Learning by doing

Details

Hits: 5221

Kennemer Dunes, today. Doing [ not 'education' ]

Above: This is our son Melle (2004) taking a break during family walk while a storm rages, shuddering the chestnut trees. Melle enjoys large freedom to discover the world outside of the school system. Non-testable according to standard IQ investigations¹ he was forced to move to a ZMLK school², a school for children with 'extreme learning difficulties'. To do exactly that: learn nothing. Degrading his morale. So we talked. And we found a way that much better suited his curiosity as the foundation to investigate, experience and learn. As parents we felt school did not contribute much to his development. His spontaneous, wilful, intuitive, emotional, sensitive, creative, qualities, on the other hand, run into danger of being pinched. This was not an angry condemnation from our side towards the school. We felt, most people, do their best, for Melle, though, the school, the pressure, led to negative stress and damaging results. Till one day, after a holiday-family-trip to Sicily, he refused to go to school. As he said, unwilling to go in on a voluntarily basis -- 10 minutes too late -- to receive punishment. Before going through the door, he turned around to cycle trough town, think things over -- to return home.

In the great (8/10) second hand store 'Het Pakuis' in Zandvoort I found a fantastic book by Arie de Geus, which will be discussed and quoted in the future on this website. In his book he re-introduces the thoughtful work of John Holt, which was a delight. Holt's book 'Instead of Education; ways to help people to do things better' is a feast of recognition. It talks about the stuff that we found out instinctively. He only went much further than we ever dared. Considering education, as we know it, trough schools, one of the worst inventions of mankind!

Min/max temperature: 14°C/18°C; humidity: 72%; visibility: 12.8 kilometres; precipitation: 2.0 mm; sea level pressure: 1006.70 hPa; clouds: mostly cloudy; wind: West 70 km/h. ; Moon: Waxing Gibbous, 96% illuminated

" [ Chapter I ] Doing, Not 'Education' […] This is a book in favour of doing -- self directed, purposeful, meaningful life and work -- and against 'education' -- learning cut off from active life and done under pressure of bribe or threat, greed and fear. […] You cannot have human liberty, and the sense of all persons' uniqueness, dignity, and worth on which it must rest, if you give to some people the right to tell other people what they must learn or know, or the right to say officially and 'objectively' that some people are more able and worthy than others. Let any who want to make such judgements make them privately, knowing that such judgements can only be personal and subjective. But do not give them any permanent or official sanction, or the liberty and dignity of your citizens will soon be gone. […]

Losers, […] can't make many choices; can't make plans for the future, can't do almost nothing to protect the security of their families, and have little or no control over their work, but must do what they are told. Eighty per cent of the jobs that will be filled during the next decade will be jobs for which a college degree is not needed. Most of those who will do these jobs will feel themselves losers, and even more so if (like many) they have first spent the time and money to get a college degree.

To be peaceful and stable, every society organised into winners and losers must persuade the losers that this state of affairs is necessary, and that its way of picking winners and losers is just, that the losers deserve to lose. At one time, winners and losers were picked by the accident of birth. Modern societies do this more and more with schools. But the people who control society naturally want schools to pick winners in such a way that the existing social order is not changed -- in short, so that most of the winners are children of winners, and the losers the children of losers. The schools, then, must run a race which mosty rich kids will run but which most poor people will accept as fair. On the whole they have done this very well.

Many educators will protest that ranking is not what grades and tests are for, but only to help children learn, and to help teachers help them to learn. No doubt many teachers sincerely believe it, as I did for many of my years as a T-eacher [ Holt differentiates between T-eachers and t-eachers, S-chools and s-chools, ed. ]. But it is not true. Any observant and thoughtful teacher soon learns in his work, as I did, that fear blocks learning. The skilful learner must trust the world, and himself to be able to cope with it. […] When they have lost confidence […] even 'bright' children […] instead of reaching out to new experience, they shrink back from it. Often they protect themselves from danger and shame of failure in the only way they can, by failing on purpose.

Not only does fear prevent children (and adults) from using their minds well, but it almost certainly, and at the most biological level, prevents the mind from working at all."

