Emergent Pedagogy, the Brain, Conflict, and Social Dynamics

Even when I first clicked on the Suduku icon at the Inquiry Institute site, I already had feelings of nervous anxiousness. I know I don't like to play games and this was going to be an intense game for me. So, when I saw it online, I knew I was in for an experience. When I first started, it was so frustrating that I was near to tears- really! I think I have pushed myself into a mental corner... so I didn't even consider that I could succeed at such a challenge.

But after calming down, and seeing that my "play pals" had also been frustrated, I gave in to a slight surge of confidence, and I finished my first suduku in under ten minutes!

The ongoing looping process that Paul talks about is a reasonable explanation for the way in which our brains help us to sort out the world and I think I am finally beginning to understand some of this theory. I remember Joyce said that she "had no idea" what paul was talking about after her first Brain and Behavior Institute. So, the fact that I am starting to get it after just 25 days, is good news!

Your unconscious comes up with new meaning while you consciously make observations. If students are going to learn then there must be conflict. Yes, the brain will not accept knowledge if everything is on an  even keel: Things must be rocky to get inside!

Finally, I did want to add my unlikely football team to
the Mind Over Matter Football League: The Taoist Cowboys.

It's not about Soduko anyone.  Actually it was torture for me doing those puzzles.  I guess I find it crazy that I am saying this since I want my students to think critically and logically and be able to cogently express their thoughts. 

I felt a union with some frustrated students in our classrooms.  I was amazed how different our success was and how varied our times were even after we reflected, talked about strategies, and iterated for another loop and more observations.

 I enjoyed Paul going around the room for our individual feedback about what we fealt about the lesson being inquiry-based or not.  Even at this point in this Inquiry Institute our interpretation, application, and observations about inquiry-based were different although some common threads emersed.

I wished in today's session that Alice and Barath were more involved. I wanted to discuss the article more. What struck me in the conversation was creating classrooms of collaborators instead of  competiors.  Even in fifth grade they are competing for the best grade.  In my classroom i tried to have alot of collaboration. I encourage them to work together in Math, Science, Social Studies, and Literacy.  I've noticed though that even in this arena of collaboration their is still a level of competition.  This competition works for them and that is ok. They push each other. I also thoguht about Paul's statement revising curriculum as a share product. I like this idea that the class comes up with what is produced and determine what is valued. Another strand that touched me is collaboration is a community enabling conflict.  To often, various viewpoints are lost. In my school there is little collaboration. I think this is because teachers aren't willing to have conflict among the school community and within their classroom. It is safe to discourage discourse.

I thought I knew what inquiry was but now I don't know.

After spending 4 weeks on Brain and Behavior and Inquiry.

I thought I felt confident in my abilities but after weeks of being questioned I feel beaten down and honestly tired to the point that I no longer feel confident.

Some things I thought I knew - I don't anymore.

I thought I'd feel better when I left here but I kind of feel like a boat set adrift - just weaving and bobbing wondering where the lighthouse is.

I am tired and need the lighthouse and the island and if the is an "answer" then so be it.

I wish we had spent more time looking at the article because I felt that one thing that Bharath doesn't spend time on is the fact that in order to do this we must have good classroom management skills.  In order to enact the best scenario, no matter what level of teaching we are at we need this!   The aim of education is to get people to learn and communicate and learn and create and communicate and the ideal model would be to do this!  I hope we can revisit this in the future!  I would like to try this model with my class!

This morning's discussion regarding Sudoku was very enlightening for me. It's been interesting listening to comments and different thoughts from various types of people in our class. There are obviously different teaching styles in this class, just as there are varying students. We are from different classrooms- some are larger than others-30+students, some have less than 20 students, and some of us have 120 students. Because of these different teaching circumstances, it has been interesting to see the varying thoughts as well as opinions. We cannot fill eachothers shoes unless we truly understand the circumstances.  I think people as well as teachers learn differently and think differently. We need to be more nurturing with our students as well as our peers. We need to share, and listen. Listening is something we are failing at...why do we stop listening to other people-our students...this is where we fail ourselves as educators. Inquiry needs listening in order to be successful...

I thought that the lesson was a good introduction to inquiry and conflict.  I would have liked to discuss "Reflections on openness  and structure in education".  I thought the article had many great, useful points when trying to insert inquiry into classrooms. I can appreciate how conflict leads to learning, therefore, it would have been great to share viewpoints on the reading.

Instead of blogging about the joy of finally getting the Sudoku puzzle, I would like to focus on conflict and group dynamics.  I always tell my students "You don't need to be friends, you just need to be friendly."  Students and parents are very appreciative of this statement as nobody wants to be friends with everybody.  Now I wonder if I need to add something about the importance of conflict in friendliness.  Otherwise people will be polite, but no real "group story" will develop.

If "agreeing to disagree" is denying conflict and we need to insist upon conflict to develop understanding than there needs to be some team building activities at the beginning of a class.  Working in collaboration over a seemingly meaningless task builds a trust among the individuals in the class.  Setting this stage is vital to good group dynamics.  Building that trust helps people understand how to interpret people's questions and trust their motives.  There would be more understanding of peoples communication styles and less feelings of being under attack. 

It is human nature, unfortunately when people's ideas are threatened, they tend to gravitate toward people with similar ideas.  This is how cliques begin in our schools, neighborhoods, and even graduate classes.  Anyone who agrees "hey, that person was too aggressive or that person was too sensitive" - they are welcome in the respective groups.   What is most unfortunate is that these groups can devolve into  pointing out irrelevant deficiencies the person who is viewed as "too sensitive" or "the aggressor" has.  This leads to prickly conversations, no trust, and an seemingly impossible environment to achieve a "group story."  Setting up some team building activities at the beginning, can be a proactive approach to avoiding this problem.