Davis quotes Maturana as saying "everything said is
said by an observer"; he goes on to say, "an act of observation
entails more than something that is observed; there must also be something
observing" (p. 145). Therefore,
there is no observation without an observer; nothing acted on without an actor;
nothing perceived without a perceiver.
As we look at the relationship between each of these, Davis presents two
ways of viewing interobjectivity, through complexity science and ecology.
Complexity Science is a new way of studying knowing and
knowledge as it looks to “better understand self-organization mainly through
close observations of complex systems and computer modeling” (p. 152). Matters of knowledge, learning, and
teaching are influenced by the belief that humans are both biological and
cultural beings. Two key qualities that
Davis presents for complexity research is that it is adaptive and
self-organizing. What is your
understanding of these two qualities?
For education purposes, complexity science is interested in
the relationship between the individual and society. Davis introduces the term coupling as a way
to describe this relationship. Coupling
is the “intimate entangling of one’s attentions and activities with another’s”
(p. 166). The act of coupling demonstrates
that humans are biologically and culturally destined to be teachers. How does the idea of coupling transfer to the
classroom?
Moving away from the practical know-how (complexity science)
and onto the ethical know-how, ecology asserts, “that life in all forms is
inherently valuable” and “the role of humanity is” understood as “mindfulness
and ethical action” (p. 156).
Ecologists look at knowledge as more than a strictly human phenomenon. They’re concerned with questions of morality,
values and conduct. They believe in
taking action now. How would you
describe ethical action?
From this view of the world, teaching is described as
conversing, caring, pedagogical thoughtfulness, eco-justice or hermeneutic
listening. Davis expands on the idea of
conversing. He stated, “when engaged in
conversations, our working memories are vastly larger than they are on our own”
(p. 177). Although the research found
this idea to be true, I don’t totally agree that when conversing we “recall
more detail” or “maintain better focus than when alone” (p. 177). For me, I tend to work better, have better
focus, and recall more detail when working alone. What about you, do you agree with the
research?
In the ecology chapter, Davis mentions Nel Noddings view on the ethics of caring. If you haven’t had a chance to read her work, I recommend reading Education and Democracy in the 21st Century. She states, “our objective in moral education is to establish a climate in which natural caring flourishes” (p. 119). There are four components to moral education. They include: modeling care, engaging in dialogue, providing opportunities to practice caring, and confirmation. These components align directly to Davis’ conceptions of teaching for ecologists: caring, conversing, listening, and minding. These ideas are powerful, as they teach both children and adults how to be human. By showing children how to care, by caring for them, we are giving them the greatest gift.
ReplyDeleteJenny, the quote about coupling does create some interesting topics for discussion. I also enjoy working alone, or maybe I just enjoy the moments when I actually get to work alone. The conversations we have in class certainly bring me back to the other end of the spectrum in reminding me that I do enjoy working with SOME people on SOME projects.
DeleteThe quote from pg. 177 about, "maintaining better focus than when alone" doesn't strike me as true. I can think of many occasions where I was new to a task, received instructions, but couldn't wait for the person guiding me to leave. Perhaps that's because they weren't meant to be a teacher and I just couldn't learn from that individual. That however goes against the idea of coupling representing that we are all meant to be teachers. I think that maybe, by default, and the need to socially construct knowledge, that we have to engage others in a way that resembles teaching or education. Do you think that maybe in order to get through this life we have to teach others along the way, but maybe that role really should only be embraced by some? Or better yet, should only be embraced by some at certain points of their life?
Could the "not alone" not be the physical alone. But even communing with a text? Would that also be coupling? I just think the idea and some of the thoughts I have had about language really work well with this idea.
DeleteAdam, that idea of teaching others along the way was pointed at by Davis. Something about we are all teachers when we couple?
Good morning Jenny. I really liked these chapters and i think you found interesting points for us to speak about. I personally found these chapters to be a bit more hopeful than the previous ones. The concepts of complexity science were new to me but somehow Davis was able to explain it in such an efficient way that it just made sense.
ReplyDeleteNoting a few of the quotes you pulled out: "an act of observation entails more than something that is observed; there must also be something observing" This reminds me of some of the concepts of quantum sciences, in that when we observe something it changes and so we can never really know the true state of things.
What self-organizing complexity seems to be is the natural tendency for things to take a recognizable form. We can't really explain it, but it happens none the less. like, logs rolling down a hill, they all eventually are organized parallel to each other. Adaptive is a system that can change based on conditions. like his example of birds swarming and reacting to things in the environment.
What I truly liked the most was this idea of coupling and the numerous interactions that take place for communication to occur. In the classroom I think this translates to classroom organization, teacher proximity, even desk placement. All these set a scene for a communication to occur, it is the setup of power structures. I think, in a classroom of 30+ these couplings have to be even more closely controlled in order for communication to take place in meaningful manners.
Im going to try and express clearly a thought that I had about truth. Matt, you said the true state of things... is that more like Truth than truth? and would that then be a metaphysical aim? I was thinking the truth is what we make it, but not necessarily alone, also as a collective. But I sometimes wonder about people who are geniuses and how their way of thinking and perhaps even perceiving is different than mine. Some of the most talented people are shunned by society because they are so very different, their "truth" is not the same as everyones else's. I had a friend in high school that was extremely gifted in music. He once asked me, "don't you see the colors of the notes when the music plays?" I had no idea what he was talking about. I think that was something he was reluctant to share on a typical basis because he already knew his perception was different than most peoples. Its experiences like these that make me so appreciative of individual intersubjective theories like constructivism, but also theories around inter objectiveness, helping us to realize that we are all just parts of a framework, but that we influence it as much as it influences us. When you speak of an adaptive system I thought about the eerie feeling I often get on the highway, rushing to the "heart" of the city. Like I'm just a corpuscle on my way to do what I can for a bigger purpose. "The role of an agent in in the emergent of the collective"- p 161 But hopefully our next adaptive step is not something like the Borgs. :)
DeleteDon't worry Lindsay, I too have never seen colors when playing music plays. At least not when on pure oxygen. Does this make the collective efforts of seeing from the persons perspective, as you mentioned, create opportunity or misunderstanding when looking through the "constructivists concern with the individual's construal of socially effected reality," (p.163) or, "critical theorists focus on how intersubjectively effected reality delimits the possibilities of the individual." (p.163,164).
DeleteIn your statement the creative nature, or language, that the individual uses to describe the connections they make to music would ultimately delimit their possibilities as a creative individual, but certainly limit their ability to work within a society when looking at how to teach to this person, or be taught by this person.
Well Lindsey, I was not necessarily alluding to "Truth." However, yes, I do see that as a metaphysical thing, and the true state of things, I suppose that would be metaphysical too. However, I think that is were the complexitivist is coming from. When we observe something, it changes, it is not metaphysical but physical. I suppose a little bias leaked out there from me.
DeleteGood Morning colleagues! Great points Jenny; they certainly bring up some great things to discuss.
ReplyDeleteWith regards to the qualities of adaptation/adaptivity and self-organizing, I found this particular section of the reading to be very interesting. While I don't think I have a crystal clear grasp on it yet, I found the necessary "key conditions" (p.153) helped provide a framework for understanding for me. Davis states that the involved systems must have:
- "considerable redundancy among agents (to enable interactivity)"
- "some level of diversity (to enable novel responses)"
- "a means by which agents can affect one another"
- "a distributed, decentralized control structure"
When reading Chapter 15, it was easier to see the connections between the above characteristics.
Davis states that in order for the collective to surpass the individual, there must be diversity. None of the examples that he gives are related to education or learning, however I think that our classroom conversations are a great illustration of this. We, collectively, with our diverse backgrounds and experiences, bring to the table a wide variety of ways to attack and understand a problem or situation. Collectively, as a group, we are able to build knowledge and understanding that surpasses what any one of us can do on our own, just how you all help me see things differently and beyond my own understanding (read: cloud of confusion).
BUT... this diversity is only helpful when the members of the group are appreciative/open to the ideas/experiences of others, which (if I understand correctly) is what Davis refers to as the redundancy within a group. A non-example related to education would be the "know-it-all" who doesn't benefit from what the other members of the group have to offer because they don't/won't listen, and don't/won't help contribute to the greater knowledge base because perhaps they feel like everyone else in the group is an idiot, for lack of a better term. So in a classroom setting, a teacher would strive to build a positive classroom culture of openness, diversity, and willingness to listen and share.
The concept of decentralized control reflects the need for flexibility within instruction and learning. There should be some guidelines to maintain focus, however there must be flexibility in both process and content because as a result of the diversity and redundancy, the path of learning will not always be predictable nor linear. One example of (what this looks like in today's more structured classrooms that do not operate in this manner consisitently) this may be the idea of "teachable moments" in the sense of an opportunity arising by conversation or interaction that leads away from the "intended" learning, however the learners are allowed to go down that path and build knowledge and understanding about this "side topic" for a brief period of time before being corralled back to the intended instruction/knowledge.
