Former Minister of Education of Finland Olli-Pekka Heinonen talk with Toby Lowe about Education system of Finland with a complexity perspective.
Category: Education
-
Problem for Cognitive Load Theory
Previously I have written a critical review post(Link: Constructivism vs Direct Instruction) on the article “Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching BY Paul A. Kirschner, John Sweller & Richard E. Clark.
I have also posted a Guy Claxton playlist in which Claxton questioned the core ideas over which the Neo-Traditionalist view(Cognitive-load, Direct instruction, Knowledge rich curriculum) is built-on. This includes fundamental assumptions about Computer analogy(+boxology), Evidence(evidence in health Vs education), False binaries, Contextually divorced ideas, etc.
This post is about a 2020 article titled “A Problem for Cognitive Load Theory—the Distinctively Human Life-form”, by Professor Jan Derry of UCL. She used Philosopher Robert Brandom’s Inferentialism to directly question the representationalist world view presented by Cognitive load theory, and to some extent Constructivist thinking. “She challenges the presuppositions involved not only in arguments for guided instruction by those supporting cognitive load theory, but also in opposed pedagogic approaches involving discovery and inquiry learning”. According to her, Both approaches are in danger of presupposing what C.B. Macpherson criticised as ‘possessive individualism’—i.e. capacities, beliefs and desires viewed as possessions of an individual. As a result, they fail to pay attention to mediation and normativity, both of which are distinctive aspects of human action.
In the Cognitive view, mind is distinct from world, and representations depict states of affairs; in the Inferential view, mind and world are not separated, and inferential connections, arising through human activity, constitute representations in the first place. Thus the role of representations has gone down one level. She adds, “the forging of the connection between word and object involves reversing the conceptual framework of much conventional pedagogical practice and placing the emphasis on bringing the learner into the inferential relations that constitute a concept prior to its acquisition.”
For me, This is an amazing perspective to have. Since I am in a quest to explore the maximum of diversities of ideas in education and learning, what I really like to further explore is–How does inferentialism fit with ecological and enactive perspectives, which also may stress the need to have a purpose, intention, and meaning, etc.
Video: Knowledge in education: Why philosophy matters
(Jan Derry talks about the core themes mentioned in the paper)
One key experiment noted in the paper
One of the highlights of the article is the example of an experiment conducted by Martin Hughes and Margaret Donaldson, in order to put the original findings of Piaget and Inhelder’s mountain task experiment (Piaget and Inhelder, 1967) to the test(Donaldson, 1978).
It demonstrated the importance of the purposes and intentions behind human action, which according to the author, very much relates to inferential thinking than just a representation of one mental item to another in the brain.
-
From Representation to Emergence by Osberg, Biesta and Cilliers
A complexity critic of cognitive reductionism.
In the paper “From representation to emergence: complexity’s challenge to the epistemology of schooling” Deborah Osberg, Gert Biesta and Paul Cilliers challenges the ‘spatial epistemology’ of representation by using ideas from complexity.
Key takes
- In this paper they explore possibilities for an alternative ‘temporal’ understanding of knowledge in its relationship to reality.
- In addition to complexity, It takes inspiration from Deweyan ‘transactional realism’ and Derrida’s deconstruction.
- They suggest that ‘knowledge’ and ‘reality’ should not be understood as separate systems which somehow have to be brought into alignment with each other, but that they are part of the same emerging complex system which is never fully ‘present’ in any (discrete) moment in time.
- This points to the importance of acknowledging the role of the ‘unrepresentable’ or ‘incalculable’. With this understanding knowledge reaches us not as something we receive but as a response, which brings forth new worlds because it necessarily adds something (which was not present anywhere before it appeared) to what came before.
- This understanding of knowledge suggests that the acquisition of curricular content should not be considered an end in itself. Rather, curricular content should be used to bring forth that which is incalculable from the perspective of the present.
