Re: [xmca] new national curriculum in Australia

[ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org]

I am curious Andy, do you believe the Ideal to be factual or is it based 
on faith?

eric




Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
Sent by: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
03/02/2010 06:17 AM
Please respond to ablunden; Please respond to "eXtended Mind, Culture, 
Activity"

 
        To:     Rod Parker-Rees <R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk>
        cc:     "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
        Subject:        Re: [xmca] new national curriculum in Australia


I really don't know the answer to this, Rod. I am just 
exploring,  but in that spirit ...

All teachers and probably all children like it best when the 
kids are just doing what they like doing, and of course they 
acquire competency and confidence if they learn like this. 
That's all nice and cosy. Ever since some time in the 1960s 
it has been near impossible to teach any other way (in many 
countries) in any case, because teachers can no longer 
exercise fearful authority or even respect ...

But how does one grasp the Holy Trinity, or Saggitarian 
personalities, Iconic representation or Nonalgebraic 
equations, ... or any of these concepts which belong to 
systems of activity and concepts which are foreign to the 
day to day life of children?

And if children just quietly accept the Holy Trinity without 
noticing that it is a concept based on Original Sin and the 
sacrifice of Christ on the Cross, which is not really 
factual ... is this a good thing?

Is there anything to learn at school? Or can we all just 
absorb everything we need to know without really trying? Are 
we all natural born masters?

I have in mind the material Chapter 5 of "Thinking and 
Speech." Vygotsky seems to think that learning concepts 
which are foreign to a child's day-to-day life is a 
completely different process from what happens when a child 
generalising from their own experience. It is only when the 
two processes meet that genuine understanding is possible. 
But if we shy away from teaching concepts, what is the result?



Andy

Rod Parker-Rees wrote:
> I would be opposed to JUST teaching the rules of mathematics or art 
(using the 'right' colours) AS rules before children have had a chance to 
do some groundwork on building up spontaneous concepts through immersion 
in a cultural environment in which people do the things that people do 
with maths and art.
> 
> I think John Holt once argued that if we taught children to talk in the 
same way that we teach them to read we would have many more elective mutes 
and children with speech delays. I am not thinking so much about the later 
stages of education but I think it is pretty clear that in the early years 
children benefit more from adults who follow and expand on their attention 
than from those who try to switch their attention to desirable, high value 
learning (like teachers who have to turn every form of play towards 
counting, naming shapes and colours etc.). Children are taught from very 
early on to associate learning with WORK - with all the affective baggage 
that goes with that. I often hear students saying how wonderful it is when 
children are learning 'without even knowing that they are learning', 
partly because sneaking stuff in under the radar is seen as a way of 
bypassing the 'work = boring and difficult' associations which children 
are assumed to have developed.
> 
> I do think there is a time and a place for teaching but I am not 
convinced that children always experience their teaching at appropriate 
times or in appropriate places!
> 
> All the best,
> 
> Rod
> 
> ________________________________________
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On 
Behalf Of Andy Blunden [ablunden@mira.net]
> Sent: 02 March 2010 09:42
> Cc: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: Re: [xmca] new national curriculum in Australia
> 
> So on that basis, Rod, you would also be opposed to the
> teaching of mathematics, and for that matter, art, unless
> the child was planning a career in a genuinely relevant
> profession, such as maths teacher or art teacher. :)
> 
> Andy
> 
> Rod Parker-Rees wrote:
>> I think there is a big affective difference between the way we learn 
first languages (or multiple mother, father and grandmother tongues) and 
the way we learn studied languages. I was taught French all through school 
but learned Italian by spending the best part of a year in Italy and i am 
conscious of differences in HOW I know each of these languages (and 
English). I have more of a feel for whether or not something sounds right 
in Italian but I know I know a lot more about the workings of French 
grammar.
>>
>> I wonder how useful it is to teach grammar, as a formal system of 
rules, to children who are still picking up on the 'feel' of their 
language. I still think that reading well written prose is probably the 
best way to develop this feel (picking up a set of 'intuitive' patterns 
about 'the done thing' or 'what people do, as a rule') but of course this 
helps to develop a 'gut feeling' about the grammar of WRITTEN language - 
we also need plenty of exposure to different styles of spoken language so 
that we can develop sensitivities to what works when and with whom (I 
never had much time for those primary schools which insisted that children 
must only be exposed to one, 'correct' way of forming letters - one font - 
for fear of confusing them!).
>>
>> The time for learning about conventional rules AS rules may be when we 
start to ask questions about why some people say it this way and some say 
it that way. We know from studies of language acquisition that a huge 
amount of time can be wasted on trying to condition children to follow a 
rule which they have not yet noticed.
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Rod
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On 
Behalf Of Andy Blunden [ablunden@mira.net]
>> Sent: 02 March 2010 02:21
>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> Subject: [xmca] new national curriculum in Australia
>>
>> Our immensely incompetent Labor Government yesterday
>> announced their new national curriculum for schools
>> (formerly this was a state responsibility).
>>
>> It features the teaching of history from the very beginning,
>> including indigenous history (this is an unambiguous good)
>> and emphasises the 3 Rs, including grammar. No curriculum
>> has been set yet in Geography and other subjects.
>>
>> http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/a-sound-beginning-20100301-pdlv.html
>>
>> Helen raised with me off-line this problem of reintroducing
>> the teaching of grammar: who is going to educate the
>> educators? Anyone under 55 today did not learn grammar at
>> school or until they did a foreign language, when they
>> learnt the grammar of the other language. (Grammar means
>> "Which icon do I click now?")
>>
>> What do xmca-ers think about teaching grammar? (I am in favour.)
>>
>> Also, many progressive educators here are opposed to
>> curricula in toto: education should be about learning not
>> content. Do xmca-ers agree?
>>
>> Given the disastrous implementation of policies by this
>> government over the past 2 years, I fear for our education
>> system. What do people think?
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>
>> 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
>> Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov,
>> Ilyenkov $20 ea
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> 
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
> Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov,
> Ilyenkov $20 ea
> 
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov, 
Ilyenkov $20 ea

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca


_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca