MGTutoring.com. A Rational Perspective on Education.

October 29, 2009

Innovation, Inquisitiveness, and Upbringing

Filed under: Child Development, Education, Parenting — Administrator @ 10:29 am

In “How Do Innovators Think?” (HBR Editors’ Blog, 5:21 PM Monday September 28, 2009)
,  Bronwyn Fryer writes:

We also believe that the most innovative entrepreneurs were very lucky to have been raised in an atmosphere where inquisitiveness was encouraged. We were stuck by the stories they told about being sustained by people who cared about experimentation and exploration. Sometimes these people were relatives, but sometimes they were neighbors, teachers or other influential adults. A number of the innovative entrepreneurs also went to Montessori schools, where they learned to follow their curiosity. To paraphrase the famous Apple ad campaign, innovators not only learned early on to think different, they act different (and even talk different).

Copyright © 2009 Harvard Business Publishing. All rights reserved.

This is the kind of upbringing that Thomas Edison (see a previous post) and the Wright brothers (see anecdote 1 and  anecdote 2) had.

The context for this paragraph from “How Do Innovators Think?” is the initial answer to what Jeff Dyer (Brigham Young University) and Hal Gregersen (Insead) learned are important skills from their survey of 3,000 “creative” executives and interview of 500:

Dyer: The first skill is what we call “associating.” It’s a cognitive skill that allows creative people to make connections across seemingly unrelated questions, problems, or ideas. The second skill is questioning — an ability to ask “what if”, “why”, and “why not” questions that challenge the status quo and open up the bigger picture. The third is the ability to closely observe details, particularly the details of people’s behavior. Another skill is the ability to experiment — the people we studied are always trying on new experiences and exploring new worlds. And finally, they are really good at networking with smart people who have little in common with them, but from whom they can learn.

Fryer: Which of these skills do you think is the most important?

Dyer: We’ve found that questioning turbo-charges observing, experimenting, and networking, but questioning on its own doesn’t have a direct effect without the others. Overall, associating is the key skill because new ideas aren’t created without connecting problems or ideas in ways that they haven’t been connected before. The other behaviors are inputs that trigger associating — so they are a means of getting to a creative end.

Copyright © 2009 Harvard Business Publishing. All rights reserved.

We meet again Kipling’s “Six Honest Serving-Men.”

All this, thought for the day? No, a thought for life…

August 31, 2009

The Power of Reason: A Helen Keller Anecdote

Filed under: Child Development, Education, Language — Administrator @ 10:27 am

On the Internet is some 1930 newsreel footage (2 min 58 sec) of how Annie Sullivan taught Helen Keller to speak. Amazing…   HT:  Dr. D. H.

And “Helen Keller: In Her Story (clip)” is good. It has the comment — very pregnant with meaning and implications — “her hand is her chief link to the outer world.”

August 12, 2009

Raising the Young Reasoning Mind

Filed under: Child Development, Parenting — Administrator @ 7:57 am

There have been a number of posts on raising children and discipline that I have read in the past few months and that I’ve wanted to make people aware of, but I have been busy and forgetful. Here is an excerpt from one such post, entitled “The Nature of Children:”

Because they are proto-rational, not a-rational or irrational, we must teach a rational approach to problem solving. We cannot train them through rewards and punishments (behaviorism), as we would a-rational animals. We cannot be unkind to them, using retribution or a withdrawal of time or affection, assuming that they were capable of better choices…. Instead, we must use tools that teach better behaviors while respecting the burgeoning rationality of the child.

Because children are not inherently good, we cannot expect good behavior without practice. They must learn to make the choices that lead to positive outcomes (the good), and they must learn not to make choices that harm them (the bad). We cannot expect them to know things until they have had a chance to observe adults or experience the consequences of an action first hand. We cannot be angry because they don’t know how to behave – that is putting a wish before reality. No matter how much we wish children might be inherently good and make the right choices with ease, reality doesn’t work that way.

Because children are not inherently bad, we cannot assume that any annoying behavior is malicious. …  Instead of thinking of children as bad and needing to be straightened out, we think of them as inexperienced, acting wrongly, often because they have not connected an action to its negative consequences yet.

August 11, 2009

Mental Abilities of Dogs

Filed under: Animals, Child Development, Science — Administrator @ 7:55 am

In “Dogs as Smart as 2-year-old Kids” (Live Science; posted: 08 August 2009 02:00 pm ET), Jeanna Bryner, Senior Writer for Live Science, says:

The canine IQ test results are in: Even the average dog has the mental abilities of a 2-year-old child.

The finding is based on a language development test, revealing average dogs can learn 165 words (similar to a 2-year-old child), including signals and gestures, and dogs in the top 20 percent in intelligence can learn 250 words.