- The epistemology of emergence is introduced as a complexity alternative to representational epistemology. It calls for a switch in focus for curricular thinking away from questions about presentation and representation and towards questions about engagement and response.
- In contrast to this representational epistemology—which could also be called a ‘spatial epistemology’ since it depends on a correspondence between knowledge and reality—they propose that complexity suggests a temporal epistemology which implies that the quest for knowledge is not in order that we may develop more accurate understandings of a finished reality, as it is. Rather, the quest for knowledge is about finding more and more complex and creative ways of interacting with our reality.
- This paper also views the presentationalist view(situated, real world learning) critically and point out some of its weakness. It brings up two critical dimesntions initially, ie. conservative and radical. From a conservative viewpoint, that a ‘decent’ education is not merely about practical work or apprenticeship, but one in which children get access to all the great works of a particular cultural tradition. Secondly, from a radical viewpoint, it is argued that participatory or presentational forms of learning end up in socialisation and adaptation and make it difficult to create critical distance and therefore result in one-dimensional ways of learning.
- A third critique is pointed from the work of Jacques Derrida—in particular, his critique of ‘the metaphysics of presence,’ more familiarly known as ‘deconstruction’. According to this line of thinking, both presentational and representational pedagogies rely upon the idea of a world that is simply present and can simply be represented. Both presentation and representation can be seen as examples of the ‘metaphysics of presence’—the idea that there is a world ‘out there’ that is simply ‘present’ and to which all our understandings (meanings) are in relation. In contrast to this position, deconstruction resists being drawn into and subsumed by any relationship with presence.
- Authors cites themselves @ Biesta and Osberg, 2007 to show that eventhough ‘representational’ and ‘presentational’ pedagogies are somewhat (although not completely) opposed to each other—both strategies are still the two main approaches to education, and perhaps becoming increasingly intertwined.
- The authors argue that ‘relationality to the radically non-relational’ could be considered key to the logic of complex systems. They point to Prigogine, who insists that although new order (emergence) results when a complex system explores and finds new ways of working with the initial conditions, and that these initial conditions are provided by the lower hierarchical level—and are ‘causal’ in this regard—the elements making up the lower level do not provide everything necessary for order of a particular kind to emerge at the higher level. In his words: The system ‘chooses’ one of the possible branches available when far from equilibrium. But nothing in the macroscopic equations justifies the preference for any one solution. (Prigogine, 1997).
-
Entrepreneurship and Synergetics
Synergetics is an interdisciplinary theoretical approach that studies self-organization in complex systems(systems that are characterized by openness, dynamics, and complexity). It was developed by physicist Hermann Haken(1969) through his research experiments on laser light. He noticed unpredictable patterns emerging that cannot be explained by linear models. The properties of light change in a self-organized manner when the laser reaches a critical point or “laser threshold”, and such emergent order sets the control parameter which enslaves the system.
(This is an updated post)
For a real explanation, listen directly from the master: Hermann Haken
Synergetics and Entrepreneurship
My initial exposure to synergetics from an entrepreneurship related scholarship started with reading Jeffrey Goldstein’s article(attached) in which he stressed his radical construction point of view that paints a negative picture. He argues;
“Although these connotations of self-organization have provided a corrective to the outdated belief that novel order in a system can only come about through the imposition of external order, a careful inspection of research in complexity theory reveals that the emergence of new order is more appropriately constructed rather than self-organized as such (Goldstein 2003).”
