As a rebuttal to my blog post about the viability of RC, Stephen raised a potent problem; i.e. a Radical Constructivist encounters difficulties when participating in civil duties that are tied, explicitly, to notions of truth and fact(e.g. a jury). Could a Radical Constructivist, he asks, participate in our legal system?
You are right to focus on the problem of the other. If we are limited to our own experiences how are we to render a verdict about the truth of another's action? But again, the notion of fitting, is the manner in which the RC will defend this.
Elisha was chosen for a jury; she even scoffed when the judge asked them to deliberate while considering the facts of the case. She understands the unenlightened nature of our legal system, but her previous experiences seem to comfort her and allow her to perform, to the best of her ability, the charge given. But how is that so? How can she rely on testimony...etc...It is viable, per her previous experiences, that persons of authority relay their experiences as they are viable to them. She formulates her opinion on whether or not Amanda stole the drugs (crime in question) from the viability of her own experiences; i.e. the reliability, though not perfect, of the experiences of others. She determines whether or not the viability that Amanda stole them is high enough to recommend punishment.
This is one possible avenue of defense for the RCist. As a realist, I have my doubts, and so my question is this: does that hypothetical actually cohere with RC?
Sunday, February 27, 2011
Metaphysical Moment; Or, a Response to Edward Manak
Edward asked: How vital is the question of metaphysics to education?
I was unclear, at first, how to best answer your question; it is an important one, often lost within the quagmires of detail. You are right, I think, to be concerned about spending too much time of this question, fearing that insufficient attention shall be paid to other questions. That having been said, I think the question is of great importance.
Metaphysics is potently pertinent in many ways, especially its connection to epistemology, as they are never easily separated. Realism refers, often, to both an epistemological and metaphysical position, as does Radical Constructivism, although they will try to do epistemology absent metaphysics. It is easier, I think to understand why epistemology is so vital to education. The method by which knowledge is constructed or attained is vital to the very basic issue of education and pedagogy. If teachers are to educate students (and vice versa) it is important to understand how that process happens and what that process means.
So the answer to your question runs thus: Epistemology is vital to education. Metaphysics is vital to epistemology. Therefore, metaphysics is vital to education.
Question: If metaphysics and epistemology are as vital as I suggest, what are the direct and specific ramification within the classroom. (Or without for that matter, but education, when we quintessentially refer to it, occurs in a classroom.)
I was unclear, at first, how to best answer your question; it is an important one, often lost within the quagmires of detail. You are right, I think, to be concerned about spending too much time of this question, fearing that insufficient attention shall be paid to other questions. That having been said, I think the question is of great importance.
Metaphysics is potently pertinent in many ways, especially its connection to epistemology, as they are never easily separated. Realism refers, often, to both an epistemological and metaphysical position, as does Radical Constructivism, although they will try to do epistemology absent metaphysics. It is easier, I think to understand why epistemology is so vital to education. The method by which knowledge is constructed or attained is vital to the very basic issue of education and pedagogy. If teachers are to educate students (and vice versa) it is important to understand how that process happens and what that process means.
So the answer to your question runs thus: Epistemology is vital to education. Metaphysics is vital to epistemology. Therefore, metaphysics is vital to education.
Question: If metaphysics and epistemology are as vital as I suggest, what are the direct and specific ramification within the classroom. (Or without for that matter, but education, when we quintessentially refer to it, occurs in a classroom.)
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Viable Practicality: Or, a Response to All
A response to all:
While perusing this last week of blogging I have noticed an implicit consensus from many if not all who have commented on radical constructivism; i.e. RC is impractical in that it renders functionality in a society impossible. This is an inaccuracy, borne, I think, from a misconception of the theory itself. The radical constructivist will not posit the existence of an external reality, but neither will she spend all of her cognitive power constantly exercising the doubt inherent in her philosophy. RC does not beget paranoia in this way. What the realist considers to be true, the radical constructivist does not think to be untrue, but rather, considers it viable. This viability is the solid foundation upon which the constructivist operates and can thus interact with a society.
Elisha is a radical constructivist. She need not actively doubt the metaphysical properties of her daily blueberry bagel; its existence is viable which is enough to for her. Her bike ride to the store is not laden with her constant worry about the existence of the sidewalk; its existence fits with all her previous experiences. Her metaphysical agnosticism does not keep her from playing the flute almost every day; its existence, while not certain, fits and is viable...notice the pattern?...etc...
Radical constructivism is not without its difficulties; they are plenty and fatal. Does Radical Constructivism beget a paranoid person incapable of existing and interacting within a society? No. When is it prudent to doubt the existence of reality? Always.
Question: Does this notion of 'fitting' and 'viability' successfully disarm these concerns?
While perusing this last week of blogging I have noticed an implicit consensus from many if not all who have commented on radical constructivism; i.e. RC is impractical in that it renders functionality in a society impossible. This is an inaccuracy, borne, I think, from a misconception of the theory itself. The radical constructivist will not posit the existence of an external reality, but neither will she spend all of her cognitive power constantly exercising the doubt inherent in her philosophy. RC does not beget paranoia in this way. What the realist considers to be true, the radical constructivist does not think to be untrue, but rather, considers it viable. This viability is the solid foundation upon which the constructivist operates and can thus interact with a society.
