Tuesday, October 15, 2013

Activity 7.5: What makes a Successful Learner?

Activity 7.5: What makes a Successful Learner?

Malcolm Gladwell’s (2008) Outliers is the piece I chose to listen to and read. I wonder why they are not verbatim. After I answer the questions, I will pose some additional questions.
Gladwell’s main points are that work ethic varies between cultures and that this may help explain the gap between American and Asian fourth and eighth graders math scores on the international TIMSS test, given every four years. His claim is that the Asian nations consistently out score Americans due to a long history of year-round commitment to very precise, labor-intensive, communal rice production, which teaches hard work and discipline in all areas of life, especially education. Attitude and effort, besides the fact that Americans go to school about 180 days versus 243 for the Japanese, are affecting learning, thus test scores. I agree with Gladwell, that longer days and a year round school calendar, eliminating the long summer breaks, and emphasizing such character strengths as grit, self-control, and resiliency, may help bridge the gap between our own schools, and those of other nations.  Will American parents and children, buy into this framework, be willing to work this hard and give up their summer vacation? I agree with Gladwell, that culturally we have major differences, but that U.S. agriculture began with very few settlers working massive acres of land in the prairies, which over time has led to increased mechanization, from the family farm to huge agribusiness conglomerates. My pop and his father worked for John Deere for over 70 years between them, my father designing engines for enormous combines. It is hard to compare the small, labor-intensive rice paddies, to the Iowa corn and soybean production, and yes, these differences reflect our cultures.  Gladwell also claims that Asians are better at math because there is a “big difference in how numbering-naming systems in Western and Asian languages are constructed” (p. 228), making Chinese simpler, sensible, and more logical, which allows them to be able hold more digits (up to ten) into memory. So the fact that Asians score higher on the math tests, have less to do with IQ, and more to do with language and culture.

I have studied the KIPP program’s development of the character strengths report card, which Paul Tough (2012) discusses in his publications, and I think if our youth can learn how to put forth effort, perseverance, and motivation, they will also develop the self-regulation skills, strong self-efficacy, and agency to successfully engage in school and life in general. There is also the element of chance as discussed by Bandura (2011) since the students’ fate, is determined by the luck of a lottery to be allowed an opportunity to attend KIPP. These and other factors mentioned by Gladwell, absolutely fit into the social cognitive theoretical framework, with an emphasis on teachers, parents and learners to become growth-minded, goal-oriented, lifelong learners, within any culture.
 

Gladwell’s views are most consistent with social cognitive theorists, especially Zimmerman (2002) and Bandura (2011), in that they endorse modeling, self-efficacy, and self-regulation processes to improve learning.  Bandura states that the behaviorists believed learning to be “by direct experiences through paired stimulation and response consequences” (p. 1), whereas he feels that “observational learning” takes place “from the myriad modeling influences in their social and symbolic environment” (p. 1).  So like Gladwell, he recognizes the influence of one’s cultural and environmental affects upon the individual’s and a society’s system of learning. American’s may apply Asian educational models of effort, endurance and precision, from their high, agricultural standards, to improve our own educational system. Zimmerman emphasizes the value of study, many hours of practice, and self-efficacy and regulatory process skills, that experts have developed. This dedication and motivation serves as a model for novices in various fields from academics, to sports and hobbies. Research shows that in schools, like KIPP, “each self-regularity process or belief, such as gold setting, strategy use, and self-evaluation, can be learned from instruction and modeling by parents, teachers, coaches, and peers” (p. 69). Gladwell sees the influence of Asian culture on language, mathematics, agriculture, work ethic and education, in general, on a macro and historical level, dating back thousands of years, while Bandura and Zimmerman, on a micro level, see the learning by the individual or self, in a relatively young, historically, and diverse United States. In terms of learning and our educational system, with a bit of luck, dedication, desire, and “baby steps,” Americans can compete, globally.

Gladwell discusses failure in learning as he refers to a famous video made by Alan Schoenfeld about a woman in her twenties, named Renee, solving a math problem about slope. The perseverance and determination she possessed was atypical in that she had the will to keep trying even after she failed, trying for twenty-two minutes. The typical high school student gave up after two minutes. “We sometimes think of being good at mathematics as an innate ability. You either have “it” or you don’t. But, to Schoenfeld, it’s not so much ability as attitude. You master mathematics if you are willing to try. Success is a function of persistence and doggedness and the willingness to work hard at something for twenty-two minutes to make sense of something that most people would give up on after thirty seconds” (p. 246).