John Holt in 'Instead of Education; ways to help people to do things better' , page 7, 12, 13, 162, 163, first published in 1976 by Penguin Books, USA

_________________________

¹ IQ testing merely measures cognitive intelligence. Compare that to a light meter. This is a useful device to measure light, not sound or -- for example -- temperature. Does that make sound inferior to light? Does that make a soundrecordist less valuable than a cinematographer? If you are training cinematographers only, at a workshop exlusively aimed at cinematographers, maybe. But a film school, which educates filmprofessionals, soundpersons and editors and directors and screenwriters and cinematographers, etcetera, would it select its students on the basis of their ability to read and interprete light with a meter only? I don't hope so and it is not what I remember, going trough those selections myself. As Ken Wilber has written, 'Human beings have a variety of intelligences, such as cognitive intelligence, emotional intelligence, musical intelligence, kinaesthetic intelligence, aesthetic intelligence and so on. Most people excel in one or two of those, but do poorly in the others. This is not necessarily or even usually a bad thing; part of Integral wisdom is finding where one excels and thus where one can best offer the world one’s deepest gifts.' If it -- everything ouside the measurable cognitive intelligence curve -- is not acknowledged, measured, to begin with, it will not be used to work with -- it will be unknown and maybe even turn out to be a disadvantage for the person who has it, leading to isolation. The good news is, with proper support this ignorance actualy can turn out to become an advantage...The present educational system with its worshipping of testing ('Thou shalt be tested') and the circumstances, the offices and factories it prepares people for, seem to equalize the input so the outcome is measured in productional value within economic terms. The (higher) diploma eventually is the ticket to (higher) education and (higher) salary and (higher) management positions. If you fail in IQ tests, you will be bummed in life! Convicted to work in a (social-) workplace, "shovelling shit in Louisiana", with some appointed supervisor telling you: " ... you are too late, again!" and punish you for that, with whatever means are available to them -- just as they are punished themselves by whatever means are available to their supervisiors... And for what? Because you failed fitting in measurable curves. So, if you have the advantage of being good at something, all opposition met along the way, is nothing but opportunity to get better! Nobody has the right to take it away, no matter how hard they believe in the justification to do that! As the Buddhists say, 'your biggest enemy is your greatest teacher.' If you take that attitude, you will be bend, gaining flexibility and endurance. Not broken trough infectious, devastating shame, fear and anger and its resulting preconceived stiffness!

² A hierarchical structured school -- as is seen so often, grown under healthy (public) leadership over the years, now part of an efficient umbrella organization, ruled like an empire, by kings and servants, by 'managers'  -- with an authoritarian board, governed from top down by dictation. Though and most importantly some of the people 'on the work-floor' we have dealt with, actually are remarkably open minded, experienced, social, clear thinking, collaborative and willing to co-organize change for the wellbeing of the children. In a communicative, daring, constructive, courageous and relaxed, professional manner. Through an open discussion. Structured -- there is a reason to come together -- but not one where the outcome is preconceived by personal interests -- jobs, career, status, stupidity, power -- which is so often the case! (I am sure these people know how to deal with reprimands from 'their' stubborn board(s) -- including those formed by power-hungry parents, who seem to operate in the same tenacious spirit -- when 'their number is up' to appear in front of them to receive a dose of 'scare' during a so called 'performance interview power play'; always 2, 3, or 4 of 'them' -- and always very friendly, "... you understand we mean only the best for you and all of us....you do understand that, don't you?" ). This has an effect upon the 'corporate identity', the atmosphere among the teachers and staff. Only the strongest know how to deal with stubborn 'bosses'. The weaker people, will get even more stressed out! Overall it leads to confusion, charging the daily atmosphere with fear, even cruelty, contradictions, frustrations and weariness. Sounds like the average organisation, doesn't it? But this is about schools, where children are forced to spent their childhood. At the bottom the children will pay the price! Is the purpose of schools to keep the board(s) happy, create employment for the teachers and staff and keep the children off the street so the parents can go to their work? (see also: 'Loin du 16^e'). School(s) seem not to fully realise this (or somehow believe in the justice of it) as the law forces children to appear at school. The children have no choice! The children are punished when they don't obey the rules, but who 'corrects' the power hungry boards and the 'morale' they have forced upon the environment? The children, for sure, they don't stand a chance! Them -- the former -- are -- like politicians -- out for them selves and that daily free lunch. Unprocurable in their ivory tower. Puppeteers and puppets at the same time.

Eintracht

Details

Hits: 5197

Zandvoort an der holländischen Nordseeküste, 360° heute. Geist [ wind ]

Min/max temperature: 8°C/11°C; humidity: 66%; precipitation: 0 mm; sea level pressure: 1036 hPa; wind: SW 20.9 km/h; visibility: 10.0 kilometres; Clouds: Few 1188 m.; Moon: Last Quarter, 39% illuminated

"I don't smoke marijuana. […] I smoke herb. The lawmakers make every name illegal to incriminate the underprivelaged; I will happen to be one of the so called 'underprivileged'. […] It is totally illegal for me not to smoke herb. And totally unlawful, or what you would say: ungodly, because it is against my religion, not to smoke herb. […] Grass for the animals and herbs for the use of man. [...] Igziabeher [...] I will fear no evil."