While dogs ranked with the 2-year-olds in language, they would trump a 3- or 4-year-old in basic arithmetic, Coren found. In terms of social smarts, our drooling furballs fare even better.

To get inside the noggin of man’s best friend, scientists are modifying tests for dogs that were originally developed to measure skills in children.

Here’s one: In an arithmetic test, dogs watch as one treat and then another treat are lowered down behind a screen. When the screen gets lifted, the dogs, if they get arithmetic (1+1=2), will expect to see two treats. (For toddlers, other objects would be used.)

But say the scientist swipes one of the treats, or adds another so the end result is one, or three treats, respectively. “Now we’re giving him the wrong equation which is 1+1=1, or 1+1=3,” Coren said. Sure enough, studies show the dogs get it. “The dog acts surprised and stares at it for a longer period of time, just like a human kid would,” he said.

These studies suggest dogs have a basic understanding of arithmetic, and they can count to four or five.

Other studies Coren notes have found that dogs show spatial problem-solving skills. For instance, they can locate valued items, such as treats, find better routes in the environment, such as the fastest way to a favorite chair, and figure out how to operate latches and simple machines.

© Imaginova Corp. All rights reserved.

But we have to use “mental abilities” loosely. The child has a consciousness that is developing into a rational consciousness; dogs do not. The child is going through this state of development of his/her consciousness; the dog is stuck there, and will develop no further.

While the dog and 2-year old show evidence of being able to do some of the same things, their mental content and methods might not be exactly identical. A child, for example, is just about ready to talk or is already talking; a dog is not and never will.

Update (6:00 PM): Top this, top dog!!  In “Toddler milestone: Talking,” on a Website called The Baby Center, they say:

(more…)

July 29, 2009

Silly Educational Methods

Filed under: Child Development, Education — Administrator @ 5:36 am

Wrong-headed attempt to practice “brain research” and all that. This looks like the same “research” that lead to some childrens’ shows changing to quick, jumpy sequences that do not let the child concentrate. Quite opposed to what Montessori teaches and does!!

It appears that the class in the video is functioning on the premise that we learn best when we learn in a “multi-sensory” fashion. Not necessarily the case. That idea has to be put in context (like the ancient Greeks, we should engage in full analysis and synthesis of the idea); it should not be taken and run with like a wild animal running scared from the wind.

July 9, 2009

Cognitive Development

Filed under: Child Development, Education — Administrator @ 7:27 am

Piaget’s stages of cognitive development:

1.  Sensorimotor stage (Infancy). In this period (which has 6 stages), intelligence is demonstrated through motor activity without the use of symbols. Knowledge of the world is limited (but developing) because its based on physical interactions/experiences. Children acquire object permanence at about 7 months of age (memory). Physical development (mobility) allows the child to begin developing new intellectual abilities. Some symbollic (language) abilities are developed at the end of this stage.

2. Pre-operational stage (Toddler and Early Childhood). In this period (which has two substages), intelligence is demonstrated through the use of symbols, language use matures, and memory and imagination are developed, but thinking is done in a nonlogical, nonreversable manner. Egocentric thinking predominates.

3. Concrete operational stage (Elementary and early adolescence). In this stage (characterized by 7 types of conservation: number, length, liquid, mass, weight, area, volume), intelligence is demonstarted through logical and systematic manipulation of symbols related to concrete objects. Operational thinking develops (mental actions that are reversible). Egocentric thought diminishes.

4. Formal operational stage (Adolescence and adulthood). In this stage, intelligence is demonstrated through the logical use of symbols related to abstract concepts. Early in the period there is a return to egocentric thought. Only 35% of high school graduates in industrialized countries obtain formal operations; many people do not think formally during adulthood.

Huitt, W., & Hummel, J. (2003). “Piaget’s theory of cognitive development.” Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved 6-21-09 from http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/cogsys/piaget.html

This is what I have (generally, non-scientifically) observed, too — but I had not put it to words, had not done a lot of work and research in the area, had not fully developed a theory, had not put it all into a science as Piaget had. Thanks to Piaget!

July 8, 2009

Montessori on Intelligence

Filed under: Child Development, Education — Administrator @ 7:33 am

Dr. Montessori points out how “intelligence” is not a “hard-wired” aspect of our consciousness, but is affected by how well-ordered our memory is (and, I’d say, also by how efficiently our subconscious functions):

The swift reactions among our children are not merely an external manifestation of the intelligence. They are related not only to the exercise, but also to the order which has been established within: and it is this intimate work of re-arrangement which is in itself a more exact indication of intellectual formation.

Order is, in short, the true key to rapidity of reaction. In a chaotic mind, the recognition of a sensation is no less difficult than the elaboration of a reasoned discourse. In all things, social as well as others, it is organiztion and order which make it possible to proceed rapidly.