Some people quit when faced with failure, while others see failure as a step in the right direction, since one rules out something after each attempt, until correct. The behaviorist sees each response to a stimulus as either a success or failure, followed by a reinforcing stimulus, positive or negative. With operant conditioning, a failed response to a discriminating stimulus receives a negative reinforcing stimulus. The reinforcement can be continuous or intermittent, but the subject “learns” the correct response to the stimulus to avoid failure, or punishment, thus receives the positive reinforcement.
William James (1890?) says that how one handles failure is about having a positive attitude “Success or failure depends more upon attitude than upon capacity, successful men act as though they have accomplished or are enjoying something. Soon it becomes a reality. Act, look, feel successful, conduct yourself accordingly, and you will be amazed at the positive results.”  Some might say, fake it until you make it.

I do believe there are certain ingredients or recipes for developing successful children, but they involve commitment on the part of everyone involved in the process. Gladwell's description of the KIPP program may in and of itself be a recipe for success. "It is not the brightest that succeed. Outliers are those who have been given opportunities - and who have had the stength and presence of mind to seize them" (p. 267). The Kipp program is offering those opportunities, and success, to more and more children, as they have expanded to over 140 schools across the country. Carol Dweck, in Mindset (2006), reveals the secrets of some great teachers and their students, also great coaches and their players, to discover how to promote success in our youth. You may notice that some of the “ingredients” are on both lists.
 

This compilation of ingredients, or words of wisdom, were borrowed from the following teachers, coaches and former players: Carol Dweck, Marva Collins, Raife Esquith, Dorothy DeLay, (Bobby Knight), Daryl Thomas, Steve Alford, Isiah Thomas, John Wooden, Bill Walton, Denny Crum, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Pat Summit, Pat Riley, and Alex Rodriguez.

Recipe for Success
Ingredients recommended for parents and teachers to raise successful children: Combine the following ingredients in any order, and then mix gently, with lots of love.


Believe that anything is possible.
Care about every child.
Give respect, equal time and attention to all children.
Provide a nurturing atmosphere.
Show genuine affection for your children.
Continue to learn along with your children.
Know it is okay to not know everything, just know how to find out the answers.
Be growth-minded, non-judgmental, and selfless.
Have high standards for all children then, teach them how to reach them.
Do hard things that fill their brains.
Be excited about the process of discovery and sharing in your kids’ discoveries.
Be warm and accepting.
Be strict and provide disciplined, but a loving atmosphere.
Tell children when they are behind, then lay out a plan of attack.
Provide an atmosphere of affection and deep personal commitment to every student.
Challenge and nurture at the same time.
Teach how to reach high standards.
Teach children to love learning, to eventually learn and think for themselves.
Work hard on the fundamentals.
There are no shortcuts.
Ask for full commitment and full effort.
Know there is no magic.
Tell them the truth and give them the tools to succeed.
Do not give up on kids nor let them give up on themselves.
Have the desire to reach in and ignite the mind of every child.
Love to learn.

Ingredients recommended for children to achieve success: Combine the following ingredients in any order, and continue incorporating until firm and set.

Believe that anything is possible.
Know that if you can do it here, you can do it everywhere.
Know it is okay to not know everything, just know how to find out the answers.
Success, is not coming to you, you must come to it.
Know there is no magic.
Work hard on the fundamentals.
Be excited about the process of discovery
Know there are no shortcuts.
If you do not give anything, do not expect anything.
Do hard things that fill your brains.
Do not give up on yourself.
Love to learn.

Questions regarding motivation:
1. Why do social cognitive theorists consider fortuity, or chance occurrences, as a part of human functioning?
2. How would, placing an emphasis on strengthening children’s’ self-efficacy and establishing self-regulation processing skills, as early as age two, affect the achievement gap later in adolescence?
3. If there is evidence (Alexander), that summer vacation, affects the achievement gap, between the lower, middle and upper class (socioeconomic) children, why not institute a year round calendar, in our public schools?
4. Do Americans value summer vacation and leisure time over learning? What is preventing our schools from spending education dollars on extending the school year through summer, if it means closing the achievement gap?

Sunday, October 13, 2013

Activity 7.4: Implicit Theories of Ability


Activity 7.4: Implicit Theories of Ability


The article and videos by Carol Dweck (2006) were interesting. I was able to reflect on my own learning and teaching style. I do watch sports and am familiar with the three notable coaches, and of course, as a teacher, am familiar with the techniques espoused by Marva Collins. The essence of Dweck's philosphy is that teachers, coaches, and parents must care equally about each one of their children, create a nurturing environment, yet set extremely high standards and expectations for all, both "challenge and nurture" (Delay, p. 192). We need to teach our subjects to love learning, modeling the behavior, by demonstrating our own love for learning. This brings me back to the term "obuchenie" or the dynamic relationship of learning between teacher and learner, at the same time. Dweck differentiates between two types of adults. Growth-minded are continually learning, self-less, kind, caring, positive, firm and flexible. Fixed-minded are judgmental, finished products in that they have nothing more to learn, self-centered, negative and inflexible. Dweck's belief is that, "as parents, teachers, and coaches, we are entrusted with people's lives. They are our responsibility and our legacy. We now know that the growth mindset has a key role to play in helping us fulfill our mission and in helping them fulfill their potential" (p. 204).

