from Terry Haik
Not thinking behind an idea should bother us, but more recently the effect of the idea.
#Edtech. Content -based academic standards. PLCS. Video streaming. Using data. Mandates to be based on research in our behavior. Remote teaching. Differentiation. Social media in the classroom.
None of these ideas are good or bad in itself. They are just ideas. They are the value-neutral-inert in isolation. We only charge them when we internalize them – think about them, using our unique scheme, imagine them in circumstances known to us or otherwise to context them comfortably to avoid cognitive dissonance.
By internalizing them, we smooth their rough edges for easier consumption. Who wants to feel that they have an incomplete understanding of something? At this point, however, the idea lost its original shape. This is an abuse – the same difference between a real dog and a clown curves in brown and white balloons.
The transition from a concept or idea to something we understand in our own conditions is not a small change. And it comes with a loss. By internalizing an idea, we also apply emotions to them-a pre-optimism, shocking skepticism. Or indifference.
For example, I love the idea of personalized learning, so I apply positive feelings to it that can lead me to cognitive distortions downstream, where I simplify its function or crash my continuous misunderstanding of its potential in education. I support it, but “it” (personalized training in this case) is just an idea. The IT + context is different. This is chemistry.
Think of it as a model: Idea->Integration->EffectS
Only the idea is only useful as a matter of vision or artistry. As an academic or intellectual exercise. As a matter of playful dialogue or good old -fashioned bench competitions.
Integration is a matter of design and engineering (designer and engineer are two minds of a teacher).
Ideas, integrations and effects, of course, “all this is also recursive: one affects the other, the idea that affects the integration, the integration affecting the effect, the effect shines a new light on the idea. Maybe then, instead of linear Idea–->Integration->EffectWe may think instead of something as a triangle:
Idea
Integration Effect
Changing our thinking
And instead of “is that good idea? “We can ask other questions:
What is it? What are its parts? What does it look like?
What is it doing?
How does it work?
What does it cost? Effect? Change?
How does he support teachers – to teach creatively and intellectual and human act instead of a matter of politics, procedure and survival?
What are its effects -and not the narrow effects in the search for a single goal, but more recently macro effects on something in its birthplace?
In education, they can be compensated as:
What is the standardization of content in a narrow set of fields of content made for learning?
How has a gammed education system worked for children as they strive to become whole human beings capable of working, compassion for the people around them and nuanced digital and physical citizenship?
See also What should school do?
How did education withdraw in a braid of politics and jargon, influenced the ability of families and communities to serve from their own training?
How do teachers react when they are called to be “based on research”? Does this encourage them to pour reviewed magazines into emerging pedagogy to introduce only a “proven” methodology in their classroom? Or sends them to Google to look for ‘Instructive Strategies based on research“Where they find the same 6-8 examples that are being tossed and lifeless in their next lesson plan because this is said?
Let’s expand our opinion. Let us pretend for a moment that we will eventually be able to design a teaching and training system where every student will be able to master every academic standard that the local authority has set for them. What is the effect of this system? To this mastery? What do we take for standards and their mastery? That they will create a nation from critical thinkers who do incredible things?
And this system – what do we take for it and its effects? What does it “do” to children? When they complete this hypothetical machine, will they have a strong sense of self -discovery, wisdom, place and family heritage? Of critical thinking, work and love? If not, is it okay?
Is this even the predicted effect we are looking for? If not, what is it? We need to know, right?
Ideas like effects
The converted classroom is good, right? 1: 1? Creating an education? The 3D printer in the library? Yes, as ideas. So what do they do? What are their effects? The idea is always neutral.
The “good idea” is marketing based on emotion and appearance. How is it applied in a critical, what are its effects? Technology. PD based on a workshop. Snark on Twitter. This grouping strategy you planned to use tomorrow.
And be careful about the indicators or evidence you are looking for. This new interrogation strategy may have 65% more engagement than students, but it may have accepted students fighting the question themselves. It is the same with the teacher alone PD, 3-minute corridor switches or labeling of a school such as “good” or “bad”. Saying something is a “good idea” can only be accepted if we move directly to a conversation about integration and then in force.
“What are its effects?” is a complex question that deserves our thinking and the most careful genius. But an even more dignified for our collective attachment can be: “What does our children do because they strive to become more human -to grow intellectually, creative and in wisdom and love?”
We can then encounter our necks down the stream than we are used to seeing what we – and they – to move together.