Peter Tosh from: 'Peter Tosh, Best Of Peter Tosh And Interviews' published by Justice Sound on Soundcloud

"U.S. drug-policies have been designed to try to compel people to drop using soft-drugs, like marijuana, and turn to hard-drugs, like coke -- that's actually the case. I don't say that they thought of it and decided to do it, but that's what the policies are. In fact it is almost a concomitant of the fact that marijuana is big and bulky and easy to detect, and highly industrialised drugs are harder to detect. […] Why [ is ] tobacco legal but marijuana is illegal? Tabacco is vastly more lethal and destructive than marijuana, they are not even in the same domain. Tobacco is the [ second ] most lethal substance around […] the most lethal is sugar […] But tobacco is close second. […] Why is tobacoo legal and marijuana illegal? […] Marijuana is kind of like solar energy, it will grow anywhere. It will grow in your backyard. It is a weed, it grows everywhere. Tobacco is an industrial crop; you can make money on it. Lot of inputs, takes a lot of capital and so on. If you have something legal that anybody can do, you are not gonna make any profit on it, so you better make it illegal. On the other hand, if you got something that people can make a lot of profit on, especially agro-bussines and pesticides, vertilizer-companies […] it better be legal so you get away with it. […] Fact is, marijuana is made illegal [ though] there hasn't been one recorded overdose in 60.000.000 users […] a very high percentage of people now in jail are there because someone found a marijuana joint in their pocket quite literally. [ In consequence of the fact that marijuana is big and bulky and easy to detect ] Colombia shifted from producing marihuana […] to producing cocaine, industrial drug."

Noam Chomsky 'Why Marijuana is Illegal and Tobacco is Legal', lecture given on Columbia at MIT in Boston in 1995, first published on July 6, 2012 by argusfest on Youtube

"Herb isn't drugs. It could never be drugs. Drugs was invented in chemical labs, you see? […] Anything that is right is said to be wrong, and anything that is good is said to be bad. Look at how long me smoke herb and every time me smoke herb all it inspire me to do is speak of righteousness and do good. If there was no herb you would have had more mad people and more sick people. You wouldn't have people go one way blind. So herb have to be here […]"

Peter Tosh in 'Peter Tosh talks on Raste Reggae & Ganja', first published in Home Grown Magazine Summer 1979, UK

"Psychology deals with the organisation and use of information, not with its representation in organic tissue. […] Perhaps the simplest and the most influential account of memory is that given […] by the English empiricist philosophers. [They ] assumed that one retains "ideas," or "conceptions," which are nothing but slightly faded copies of sensory experiences. These ideas are links to one another by bonds called "associations." Ideas become "associated" whenever the original experiences occur simultaneously or in raided succession ("temporal contiguity"), and perhaps also if they are similar. A person's ideas are not all conscious at any given moment. Instead, they become aroused successively, so that only one or a few are active at once. The order in which they "come to mind" is governed by the associative links, and therefore by prior contiguity in time. As James Mill wrote in 1829, "our ideas spring up, or exist, in the order in which the sensations existed, of which they are copies" […] In this view, mental processes are by no means "constructive." Instead of the creation of something new in each act of remembering, there is only the arousal of something that already exists."

Ulric Neisser in 'Cognitive Psychology', page 281, first published in 1967 by Pretice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey

Today_footprint_clear_sunny_dune_full_beach_run

Details

Hits: 5197

Above: Cooling down after 28kms dune and full beach -- Swash, Face, Wrack and Berm -- run. 

Connection

Details

Hits: 5142

Kennemer dunes 360° between Zandvoort and IJmuiden, today. Look and see [ process and show ]

Min/max temperature: 7°C/14°C; humidity: 98%; precipitation: 1 mm; sea level pressure: 1008 hPa; wind: WNW 43.0 km/h; visibility: 10.0 kilometres; Clouds: few 670 m., overcast: 975 m.

" [ The ] concept of stress may indicate any state of reduced well-being varying from being in a bit of a hurry to a complete nervous breakdown. In a more strict sense, it refers to a state of exhaustion resulting from chronically having to deal with problems and anxieties, which in themselves qualify as inconveniences rather than threats of life. [ The ] notion of stress invariably refers to a less than desirable condition. When originally conceived, however, it was meant to denote a neurological and visceral reaction known as the "fight-or-flight" phenomenon. This reaction results in a readiness to deal with imminent danger by either fighting or fleeing. Since this constitutes an elementary survival mechanism, such a stress reaction should be considered both normal and healthy. In everyday life it is only if a state of heightened alertness and preparedness for action is maintained over a long period of time, without any breaks for recovery, that the effects of stress are potentially harmful. In normal life […] damaging effects occur if there is no plausible opponent to fight or fly from: e.g. if the threat originates from a bureaucratic machinery, or if an insurmountable work-load is self inflicted. Since there is no clear way to deal with these problems actively and effectively, the individual may resort to emotional coping strategies. […] these strategies may give rise to damaging symptoms: sleeplessness, overconsumption of tobacco and alcohol, irritability and tension. […] Fight and flight are behavioural categories. They are mutually exclusive. Although obviously related to fight and flight, courage and fear are not mutually exclusive. [ People ] may be frightened and courageous at the same time. Most people […] agree that there is no courage without fear. Fearlessness may strike the observer as an exceptional characteristic, even as something odd; it does not qualify, however, as true courage. The notion of courage presupposes the presence of fear. It is fear conquered in the interest of some worthy cause.