EMERGENCE, CREATIVITY, AND THE LOGIC OF FOLLOWING AND NEGATING by Goldstein’ 2015Goldstein further specifically pointed to Haken; in that he adds;
“An example is that much touted emblem of self-organization, the laser with its property of ultra-focused coherence (see Haken, 1981). In actuality, though, laser light hardly comes about either spontaneously or through inner direction. On the contrary, it requires the most stringent of laboratory manipulations and constraints (see a list of these in Strogatz, 2003). An examination of other examples of self-organization reveals a similar constructional nature of emergent phenomena (see, e.g., Nicolis, 1989)”
EMERGENCE, CREATIVITY, AND THE LOGIC OF FOLLOWING AND NEGATING by Goldstein’ 2015Andreas Liening of TU Dortmund
In entrepreneurship, a pioneering effort to apply Synergetics is coming from Prof Andreas Liening and colleagues of TU Dortmund. The top reads are;
- Complexity and Entrepreneurship: Modeling the Process of Entrepreneurship Education with the Theory of Synergetics
- Synergetics—Fundamental Attributes of the Theory of Self-Organization and Its Meaning for Economics(OPEN Access)
Although I am extremely interested in reading anything relating to entrepreneurship and complexity, I totally disagree with the “Entrepreneurship Mindset” as the purpose of Entrepreneurship Education promoted by Liening. To see my reasons check this, this, this, this, this and this
It is very easy to fall into the trap of traditional representational cognitive psychology and its lazy dependence on decontextualized hard or impossible to define concepts like Mindset.
Some potential issues with application of self-organization and synergetics in education
It is confusing when you as an outsider looks at education and learning science for the first time to find application ideas. It is very easy to be trapped in a cultish eco-chamber. Even though I agree that It is essential to read people whom we disagree with, a serious issue arises when we start to blindly believe everything they say. This is especially true if one doesn’t have the necessary expertise and diversity in their system to figure out the flaws of the argument.
Example; Paul A. Kirschner who is one of the most reductionist of all the education scholars with his famous works like, “Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work” is also famous for his work on learning in complexity, ” Ten steps to complex learning”. A new observer might be mistaken to believe that Kirschner is the go to authority in complexity in education. This is a huge mistake. This points to serious issues with the application of synergetics in particular and complexity science in general without any understanding of domain epistemology.
- Those with domain expertise may use complexity theory to fit in with their long-accumulated path dependency.
- They may use a complexity tag to avoid being called a reductionist.
- Those with complexity background may fall for the obvious and visible part of domain knowledge.
- Those with ideas and tools to sell may try craft a much less uncertain version of complexity;.
- As often pointed out by people like Dave Snowden, those with a complexity background, especially those associated with mathematical modeling and Santa Fe may assume that they can model human complexity by developing agent-based models as they do for some idealized version of Ant behavior. This can be viewed as a reductionistic tendency inside the complexity sciences (http://www.human-current.com/archived-episodes/tag/anthrocomplexity)
All the above can be viewed as going against the ethics of complexity, especially when proposed as solutions for other people and other people’s children.
According to Synergetics Philosophers Helena Knyazeva and Sergey Kurdyumov, “The synergetic assertions can apply to many scientific disciplines. They are functioning on the level from which a great scope of scientific disciplines can be embraced. However, such an approach has also a negative side. The higher the level of the view is the less concrete details can be distinguished. On the other hand, the deeper we penetrate particular details the less place seems to remain for synergetics itself” They adds; “Synergetics can provide us only with general frames of consideration, a mental scheme or a heuristic approach to a concrete scientific investigation. Concrete applications of synergetic models to complex human or social systems presuppose further detailed scientific investigations. Such investigations can be carried out only by the use of a profound knowledge of a certain disciplinary field and/or with a close collaboration with specialists in a corresponding scientific discipline. Thus, synergetics gives a certain approach or a direction of research, or, to put it in terms of psychology, a scientific attitude. The rest is the matter of every concrete investigation”
Some interesting articles by Russian philosopher Helena Knyazeva on synergetics are attached
Synergetics: New Universalism or Natural Philosophy of the Age of Post-Nonclassical Science?
