into those standards and understand not only how to present them in engaging ways, but how to appreciate and communicate their inherent emotional dimensions. Finally, I need to find ways to effectively assess the emotional climate in which my students are immersed. Is it positive? Can it be better? What about it is within my sphere of control and influence? And how can I measure whether needed improvement is occurring?
References
Hardiman, M. (2003). Connecting Brain Research With Effective Teaching: The Brain-Targeted Teaching Model. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Eduation.
Immordino-Yang, M. & Damasio, A. (2007.) We Feel Therefore We Learn: The Relevance of Affective and Social Neuroscience to Education. Mind, Brain, and Education, 1(1), 3-10. Retrieved from http:/olms.cte:jhu.edu/olms/data/resource/8038/Week4_ArticleWeFeelThereforeWeLearn.pdf
Prior to this class, experience had taught me that relationships had to precede learning. As a new, mid-career teacher 7 years ago I quickly came to realize that I am not an imparter of knowledge. The challenge is not to pour knowledge into waiting heads and a teacher can’t be replaced by a jar of knowledge – a book, computer, or canned activity. The challenge is to excite learners to actively incorporate knowledge and understanding, and to be truly effective a teacher must have a RELATIONSHIP with students before that can happen. Greeting students at the door, writing personal comments, acknowledging students’ interests and interacting beyond the school day are all important ways to build those relationships. Engendering trust and being genuine are part of it, too, as is letting students know that they are part of a community where it is safe to share ideas and take risks. Those are ideas that I believe I have been incorporating into my teaching practice – more effectively each year – for a while.
What’s new are some of the deeper and perhaps more radical ideas proposed by Immordino-Yang and Damasio (2007). First, they suggest that learning simply cannot happen devoid of emotion (p. 9). Emotion is not something that is along for the ride and it’s not only about students trusting teachers and having good relationships with them. Emotion is part of the way in which knowledge is understood, memories are made, brain connections are created. My new understanding is that trying to remove emotion from learning is like removing a piece of the track and still expecting a train to go from point A to point B. Hardiman (2003) also talks about this as she traces the path of a visual stimulus going from the thalamus to the neocortex and simlutaneously to the amygdala where emotional relevance is determined (p. 29). This idea tells me that any learning to which I am trying to expose students is being understood through a lens or channel or filter of emotion, and it’s not just me as the teacher that creates that emotion. Students may be responding to self-concepts, peer relationships, home struggles, and social preoccupations, as well as their relationships with me. I have a role in helping the student manage the emotional…lens, but it’s about a whole lot more than a student’s relationship with me.
My second deeper understanding is also based on Immordino-Yang and Damasio (2007). They propose that efforts to teach students only “objective” learning – a misguided effort anyway based on what I just discussed in the last paragraph – may result in the student creating a body of learning made up of knowledge that is inherently less useful – knowledge that doesn’t really transfer to “real-world” situations (p. 9). To me this means that by trying to be objective, to focus on something dressed up as being strictly objective and not personal, is focusing our efforts on teaching students things that does not accomplish what is really important: to “prepare skilled, informed, and ethical students who can navigate the world’s social, moral, and cognitive challenges as citizens” (Immordino-Yang and Damasio, 2007, p. 3).
Specifically, for me, these ideas have specific implications for my own growth as an effective educator. First, I need to broaden my lens of what it means to create a positive, emotional climate. How do I help students understand themselves emotionally and help them develop the skills to self-regulate and ensure that they are open to relevant, important learning? Second, I need to adjust my own view of what I am teaching. I’m not saying that I will reinvent content standards – I accept the responsibility to teach what my state tells me I must teach. However, I may need to delve deeper into those standards and understand not only how to present them in engaging ways, but how to appreciate and communicate their inherent emotional dimensions. Finally, I need to find ways to effectively assess the emotional climate in which my students are immersed. Is it positive? Can it be better? What about it is within my sphere of control and influence? And how can I measure whether needed improvement is occurring?
References
Hardiman, M. (2003). Connecting Brain Research With Effective Teaching: The Brain-Targeted Teaching Model. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Eduation.