Ok, not sure that made any sense to anyone else, but it's what I've got! lol :)
In your discussion of decentralized control, I agree with your thoughts on "teachable moments" and their importance. I would maybe also like to extend your thoughts into our interpretation of every day discourse. The paths that we need to go down, both internally and externally, are full of incoherent thoughts, mis-interpreted language, and really require the need to let someone settle with their thoughts, or really be allowed to take the time to get what they really are trying to say out in the open. So it seems that when we don't have the ability to articulate our ideas the way we want that discourse falls apart. And like you, I think that in order to better our experiences we have to let that idea of decentralized control permeate into our everyday conversation and not be so beaten up when we can't make ourselves heard or understood. But, how often as teachers, do our students fall apart when they can't get their ideas out, or how often will they try and verbally navigate the unknown in front of anyone other than themselves?
DeleteAdam your post made me wonder how the changing faces of self-identity (with regards to the internet and ability to have multiple identities depending on someone's roles within online environments) affect these requirements. I can kind of see how the argument could be made that they fall into enactivism, but I'm not sure. What I do feel fairly confident in saying is that I think these different identities allow individuals to bypass some of the struggles that you mention regarding the ability to find voice and adequately communicate one's message.
DeleteMackinley, I took redundancy to mean the common knowledge shared within a group. He said that group members should be more alike than different so they have common ground in which to facilitate discourse.
ReplyDeleteI agree, however, that the "know it all" destroys that redundancy by not allowing any common ground among group members.
OK well then I am not sure that I explained myself adequately then, because that is what I was trying to say, kind of. I understand the literal definition of redundancy, and how that applies to Davis's explanation, however if diversity leads directly into redundancy, as Davis states on p.168, then the nuances in the knowledge that a group brings to the table must be of some value. If not, then there would not be any need for diversity and everyone could just be clones or robots.
DeleteIt's a perfect world situation. We need diversity but not so much we cannot communicate. Or else it would be like talking to our clone that perfectly agrees with us all the time, and well, we would not advance much in learning endeavors. We cannot go too far in either the similarities or in the differences or else communication breaks down. To this end, as teachers, this is why we front load assignments with needed information and texts, or activate prior knowledge, so we have a solid footing to begin and sustain conversations.
DeleteOne of the bigger ideas that I got from these chapters was the comparisons to epitome and gnosis. That ecology is about deriving meaning and complexity science is more about the "workings" p 161. Right along the lines of what you mentioned, Jenny, that ecologists look at knowledge as more than a strictly human phenomenon. But I am struggling moving past it as an idea related to the planet. Is it more about relationships as their own being? Davis discusses it as conversing, and organic. Is that because it lacks a predetermined structure?
ReplyDeleteI think I would describe ethical action as what is right in the context. When there are those grey areas. Owl habitat vs. logging, social welfare and the role of taxes, prison terms that don't fit the crime like in that movie with Kevin Bacon (Murder in the First) and so on and so forth. What is the right thing to do for now, does it change if we talk about long term, what is ethical? Davis discusses the difference as ecological thinking promoting mindful participation instead of complexity science that is ongoing coping, a "responsiveness to the here and now" p 176. Did I interpret this correctly?
Also, Jenny, I see what your saying about having that quiet time to think and focus, but maybe he means we are more aware of what we are thinking, more contemplative when we share with another person, and therefore hold ourselves to a higher standard?
I agree Lindsay. Until recently, ethical codes were based on human to human interactions for the metaphysical and intersubjectivists. Ethics were known as a code or set of rules to follow. Currently, with ecological discourses, ethical action is concerned with involvement of wrongdoing beyond human to human interactions. As we evolve, this view of ethics as ongoing, must evolve with us. Therefore, I interpreted ethical know-how to be ongoing coping and mindful participation.
DeleteLindsay, I think the recall of information refers not to a specific information but to information that has immediate meaning. To clear up this idea, I think Davis is talking about how we communicate. In my class, we just finished "A Raisin in the Sun." If I ask the students to sit down and think about the play and then tell me what it is about they might get some surface level meaning (the play is about an African American family, they live in an apartment, so on). But being able to communicate they can start creating webs of meaning and focus on the heart of the question which is what is the theme of the novel, what are major issues addressed in the novel. I think the focus is that they can stay on task, kicking ideas back and forth. Alone, the mind drifts. Of course, these are general statements, and perhaps it's not best to classify ourselves as general examples because of our level of education.
ReplyDelete