Elisha is a radical constructivist. She need not actively doubt the metaphysical properties of her daily blueberry bagel; its existence is viable which is enough to for her. Her bike ride to the store is not laden with her constant worry about the existence of the sidewalk; its existence fits with all her previous experiences. Her metaphysical agnosticism does not keep her from playing the flute almost every day; its existence, while not certain, fits and is viable...notice the pattern?...etc...
Radical constructivism is not without its difficulties; they are plenty and fatal. Does Radical Constructivism beget a paranoid person incapable of existing and interacting within a society? No. When is it prudent to doubt the existence of reality? Always.
Question: Does this notion of 'fitting' and 'viability' successfully disarm these concerns?
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Practically Physical; or, a Response to Edward Manak
Edward asked: Should schools be concerned with the physical and emotional well-being of their students as well as the intellectual?
My answer to this question is in two parts:
First, you cite studies that demonstrate aerobic exercise helps to improve problem solving ability and I.Q. scores. (I shall not for the purpose of this post, but I.Q. scores, are, at best, I think, a drastically over emphasized assessment of intelligence and at worst, though most likely, dysfunctional both in application and generation.) If these studies are accurate, as I have little reason to doubt, than it would seem that physical and emotional well-being are not entirely distinct, and to be concerned with one is to be concerned with the other.
Secondly, it depends. There is a significant quantity and severity of difference between compulsory and non-compulsory education. In k-12, it is well within the right of the school system, although I disliked it at the time, to enforce a Physical Education requirement. But post-secondary education must entail a greater amount of responsibility. Part and parcel to this responsibility is the ability to make more decisions for oneself. The student's education is more their prerogative, and this should be reflected in the physical education requirement, i.e. it should not exist. Student in post-secondary schools should possess their own burden of staying in shape if they wish to, and to direct their own development that may be aided from aerobic exercise.
Question: Is there non-paternalistic merit to requiring physical activity of a student in non-compulsory education?
My answer to this question is in two parts:
First, you cite studies that demonstrate aerobic exercise helps to improve problem solving ability and I.Q. scores. (I shall not for the purpose of this post, but I.Q. scores, are, at best, I think, a drastically over emphasized assessment of intelligence and at worst, though most likely, dysfunctional both in application and generation.) If these studies are accurate, as I have little reason to doubt, than it would seem that physical and emotional well-being are not entirely distinct, and to be concerned with one is to be concerned with the other.
Secondly, it depends. There is a significant quantity and severity of difference between compulsory and non-compulsory education. In k-12, it is well within the right of the school system, although I disliked it at the time, to enforce a Physical Education requirement. But post-secondary education must entail a greater amount of responsibility. Part and parcel to this responsibility is the ability to make more decisions for oneself. The student's education is more their prerogative, and this should be reflected in the physical education requirement, i.e. it should not exist. Student in post-secondary schools should possess their own burden of staying in shape if they wish to, and to direct their own development that may be aided from aerobic exercise.
Question: Is there non-paternalistic merit to requiring physical activity of a student in non-compulsory education?
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Textbook Ambivalence; or, a Response to Shelby
Shelby Asked: Are textbooks a boon or a hindrance to the classroom?
As she probably suspected when she asked the question, there is no easy answer as textbooks can certainly be both. This oscillating difference is accounted for by two separate criteria: 1) Quality of the textbook 2) Treatment of the teacher towards said textbook.
1) Obviously some textbooks are more beneficial than others, and the quality of the textbook often accounts for their entire benefit. There is not a single traditional discipline that cannot profit from the presence of high caliber textbooks. This depends, of course, on how the textbook is employed...which brings me to 2.
2) When a textbook is a hindrance, as it occasionally is, it is typically due to the teacher rather than the book itself. Textbooks become detrimental when they are relied on nigh solely as the method for imparting knowledge. The textbook is a convenient excuse for the teacher to not diversify pedagogical practices. The answer to this is not just to rely on electronic resources as the school in Arizona did.
Some further notes: While it may be personal preference, I think there is a benefit to having a hard copy of text rather than reading it from the screen of a computer. Although, this having been said, there is an environmental boon to removing textbooks form the classroom, though this will often be offset by copious amounts of printing sources from the internet.
Question: Given that there is this ambivalence, how can the benefit from textbooks be optimized?
As she probably suspected when she asked the question, there is no easy answer as textbooks can certainly be both. This oscillating difference is accounted for by two separate criteria: 1) Quality of the textbook 2) Treatment of the teacher towards said textbook.
1) Obviously some textbooks are more beneficial than others, and the quality of the textbook often accounts for their entire benefit. There is not a single traditional discipline that cannot profit from the presence of high caliber textbooks. This depends, of course, on how the textbook is employed...which brings me to 2.
2) When a textbook is a hindrance, as it occasionally is, it is typically due to the teacher rather than the book itself. Textbooks become detrimental when they are relied on nigh solely as the method for imparting knowledge. The textbook is a convenient excuse for the teacher to not diversify pedagogical practices. The answer to this is not just to rely on electronic resources as the school in Arizona did.