Immordino-Yang, M. & Damasio, A. (2007.) We Feel Therefore We Learn: The Relevance of Affective and Social Neuroscience to Education. Mind, Brain, and Education, 1(1), 3-10. Retrieved from http:/olms.cte:jhu.edu/olms/data/resource/8038/Week4_ArticleWeFeelThereforeWeLearn.pdf
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Week One - New Questions
This first week has stretched my thinking in many new ways. The reading was, in many ways, review – but an important and useful review of the basics of the structure and organization of the nervous system and the structure and organization of the Brain-Targeted Teaching Model. I love that this is part of the course because it lays a consistent foundation for all of us – providing common background knowledge and vocabulary that can ground our conversations.
The more challenging part of the week involved the conversations on the discussion board. From a fairly simple prompt – How do you think the neuro- and cognitive sciences may be able to help inform your previous, current, or future work in educational settings? – dozens of different ideas and interests emerged. For me, I’ve formulated three new questions that will help shape my inquiries in this course. Thank you to the classmates whose posts prompted these questions for me!
1. What is perception and what does it mean/take for a student to change his or her perception and be more open to learning?
2. How can a better understanding of the brain help us identify and address the wide range of variables that contribute to “magic moments” of teaching and learning?
3. How does the internal process of learning (memory or sense-making) differ when a student is actively connecting to previous knowledge and extending ideas in creative ways…vs. when a student is memorizing a fact?
Perception: Thanks to one classmate I am thinking about what perception is. Is it something we experience? Or is it a filter that is created by our experiences? If it is a filter…what can influence how it is constructed and how it might be able to change? I have often said to students, family and friends – especially my own children -- that they have the power to change or adjust their attitudes and perceptions of what they experience…but do they? To what extent is that hard-wired or programmed and depending on that previous programming, how open is it to adjustment? Can understanding the reward system of the brain shed light on this?
Magic Moments: One of the most important things I took away from the portion of my student teaching in first grade was the incredible awe I felt for my cooperating teacher. Watching her graceful and purposeful planning and transitions through the day I felt as though I was watching a beautifully choreographed dance. She was able to bring together so many different threads to construct beautiful and 1st-grade-appropriately brief moments of intense learning all day long. I try to achieve that same thing each day with my fifth-graders, but it’s not always nearly so elegant. What if I knew better how to be sure that we shared the background knowledge, that we all feel safe and comfortable emotionally, that we achieve the right balance of guidance and independence? That our bodies are healthy and open to learning? Can the neuro- and cognitive sciences help me? Thank you to the early childhood educator who focused my thinking in this area.
Creativity: Thank you to another classmate whose post re-focused my attention, reminding me of the importance of creativity and higher-order thinking. As I wrote to her on the Discussion Board, developing creative thinkers is an important focus for me in the classroom, but to date I have compartmentalized it in a different place from my personal inquiries into neuroscience and learning about memory encoding. I think I need to bring those ideas together. What makes new learning higher level? Is it encoded differently? Is it linked to other learning differently? Is it accessed differently? How can I “enrich” for learning that becomes…higher?
Thanks to all the teachers in this cohort – not just those on the JHU payroll. Your posts have stretched my thinking in new and important ways.
The more challenging part of the week involved the conversations on the discussion board. From a fairly simple prompt – How do you think the neuro- and cognitive sciences may be able to help inform your previous, current, or future work in educational settings? – dozens of different ideas and interests emerged. For me, I’ve formulated three new questions that will help shape my inquiries in this course. Thank you to the classmates whose posts prompted these questions for me!
1. What is perception and what does it mean/take for a student to change his or her perception and be more open to learning?
2. How can a better understanding of the brain help us identify and address the wide range of variables that contribute to “magic moments” of teaching and learning?
3. How does the internal process of learning (memory or sense-making) differ when a student is actively connecting to previous knowledge and extending ideas in creative ways…vs. when a student is memorizing a fact?
Perception: Thanks to one classmate I am thinking about what perception is. Is it something we experience? Or is it a filter that is created by our experiences? If it is a filter…what can influence how it is constructed and how it might be able to change? I have often said to students, family and friends – especially my own children -- that they have the power to change or adjust their attitudes and perceptions of what they experience…but do they? To what extent is that hard-wired or programmed and depending on that previous programming, how open is it to adjustment? Can understanding the reward system of the brain shed light on this?
