Natural Learning?

Re: Natural Learning?

by Roy Williams -
Number of replies: 3

Hi Kathleen, as Jenny says, below, its very relevant.  

Much of what I learnt about emergence comes from Montessori preschools.  The approach starts a little differently, in my experience.  It assumes children want to explore writing first, and in an embodied way - so ... they get to isolate a few letters (the f of food - see Sesame Street) is a favourite of mine, and food is such an interesting thing for young children, who love to explore what 'is' food and what 'isn't'. 

Then they can explore sandpaper letters, and the practice of writing one letter at a time, then put them together, and so on - reading comes much later, as it is not - in the same way - based on the development of agency in the child, and it is someone else's text. (Reading aligns with agency later on, sure, but not at the beginning).  

Our eldest daughter was going through this process at the time her sister Alice was born, and the next step for her was to write "Alice", and then to repeat that - almost without pause, for 3 days - she did little else during this time, except to write Alice, Alice, Alice .... until she decided she had 'got' it.  Then she left that behind, and went on to other things. 

Point is, the process was driven by the availability of 'intentional' learning objects and learning practices, which she could choose from, and pursue until she had decided she had got it / mastered it, and then never had to return to it, or be 'assessed' in doing it.

Internal motivation, linked into 'intentionallly designed' learning objects - (see the discussion elsewhere in these forums on 'intention', and what we might call the dance between the intention of the open learning environment / structure and the emerging intention of the learner) - if sustained, can go a long way (all the way? I dont know - it depends on whether the designer is astute enough to recognise the emergent intentionality of the learner, and translate/transcribe that into intentionally designed learning objects / learning practices - its a big ask for anyone, and we're not all designers - certainly not at that level. 

More problematic is base 10, which Napoleon imposed on us to the exclusion of all other counting systems (although some survive, like our base 60/12/24 for time). There is nothing intuitive about base 10 - I for one much prefer 12 (or 5 if you must), but Montessori (who was firstly a mathematician) managed to design intentional learning objects for that too - like the wonderful 'pink tower'. 

There's also a whole trajectory of 'embodied' learning to consider, and its role in emergence and 'natural' learning - not only at preschool level - but that's another story.

In reply to Roy Williams

Re: Natural Learning?

by Kathleen Zarubin -

Hi all - so pleased the concept is seen as 'relevant' .  Roy I love the fact you brought up writing.  Yes while 'being read to' can occur from birth (or earlier :) )  -  I have always thought writing comes slightly 'first'  - but the action of (almost pretend) writing ....

 

A favourite game for all the little toddlers (18 months + ) in my life has been 'love letters' - especailly when a few people are gathered.   A pile of 'post it notes' (or any bit of paper),  a few pencils .....  The little ones write 'a letter'  and then deleiver it to a big person ... who is delighted to get it and asks ... "What does my letter say?' 

 

Almost always at first it 'I love you'   :)  

 

There is no presure here - it is fun.  Some times I might 're-write' what it says underneath ... 

 

Over time (sometimes just the course of a couple of evenings)  the 'writing' goes from just scribble to real  'up and down - joined lines'  with a break and then more 'up/down line'  - visually it looks like the concept of writing ...

 

Then in the / family gathering the older kids get in on it often playing along / sometimes trying to take over (with younger ones around 2-3 loudly complaining I want to do my own writing etc etc ...  )

 

One of my favourite memories was with my friend's son - about 4 ... as the love letters are flying - he comes to me with a picture of a truck  and before I can say anything - he says to me ...  "Kath this one doesn't say anything - It is a truck and trucks don't talk .... "  (or words to that effect ..) 

 

THEN out of the blue - we all ended up (adults and kids included) having this great convo on the 'concept' of hieroglyphics - phones and tablets at the ready - finding examples,  discussing how you need to know the 'code' - kids making thier own 'picture writing letters ...'  (it was crazy and went on for ages) 

 

Then at kindy a couple of days later - one of the kids told the 'story' of picture writing at kindy ... and on it goes ... 

 

I do not know exactly what is big take out message in the above except I *think* we all (or almost all) have a drive to communicate.  Talking is one way (with all the associated 'things')  -  visual representation  (words / pictures etc) is another .. (& ofcourse others as well ) 

 

But it is the drive to communicate -

capture a thought - pass it on - have it able to be recieved - add / or substract or change something(?)  -   return to sender - & then repeat ...

that is the basic drive we are all tapping into ....   always (??)  ....

 

What do you think?

 

In reply to Kathleen Zarubin

Re: Natural Learning?

by Roy Williams -

Kathleen, OK, I'll give it a try, to unpack the basic drive (health warning, I love semiotics - see here, for example - it's an analysis of two pictures of "The Pope sat on the chair") ... 

I would say

  • we all want to be in touch with each other (figuratively and literally) 
  • so, we use touch, glances, movement .. 
  • we move on to sounds, to language
  • all of which leave impressions - on the mind, the imagination, the subconscious ...
  • then on to physical inscriptions - in the air (dance, music), on the ground (sandcastles, castles, highways), on the body (ours and the bodies of others)  
  • and in the process we become part of communities ...(like this online one) 
In reply to Kathleen Zarubin

Re: Natural Learning?

by Scott Johnson -

Kathleen,

What I noticed right away was the gathering of people in a group activity. Together we can imitate each other and be in the presence of supportive cues flying all over the place. I'd prefer to call this bonding over a case of learning.

School removes the simple human desire for belonging and emphasizes the individual. Not to mention presenting a value system held dear by people you don't know--and normally wouldn't associate with. School plunges kids into a system of interaction where the purpose is not to show mutual support or being of the group, but to perfom in an "acceptable" manner.

Somewhere it was decided the best model of the world to display at school is neutral and de-personalized. The equivilant of life's journey designed by the Greyhound Bus interior design department.

This caught my attention for no reason in particular while looking through the I Ching for advice on emergence: #25 Wu Wang / Innocence (The Unexpected). We can let Roy work on the meaning:-)