I decided to add a rather "clunky" audio link to my post that demonstrates how teachers can use questioning techniques designed to, either stifle or expand the thinking processes, learning and language expression in children. I worked with three nine-ten year old girls, introducing them to the mathematics concept, "quadrilaterals" for an elementary mathematics class. My goal was to try to elicit from them their knowledge using oral language, drawing, and technology after each task. Alice revealed not only incredible knowledge and ability to articulate that knowledge, but a kindness, sensitivity, and maturity that was unexpected in a nine-year-old kid. I had to be careful not to stifle her open expression by cutting her off with responses like "Good job!" or "That's right!" Her description of the book she had read was so insightful; as was her story about encouraging a kindergarten girl, she did not know who was in tears due to some negative comment made by some fixed-minded individual. Alice told her she should not always believe what people say and calmed her by softly chanting, "Take deep breaths in, and blow out, breath in, then breath out." This occurred after I answered her thoughtful question asking me what I really like about my job, but before we even began the math lesson and questioning techniques. This young girl is a growth-minded person, most likely raised by growth-minded parents (her mother is a psychologist), and encouraged by growth-minded teachers. 

(This link is the audio of the interview I did with "Alice" using questioning techniques. It will download in less than a minute. It will open a file called "Alice". Double click on that and it will open to Windows Media Player. Please START at minute 4:30 and STOP at minute 7:00. Feel free to listen to more if you are interested in the math lesson.)


* Alice link has been removed.

Activity 7.3: Responding to Bandura (2011)



Activity 7.3: Responding to Bandura (2011)

Question: In Albert Bandura’s (2011) piece, “But What About That Gigantic Elephant in the Room?” he states that social cognitive theory is “founded on an agentic perspective toward human self-development, adaption, and change. To be an agent is to influence the course of events by one’s actions” (p. 4). Bandura proposes a dynamic relationship between individuals and their environments. Is Bandura suggesting that through agency, humans have “deliberate, reflective, (and) self-referential” (p. 4) free will within our social/environmental framework or structure? How would psychologists argue this position?

Quotation: Fortuitous means happening by chance or fortunate accident. Bandura states that people “exercise some measure of control over their self-development and life circumstances But there is a lot of fortuity in the courses lives take” (p. 8). People “can make chance happen by pursuing an active life that increases the number and type of fortuitous encounters they will experience. Chance favors the inquisitive and venturesome, who go places, do things, and explore new activities. People also make chance work for them by cultivating their interests, enabling beliefs and competencies. These personal resources enable them to make the most of opportunities that arise unexpectedly” (p. 9).

Personal Connection: Bandura talks about fortuitous events that can have very little or long lasting effects on people. “The types of settings in which one moves, and the types of people who populate those settings make some types of intersects more probable than others. Hanging out in a University library will spawn different intersects than hanging out with the Hell’s Angels” (p. 9).  The story of meeting my husband when I was a freshman and he was a senior in college is a story of serendipity, or chance. I had seen him several times in the university library often with a woman. I thought he was cute, but it appeared he had a girlfriend. One day, Jeannie from my dorm, said we should go over to another dining hall to eat because she wanted to show me a guy that worked there with a cute butt. We went that night, and the guy she pointed out was the same guy I had seen in the library. The next night, back at my own dining hall, there sitting with Mark, a guy I was kind of dating, was the guy with the cute butt! I was freaking out a bit when Mark called me over to say hello, but he did not introduce me to the cute butt guy. Later that night, I told Mark that I did not want to date him anymore. A couple of nights later, I went to the library looking for a book about the artist Salvador Dali to do research for my painting class. The art books were in a room called “The Browsing Room”, so I walked in and sitting there on a love seat was the cute butt guy, all alone.  I smiled and walked right up to him and sat down next to him. We talked so long he was late to his world religions class. He invited me to a play. When we met to see the play, it was sold out, so we studied back at the library, where we first met in The Browsing Room. Four years later, we were married, and this year we celebrated our thirty-fifth wedding anniversary. That is serendipity.

Outside Connection: Bandura quotes Groucho Marx who said about chance, “you have to be in the right place at the right time, but when it comes, you better have something on the ball” (p. 9). There have been many movies made about chance, or serendipity, even one titled, “Serendipity.” There are, “Sleepless in Seattle,” “My Best Friend’s Wedding,” “Under the Tuscan Sun,” and my favorite, “Love Actually.” These are all romantic stories that place the characters in situations where they first happen to meet, have a connection, separate for some reason or another, and then spend the rest of the movie trying to reconnect, by trying to place themselves in, or reproduce, similar situations or intersects hoping for fate or chance to reunite them in love. Link to: "Serendipity"