Magic Moments: One of the most important things I took away from the portion of my student teaching in first grade was the incredible awe I felt for my cooperating teacher. Watching her graceful and purposeful planning and transitions through the day I felt as though I was watching a beautifully choreographed dance. She was able to bring together so many different threads to construct beautiful and 1st-grade-appropriately brief moments of intense learning all day long. I try to achieve that same thing each day with my fifth-graders, but it’s not always nearly so elegant. What if I knew better how to be sure that we shared the background knowledge, that we all feel safe and comfortable emotionally, that we achieve the right balance of guidance and independence? That our bodies are healthy and open to learning? Can the neuro- and cognitive sciences help me? Thank you to the early childhood educator who focused my thinking in this area.
Creativity: Thank you to another classmate whose post re-focused my attention, reminding me of the importance of creativity and higher-order thinking. As I wrote to her on the Discussion Board, developing creative thinkers is an important focus for me in the classroom, but to date I have compartmentalized it in a different place from my personal inquiries into neuroscience and learning about memory encoding. I think I need to bring those ideas together. What makes new learning higher level? Is it encoded differently? Is it linked to other learning differently? Is it accessed differently? How can I “enrich” for learning that becomes…higher?
Thanks to all the teachers in this cohort – not just those on the JHU payroll. Your posts have stretched my thinking in new and important ways.
Saturday, September 25, 2010
First Reflection
As we get ready to start this program in earnest, I am very excited to learn. This group of students represents a wide variety of ideas and experiences, and beyond what I hope to learn from the JHU faculty and the readings we do, I am even more excited about what I will learn from others who are on this journey with me. By the end of the program I hope to have a more realistic picture of what we really know now about the brain and learning. What is real knowledge? What is conjecture and/or wishful thinking? And as we plow into the next decade of what I expect will be exciting research, what questions are getting the most attention and why?
I have enjoyed the learning activities in the orientation. The synchronous learning experiences – real-time classes – are a new experience and will add to the learning. I am especially excited about getting to know members of a small team and collaborating with them. To be successful, I’ll use many of the ideas mentioned in our live session. Checking the weekly syllabus early will be important, and planning ahead so that needed time is set aside for assignments. Taking the time to reflect – the blog will be great for this – will also be critical to make learning personal and more lasting.
I will probably need support from team-mates to broaden my perspectives on readings. I realize that I bring biases based on my experiences and beliefs. I look forward to changing my mind and reaching deeper understanding. On a much smaller front, I expect I may also reminders with APA. I will freely admit that I tend to value ideas and clear, interesting communication more than following specific stylistic conventions. I do know why they are important, however…like my students, sometimes I just get annoyed with what I think of as “little stuff,” like putting commas in or making sure the period is inside or outside the parentheses. To compile the potential problem, as a journalist/writer I absorbed and used AP conventions for so long some of those habits are hard to break. Thankfully I did okay on the APA pretest, but when rushed, I may need to take extra time to use the conventions precisely.
I have enjoyed the learning activities in the orientation. The synchronous learning experiences – real-time classes – are a new experience and will add to the learning. I am especially excited about getting to know members of a small team and collaborating with them. To be successful, I’ll use many of the ideas mentioned in our live session. Checking the weekly syllabus early will be important, and planning ahead so that needed time is set aside for assignments. Taking the time to reflect – the blog will be great for this – will also be critical to make learning personal and more lasting.
I will probably need support from team-mates to broaden my perspectives on readings. I realize that I bring biases based on my experiences and beliefs. I look forward to changing my mind and reaching deeper understanding. On a much smaller front, I expect I may also reminders with APA. I will freely admit that I tend to value ideas and clear, interesting communication more than following specific stylistic conventions. I do know why they are important, however…like my students, sometimes I just get annoyed with what I think of as “little stuff,” like putting commas in or making sure the period is inside or outside the parentheses. To compile the potential problem, as a journalist/writer I absorbed and used AP conventions for so long some of those habits are hard to break. Thankfully I did okay on the APA pretest, but when rushed, I may need to take extra time to use the conventions precisely.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)