(p. 156, The Advanced Montessori Method – I (formerly Spontaneous Activity in Education) by Dr. Maria Montessori, trans.s Florence Simmonds and Lily Hutchinson, Clio Press, Oxford, (c) 1991 Montessori-Pierson Estates, ISBN 1-85109-114-9.)

July 7, 2009

Human Nature vs Prussian Discipline

Filed under: Child Development, Education, Parenting — Administrator @ 7:34 am

In The Montessori Method, Dr. Maria Montessori wrote (pre-1912):

We often hear it said that a child’s will should be “broken” that the best education for the will of the child is to learn to give it up to the will of adults. Leaving out of the question the injustice which is at the root of every act of tyranny, this idea is irrational because the child cannot give up what he does not possess. We prevent him in this way from forming his own will-power, and we commit the greatest and most blameworthy mistake. He never has time or opportunity to test himself, to estimate his own force and his own limitations because he is always interrupted and subjected to our tyranny, and languishes in injustice because he is always being bitterly reproached for not having what adults are perpetually destroying.

There springs up as a consequence of this, childish timidity, which is a moral malady acquired by a will which could not develop, and which with the usual calumny with which the tyrant consciously or not, covers up his own mistakes, we consider as an inherent trait of childhood. The children in our schools are never timid. One of their most fascinating qualities is the frankness with which they treat people, with which they go on working in the presence of others, and showing their work frankly, calling for sympathy. That moral monstrosity, a repressed and timid child, who is at his ease nowhere except alone with his playmates, or with street urchins, because his will-power was allowed to grow only in the shade, disappears in our schools. He presents an example of thoughtless barbarism, which resembles the artificial compression of the bodies of those children intended for “court dwarfs,” museum monstrosities or buffoons. Yet this is the treatment under which nearly all the children of our time are growing up spiritually.

(more…)

June 25, 2009

Our Natural State: Action

Filed under: Child Development, Education, Parenting — Administrator @ 7:14 am

In The Montessori Method, Dr. Maria Montessori wrote:

True rest for muscles, intended by nature for action, is in orderly action; just as true rest for the lungs is in the normal rhythm of respiration taken in pure air. To take action away from the muscles is to force them away from their natural motor impulse, and hence, besides tiring them, means forcing them into a state of degeneration; just as the lungs forced into mobility, would die instantly and the whole organism with them.

It is therefore necessary to keep clearly in mind the fact that rest for whatever naturally acts, lies in some specified form of action, corresponding to its nature.

To act in obedience to the hidden precepts of nature — that is rest; and in this special case, since man is meant to be an intelligent creature, the more intelligent his acts are the more he finds repose in them.

(pp. 354, The Montessori Method by Dr. Maria Montessori, trans. Anne E. George, (c) 1964 Schocken Books, New York (and (c) 1988 Random House), ISBN 0-8052-0922-0)

This idea is generally consistent with evolution, Aristotle’s philosophy, the Renaissance’s and the Enlightenment’s ideas of reason, the philosophy of man of the ancient Greeks, modern science and technology…

June 24, 2009

In Thinking, Dig Deep

Filed under: Child Development, Education, Logic, Science — Administrator @ 7:15 am

“A little learning is a dang’rous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely sobers us again.

–from “Essay on Criticism,” by Alexander Pope

Things are not always as they seem, the video.

Now I don’t know what the people who made the advertisement want to say, and hence I don’t know if I’d agree with their message — do they want to say the educational system needs change? do they want to say anything goes and don’t judge? do they want to say the educational system stifles creativity? — but to me the video illustrates how we should not jump to conclusions, should look at the big picture, and should, objectively, put evidence in its proper context, in its proper relationship with other evidence and principles.

The parents, teacher, doctors and nurses are presented as jumping to conclusions, as failing to engage in proper induction: they think each piece of paper is all, in and of itself, in isolation to anything. They fail to relate part to whole, detail to abstraction — a critical aspect of thinking rationally.

The Greeks were masters of relating part to whole.

Edith Hamilton said:

Character is a Greek word, but it did not mean to the Greeks what it means to us. To them is stood first for the mark stamped upon the coin, and then for the impress of this or that quality upon a man, as Euripides speaks of the stamp — character — of valor upon Hercules, man the coin, valor the mark imprinted on him. To us a man’s character is that which is peculiarly his own; it distinguishes each one from the rest. To the Greeks it was a man’s share in qualities all men partake of; it united each one to the rest. We are interested in people’s special characteristics, the things in this or that person which are different from the general. The Greeks, on the contrary, thought what was important in a man were precisely the qualities he shared with all mankind.

(more…)

Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress