|
 Learning Theory Week 14 Reflection Blog Entry
Dan Wood [Cadre 11] - 12/06/2008
Wow - the final week of classes for this semester is coming up! In some ways it has gone very fast, in others it feels like so much time has passed since we started this semester. I believe this is because of the amount of new knowledge I have gained and the difference I see in myself. From my perspective I have become more critical (in a positive sense), more thoughtful, more reflective, and more knowledgeable of concepts related to learning.
I have been thinking a lot lately about Daniel Pink\'s book A Whole New Mind, which has also been the topic of some heated debate within the EDC 664 class. Gary Stager\'s strong opinions about the books, as well as the opinions of many in the Cadre, have been floating through my mind (both the left and the right side have had a go at it) as I read the book and have had many conversations with others about the book. It really seems to boil down to those who like it and those who don\'t. I have not found a great deal of middle ground so far, perhaps I have missed something though...
As I read the book I have found myself agreeing with those who see it as largely a \'repackaging\' of previously known, but perhaps not widely spread, concepts related to whole learning. I find this interesting as the Tom Peters quote on the cover claims it to be "Completely original and profound." I kept making notes in the margin of the book about how Papert had already discovered much of what Pink is espousing in terms of learning through projects that covers multiple subjects - particularly in the "Design" chapter. Where Pink focuses on design, Papert focused on computer programming with Logo to expand knowledge of mathematics and tie to other subject areas including music, movement, design, physics, etc. What I found almost offensive about the book was the lack of any mention of the work of Papert, or the concepts of experiential learning from Dewey or other learning theorists. For a book that so many in education hold up as a powerful commentary on what we need to do today in education I find that concerning. I just don\'t see it as an book about how people learn - maybe that was never the intent.
I\'m not trying to bash Pink for his work, but from a critical level there is a great deal about his writing that I find to be overly generalized and in many cases blatantly obvious. Ideas such as stories help us learn, that demonstrating care for kids by creating a safe clean school will yield more engaged, successful students, and that meaning and relevance are important motivators certainly do not strike me as "completely original" based on my own knowledge and experience and what I have been learning in the OMET program. As I look back on the semester and consider the learning theories we have studied such as Smith, Lave and Wenger, John Dewey, Papert, and others, I find myself thinking that Pink has not taken a hard look at any \'real\' learning theory before making his determinations about how education should be structured.
As I first began reading the book I thought that perhaps what he had accomplished was to basically put some difficult concepts into an easily absorbed package - thus the immense public appeal for the book. However, in moving deeper into the book I found it to sound much more like a self-help book on how to be a more innovative, holistic thinker in service to this emerging design culture that he thinks we need to cultivate in order to be competitive in the world economy. Here I agree with Greg. Are we to assume that Pink does not feel that there is a value in the world working together toward the same objectives? Or, does he think that the rest of the world - those countries where he says all \'knowledge work\' is being sent - do not think conceptually or make leaps, or create innovative design? I realize that I am being highly assumptive and general myself and I am doing so to make a point that this \'Conceptual Age\' age, as Pink proudly has named our era, is not an age unto the US alone and to be about globally solving problems we are going to need to work equally with the countries that Pink seems to be happy to ship off what he seems to feel is outdated work.
If someone picks up this book and it makes them push for arts in the school, or a more holistic approach to education, or it just makes them treat people better out of empathy than I can\'t call it all bad. Rather than see it as a book for education, I see it as a business book and not one upon which I would base all of my international business relationships and practices.
|
|