ARBITRARINESS IN NATURE: SYNERGETICS AND EVOLUTIONARY LAWS OF PROHIBITION(Co-authored with Haken)
SYNERGETICS OF HUMAN CREATIVITY; HELENA and HAKEN
The Synergetic Principles of Nonlinear Thinking
Synergetics and the Images of Future
Nonlinear synthesis and co‐evolution of complex systems
NONLINEARITY OF TIME IN THE COMPLEX WORLD
The Synergetic World View and Its Synthetic Value
FIGURES OF TIME IN EVOLUTION OF COMPLEX SYSTEMS
Recent works
Virtual Reality from the Standpoint of Complexity Science
Paradigm Shift in the Understanding of the Creative Abilities of Consciousness
Strategies of Dynamic Complexity Management
Active Innovative Media as Co-Evolutionary Landscapes
Cognitive Networks: Interactivity, Intersubjectivity, and Synergy
Complexity Studies: Interdisciplinarity in Act
The Idea of Co-evolution; Towards a New Evolutionary Holism
-
Professor Yong Zhao: Comparing the US and Chinese education system(video playlist)
Professor Yong Zhao who authored the book “What Works May Hurt: Side Effects in Education”, makes compelling arguments against comparing the US and Chinese education. He suggests that, while the Chinese system stressed more on homogeneity and standardization, the US system was always providing heterogeneous outcomes, which is really an asset.
-
Questioning the Un-questionable: “Evidence-Based”
The arguments followed by “evidence-based” + x, y, z, learning, education, policy, etc. carries a lot of credibility and authority. Ideas promoted using “evidence” tag often evades scrutiny and criticism. After I got exposed to ideas like Goodhart’s law, Campbell’s law, Metric fixation, e.g. I started to see the irony of “evidence based arguments”. This doesn’t mean I don’t believe in science or evidence anymore, but I am more skeptical.
Following are a list of links which may open the you mind a little bit on the hidden-dark side of “evidence based” arguments.
0) What they call evidence is often standardized test scores
2. The problems with evidence in educational practice
4. Selective evidence/ Cherry picking evidence etc. are another major issue…particularly in Education.
Measure whatever can be easily measured , Disregard that which cannot be measured easily, Presume that which cannot be measured easily isn’t important, Say that which can’t be easily measured doesn’t exist
-
Education: Skill VS Signal Or Access to Institutions
“Education as Skill ” VS “Education as Signaling” perspective dominate some part of the debate about education and its fundamental purpose. I think there could be be a third way, which is “Education as a key Card” which provides access to institutions, These institutions in-turn provides embedded skill development infrastructure viz contextual tools, practice opportunities, authority(confidence), etc.
I will explore the issue further in coming posts. For now I am sticking with traditional two.
The prominent thoughts Skill Vs Signal are based on important paradigms of education; The Human Capital Theory and The Signaling Theory.
Human capital theory claims that education will stimulate social mobility and raises wages by increasing productivity
The signalling perspective on education suggests that education causes social mobility because it signifies the competence to the employers or other decision makers. It suggests that the asymmetric information in job market causes the decision maker to look for most trustworthy attributes of the job seeker. That is why getting into a top college sends an stronger positive signal.
In a popular Ted talk by Rory Sutherland “Life lessons from an ad man” he gives a funny explanation about the effect of signaling power of credentials on a persons confidence level which in-turn makes him more successful in life.
” I don’t know if anybody knows it. Someone was actually suggesting that you can take this concept further, and actually produce placebo education. The point is that education doesn’t actually work by teaching you things. It actually works by giving you the impression that you’ve had a very good education, which gives you an insane sense of unwarranted self-confidence, which then makes you very, very successful in later life. So, welcome to Oxford, ladies and gentlemen.
Following thread explores some extra dimensions of this topic.
-
More bad news for growth mindset
I like the idea of Growth Mindset and I know intuitively that, some version of it work perfectly( at-least sometimes) in my life( anecdotally). Another interesting thing about GM is its freshness of positivity which goes directly against Cultural and Genetic determinism.
Unfortunately two near-replication studies find zero or small negative influence of growth mindset beliefs about intelligence across the challenging transition to university.
David Daniel and Daniel Willingham discuss a 2016 article that takes a meticulous approach to developing a growth mindset intervention.