Some further notes: While it may be personal preference, I think there is a benefit to having a hard copy of text rather than reading it from the screen of a computer. Although, this having been said, there is an environmental boon to removing textbooks form the classroom, though this will often be offset by copious amounts of printing sources from the internet.
Question: Given that there is this ambivalence, how can the benefit from textbooks be optimized?
Clarification
My most recent blog post elicited a much due critique from Emily and so I shall endeavor to explain what exactly I meant.
I did not mean to say that work by authors of differing demographics would necessarily be of a lesser quality. Diversity of perspective is important, I admit that, but the race of the author should not be the deciding criterion for what makes it into the curriculum. If a different perspective is what is being sought, fine, search for that. Choose a book because it offers a different perspective, but not because it happens to be written by a member of a specific race or gender or heritage. I do not think that a member of a different demographic will necessarily have a different perspective, so we should stop judging the level of multiculturalism merely by how many authors there are of different races, genders, backgrounds...etc...
All I was trying to say is that I am uncomfortable when we put too much stock in something like race or gender. Yes, there are differences, but focusing on those differences is, I think, a dangerous road to travel, caked with a very thin layer of ice.
Question: Is focusing on race and gender dangerous in any way or are my worries over thought artifacts of a divided society?
I did not mean to say that work by authors of differing demographics would necessarily be of a lesser quality. Diversity of perspective is important, I admit that, but the race of the author should not be the deciding criterion for what makes it into the curriculum. If a different perspective is what is being sought, fine, search for that. Choose a book because it offers a different perspective, but not because it happens to be written by a member of a specific race or gender or heritage. I do not think that a member of a different demographic will necessarily have a different perspective, so we should stop judging the level of multiculturalism merely by how many authors there are of different races, genders, backgrounds...etc...
All I was trying to say is that I am uncomfortable when we put too much stock in something like race or gender. Yes, there are differences, but focusing on those differences is, I think, a dangerous road to travel, caked with a very thin layer of ice.
Question: Is focusing on race and gender dangerous in any way or are my worries over thought artifacts of a divided society?
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Multicultural Intention
In theory, the search for differing points of view and historical accuracy (e.g. truth about slavery and sexism) is certainly laudable and necessary. Education should foster in all students an appreciation for other opinions and a desire to know, even when uncomfortable and embarrassing, the truth. But how should the drive to reach this goal be directed?
Diversity of view and historical accuracy should be prized as qualities of content, but they are qualities that are demonstrable and easily verified. But when judging the multiculturalism of a curriculum, we often hear about how many books assigned were written by women or written by authors of other races. This is dangerous and I think needs to stop. Yes, the search for different points of view will often lead to authors of different races and backgrounds, but to discriminate classroom content based solely upon that is dangerously close to perpetuating very false distinctions between races.
Question: Is there a danger is seeking authors of different races rather than the merit of their work?
Diversity of view and historical accuracy should be prized as qualities of content, but they are qualities that are demonstrable and easily verified. But when judging the multiculturalism of a curriculum, we often hear about how many books assigned were written by women or written by authors of other races. This is dangerous and I think needs to stop. Yes, the search for different points of view will often lead to authors of different races and backgrounds, but to discriminate classroom content based solely upon that is dangerously close to perpetuating very false distinctions between races.
Question: Is there a danger is seeking authors of different races rather than the merit of their work?
Multicultural Continuum; or, a Response to Drew Warner
Drew asked: Will multiculturalism ever be embraced beyond simply an ideal; will it ever be a reality?
The reality of multiculturalism within a classroom must be, I think, found along, as many things are, a continuum. I do not think it is a matter of black and white, but a matter of scales of gray. There are some curricula that are more or less multicultural than others, sure. But I do not think there exists some threshold before which they are uni-cultural and beyond which they are multicultural.
That having been said, as James Banks mentioned, multiculturalism has made significant progress in the past couple of decades and there is little reason to think that it will slow. There is still more rhetoric involved than actual practice, I will grant that, but I think it is already being embraced as more than simply an ideal. Multiculturalism has great distances still to go to reach its goal, an educational system that provides equal attention to all demographics. But will multiculturalism ever be a reality, I think it is.
Question: Is there a functional mechanism with which we can judge the multiculturalism of a particular curriculum?
The reality of multiculturalism within a classroom must be, I think, found along, as many things are, a continuum. I do not think it is a matter of black and white, but a matter of scales of gray. There are some curricula that are more or less multicultural than others, sure. But I do not think there exists some threshold before which they are uni-cultural and beyond which they are multicultural.
That having been said, as James Banks mentioned, multiculturalism has made significant progress in the past couple of decades and there is little reason to think that it will slow. There is still more rhetoric involved than actual practice, I will grant that, but I think it is already being embraced as more than simply an ideal. Multiculturalism has great distances still to go to reach its goal, an educational system that provides equal attention to all demographics. But will multiculturalism ever be a reality, I think it is.
Question: Is there a functional mechanism with which we can judge the multiculturalism of a particular curriculum?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)