[…] Fear in itself is […] complex. [ It is best ] be understood as consisting of three components: a subjective reaction (the awareness of fear), a physiological reaction (like sweating or trembling) and an avoidance reaction (flight, taking shelter). The three reactions may or may not occur together. One may feel frightened without any bodily symptoms showing, and the reverse may be the case as well […] they are loosely coupled. One consequence […] of fear is that it is not always possible to tell whether a person is anxious. This may even be unclear to the person concerned. [ How a person ] is likely to respond to a serious threat […] cannot realistically be predicted. There is not a lot of reliable evidence for personality characteristics related to either courage or cowardice. If [ people ] are trapped between the options of fulfilling [ their ] duties [...] or relinquishing them [...] because neither is a viable option, [ people ] may suffer a breakdown. This, too, is an outcome which is hardly accounted for by characteristics like emotional stability. It is likely to be determined by situational factors […] Being subjected to [ a threat ] without the possibility of retaliation or adequate shelter is a typical situation where fight nor flight are plausible options, and a breakdown may be all that is left. The strains of the situation are overwhelming to a degree that antecedent emotional stability is hardly decisive. […] If no action or response whatsoever is instrumental in determining the outcome of a crisis, a collapse of the individual as an autonomous, self-directing system may occur. […] There are a number of factors which appear to have a buffering effect against interpreting a [ threatening ] situation as out of personal control. [...] A sense of confidence may enable a [ person ] to maintain his or her share of morale and endure […] tensions. […] Notable factors contributing to this effect are adequate training, trust in fellow [ people ] and excellent equipment. Since people derive the meaning of any situation largely from the way others seem to react to it, contagion is a major cause of a [ person's ] interpretation of a [ threatening ] situation as challenging, frightening or hopeless. The emphasis on contagion and social support in shaping a particular situation […] is tantamount to stressing the role of the [ leader ] in setting an example and managing attributions of meaning by subordinates."

J. Extra in 'NL Arms; Dealing with Danger and Stress', page 150, 151,152, 153 first published in 1998 by RMA, Breda, The Netherlands

"Be not too tame neither, but let your own discretion be your tutor: suit the action to the word, the word to the action; with this special observance, that you overstep not the modesty of nature: for anything so overdone is from the purpose of playing, whose end, both at the first and now, was and is, to hold, as 'twere, the mirror up to nature; to show virtue her one feature, scorn her own image, and the very age and body of the time his form and pressure. Now, this overdone or come tardy off, though it make the unskilful laugh, cannot but make the judicious grieve; the censure of which one must, in your allowance, overweigh a whole theatre of others."

From: William Shakespeare's 'Hamlet, Prince of Danmark', Act III, scene II, written between 1599 and 1602, page 961 of 'The Complete Works of William Shakespeare', first published in 1958 by Spring Books, London

" [ If ] you imagine the story as a house with many floors, some dark, some light -- some small rooms and some larger rooms with doors and windows and ceilings and suchlike -- and then acknowledge that fact that no [ two ] people in all our wonderful world are capable of furnishing, decorating, repairing or renovating the same house in the same way -- but they all may possibly want at least to be a 'Happy House' or a 'Cosy House', or even a 'miserable house'. The beauty of it is that presentation is the way we communicate, we present ourselves in certain clothes in certain colours to convey a certain signal -- all presentations of any kind are transmitted and received through codes of language, alphabets, numerals etc. -- but how all this is assembled before presentation is precisely where the individual mind and vision meets an object and translates that same object out to the rest of the world -- transformed into a massage, a statement incorporating Personality -- 'this is storytelling'. If this becomes a sequence of objects, then it becomes a narrative structure. Angle of vision -- the movement -- the poetry, no one being is […] the same. This is the human alchemy behind any frame of any story…"

Anthony Dod Mantle in 'Framing, A Symposium on Cinematography', page 148, edited by Andreas Fisher-Hansen, Igor Koršič and Tina Sørensen (unpublished manuscript)