Maslow's hierarchy of needs Maslow's hierarchy of needs, represented as a pyramid with the more basic needs at the bottom Maslow's hierarchy of needs is a theory in psychology proposed by Abraham Maslow in his 1943 paper "A Theory of Human Motivation" in Psychological Review. Maslow subsequently extended the idea to include his observations of humans' innate curiosity. His theories parallel many other theories of human developmental psychology, some of which focus on describing the stages of growth in humans. Maslow used the terms "physiological", "safety", "belongingness" and "love", "esteem", "self-actualization", and "self-transcendence" to describe the pattern that human motivations generally move through. Maslow's theory was fully expressed in his 1954 book Motivation and Personality. The hierarchy remains a very popular framework in sociology research, management training and secondary and higher psychology instruction. Hierarchy Physiological needs Safety needs Safety and Security needs include:
Learning Transfer as Preparedness Connectivism must abandon its ideas? | x28’s new Blog Two Catalan authors see Three problems with the connectivist conception of learning and challenge its core ideas (p. 8): “the idea that knowledge is distributed in the network”, “the idea of learning and knowing as individual, interpretative recognition of connective patterns”, and “the idea of learning as the association of subsymbolic entities (neurons)”. I am not convinced. I recall: Knowledge of a society lies in connections between people or resources; knowledge of an individual lies in connections between neurons. In particular, the knowledge of concepts lies in the connections between the words, i.e. between the neuronal connection patterns that make up each of these words. Re: The Learning paradox How does a learner recognize what they do not know before? The authors ask (p. 5) “How do you recognize a pattern if you do not already know that a specific configuration of connections is a pattern?” “a pattern of connections (outer and neural) which becomes salient in the network,” vs.
Bill Gates: ‘It would be great if our education stuff worked but…’ Bill Gates (Ben Stansall/AFP/Getty Images) “It would be great if our education stuff worked, but that we won’t know for probably a decade.” That’s what Bill Gates said on Sept. 21 (see video below) about the billions of dollars his foundation has plowed into education reform during a nearly hour-long interview he gave at Harvard University. Hmmm. In the past he sounded pretty sure of what he was doing. What should policymakers do? Actually, that’s not an approach any educator I know would think is a good idea, but Gates had decided that class size doesn’t really matter. Now he says that the success of his experiments on public education won’t be known for a decade, but we already know that evaluating teachers by student test scores is a bad idea. Education reform should not be driven by private philanthropists with their own agendas, however well-intentioned. I don’t know. Education references are sprinkled throughout the interview.
9 reasons why I am NOT a Social Constructivist Educators nod sagely at the mention of ‘social constructivism’ confirming the current orthodoxy in learning theory. To be honest, I’m not even sure that social constructivism is an actual theory, in the sense that it’s verified, studied, understood and used as a deep, theoretical platform for action. For most, I sense, it’s a simple belief that learning is, well, ‘social’ and ‘constructed’. As collaborative learning is a la mode, the social bit is accepted without much reflection, despite its obvious flaws. Let me say that I am not, and never have been, a social constructivist. With Rousseau, we had the rebalancing of learning theory towards the learner, which was good but it may have led to an extreme reliance on naturalism and intrinsic motivation that is hard to apply in the real world. Although Karl Marx wrote little on educational theory, his influence on learning theory and practice has been profound. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Much of what we learn in life we learn on our own. 8. 9.
Rhizomatic Education : Community as Curriculum Below is my paper as it appears in Innovate – Journal of Online Education. Many, many thanks to the fine folks there for all their help. Note: this journal has since gone ‘out of print’. the originals are still available at archive.org but i have adjusted the links here so that they continue to work. The truths of which the masses now approve are the very truths that the fighters at the outposts held to in the days of our grandfathers. We fighters at the outposts nowadays no longer approve of them; and I do not believe there is any other well-ascertained truth except this, that no community can live a healthy life if it is nourished only on such old marrowless truths. —Henrik Ibsen, An Enemy of the People (1882/2000, IV.i) Knowledge as negotiation is not an entirely new concept in educational circles; social contructivist and connectivist pedagogies, for instance, are centered on the process of negotiation as a learning process. On Knowledge Information is the foundation of knowledge.
Hayo Reinders The False Dichotomy Between Facts And Creativity Friday, November 30, 2012 Another excerpt from the very important new article on the science of learning by Henry Roediger and Mary Pyc (my first post about it is here): “Professors in schools of education and teachers often worry about creativity in students, a laudable goal. The techniques we advocate show improvements in basic learning and retention of concepts and facts, and some people have criticized this approach as emphasizing ‘rote learning’ or ‘pure memorization’ rather than creative synthesis. Shouldn’t education be about fostering a sense of wonder, discovery, and creativity in children? The answer to the question is yes, of course, but we would argue that a strong knowledge base is a prerequisite to being creative in a particular domain. As Robert Sternberg and Elena Grigorenko have commented, ‘Teachers need to put behind them the false dichotomy between “teaching for thinking” and “teaching for facts,” or between emphases on thinking or emphases on memory.
Towards a Working Theory of Learning: The Affective Context Model Preface: (you can find a brief video overview of the Affective Context Model here.) For about five years I taught psychology - including learning theory, cognitive psychology, developmental psychology and comparative psychology. One of my main reasons for leaving teaching was that I wanted to put what I knew into practice. That might seem odd, but it’s a great deal odder to find yourself in a classroom writing ‘Piaget believed learning should be exploratory’ onto a board while students obediently copy it down. Of course there are many ways of enriching the classroom experience – but I was also experimenting with web technologies and believed that as virgin territories they offered explosive potential. I spent the next several years working with teams of developers in an ambitious attempt to apply learning theory and cognitive science to create a form of ‘super learning’ – a method which was demonstrably more effective than other forms of learning. But it’s easy to criticise.
Eight Ways of Looking at Intelligence Big Ideas In “Thirteen Ways of Looking At A Blackbird,” poet Wallace Stevens takes something familiar—an ordinary black bird—and by looking at it from many different perspectives, makes us think about it in new ways. With apologies to Stevens, we’re going to take the same premise, but change the subject by considering eight ways of looking at intelligence—eight perspectives provided by the science of learning. As with anything to do with our idiosyncratic and unpredictable species, there is still a lot of art involved in teaching and learning. 1. Situations can be internal or external. Situational intelligence, in other words, is the only kind of intelligence there is—because we are always doing our thinking in a particular situation, with a particular brain in a particular body. A feeling of hopefulness actually leads us to try harder and persist longer—but only if it is paired with practical plans for achieving our goals and concrete actions we’ll take. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Related