From primary school to middle school, high school and finally to college, getting good grades during tests have been the only goal of my life. I was raised in an environment that grades speak for every child, and I felt lucky that I was so good at this. My talent on taking tests has taken me all the way from a small town to a middle city, and to the biggest city in China: Shanghai.
The more specific the goal is and the stronger the desire is, the easier one can get lost once the goal is achieved. After the most stressful National College Entrance Exam, I got a good score and went to one of the top five universities in China. Suddenly all the pressure was gone and life is much more about tests and grades. I started to skip classes, attending activity associations such as dancing club, debating team, basketball team etc., any thing but paying attention to what was taught in class. But several questions kept haunting my mind:
What do I really like? Why am I studying this major? What is my life about?
Am I being stupid and unrealistic? No. I never had a chance to ask myself these questions. But they are so important for a student to love his or her life, love learning and live happily. And I am not the only one who did not start to think about the question of significance until entering college or later. More than one of my friends realized that their true interest lies somewhere else in the second or third year of their Ph.D.. Why? Because their life direction has been led by grades, rankings and other people’s opinions, nothing related to their true inner desire.
We’ve been taught for so many years. It’s time to really start to learn.
On the other hand, from the point view of a future teacher, we need to learn to avoid the same thing to happen to the future students. Anti-teaching and mindful learning can be a guideline on this. “Learning is the hallmark of humanity”, and the purpose of teaching is only to invoke the students’ desire to learn. We no longer need to indoctrinate the students with all the knowledge, but some of the basics and the way to learn through connected learning. And basics are not basics either. “Facts, derived from science of not, are not context-free”. “The routine stayed fixed, while the context changed.” We need to insure that the teaching environment can facilitate mindful learning. i.e., encourage the students to think while they learn. Let them enjoy learning.
I really enjoyed reading articles about mindful learning by Ellen J. Langer. The results of experiments in the article (pay attention vs. notice new things, and tasks vs. play) were very interesting but not surprising. I have already experienced this behavior in some classes. Here is an example. I was teaching assistant for an undergraduate course. The first semester, the instructor told students that we will have 4 exams before the final exam. That semester, some students were always complaining about the number of exams in my office hours! Next semester, the instructor changed the syllabus and told students we do not have any in-class exams. Instead, we will have only four quizzes. In the second semester, students never complained about the number of quizzes, although the workloads and quizzes were similar to the previous semester’s exams!
I think mathematical modeling of a problem is one of the most difficult skills to teach in my field. Here is a very simple example: we have four employees and four different jobs. Employees have different skills. How to assign the employees to the jobs in order to have maximum efficiency? This is a simple problem that students learn to model it (See the following picture for a more complicated mathematical model).
One difficulty of the mathematical modeling is that the problems do not have one unique model and each person can model a problem differently. In addition, the number and type of problems are not limited. There are complicated problems that scientists still cannot model it mathematically. Therefore, we cannot teach a specific technique to the students and tell them that use this technique in order to model all types of problems (there is only a general guideline). Students should learn to be creative facing with different problems. Teaching the modeling skill to new students in the field is a very difficult and challenging job. I have seen many students struggling to learn mathematical modeling and complaining about instructors. I also have seen a student used the YouTube to learn mathematical modeling and said that this is more helpful than the class and I should not go to the class anymore!
Teaching the modeling skill is not possible without engaging students and encouraging them to learn mindfully. In my opinion, this is why some instructors are more successful in teaching this skill even through the YouTube. I definitely will think and read more about encouraging mindful learning and ways to improve it in the classes. Thanks to Dr. Langer for the amazing articles.
It started in high school. My primary goal at the time was to get into a “good” college, and I knew how to do it- get good grades, and fill my time up with lots of “extra-curricular activities” to tack onto my application. I also knew that the material in my classes was not really that hard for me- I could pay attention 10% of the time in class, memorize a bunch of stuff, and get A’s. I got very good at efficiently allocating my time to maximize my GPA. I literally felt sometimes like I was cracking some kind of formula. In class last Wednesday, we lamented the question “Will this be on the test?” I don’t think I ever actually said these words aloud, but I would certainly pay attention if anyone else did.
This kind of learning more or less got me through my master’s program, as by that time I had gotten really good it. This isn’t entirely true- along the way, there were plenty of classes or topics or assignments that truly engaged me. Writing papers was usually more engaging than studying for exams, for instance, and anything that required some creativity often got me thinking more “mindfully.” Sometimes, the topic was complicated enough that I actually had to sit down and understand it. I would notice when this happened, so I really appreciate having words for it now. Mindless learning was fast, efficient, and not a lot of fun. Mindful learning, on the other hand, was slow. I would read a few sentences or paragraphs, then stop and think about them. I would solve a math problem, and then come up with another way to solve it. Even when I was 17, when I thought about “learning,” this is what I meant.
Everything changed when I entered my PhD program. I realized after my first midterm that I couldn’t rely on mindless learning anymore, and that now, the most “efficient” thing for me to do was to actually, mindfully, learn the material. In order for me to do this, I had to stop thinking about my grade- the outcome- and focus on the process. The great irony here is that my grades improved once I stopped caring about them, and I realized that it was more enjoyable and in some cases easier to engage with the material than to memorize it.
I firmly believe that schools should promote mindful learning. Ellen Langer, in “The Power of Mindful Learning” discusses the importance of critical thinking and the dangers of “overlearning” or simply memorizing processes. Not only can mindless learning be dangerous (and she lists many convincing examples of this), it is also thoroughly unenjoyable and does not prepare you either for the workforce or a fulfilled life. It reminds me of a quote from the song “Kodachrome” by Paul Simon – “When I think back on all the crap I learned in high school, it’s a wonder I can think at all.”
Students may always try to “maximize,” since they have limited time and attention. But as teachers, maybe we can shift what it is they are maximizing. Ellen Langer also discusses, as does Michael Wesch in his article “Anti-Teaching: Confronting the Crisis of Significance” how she promotes mindful learning in her classroom. As she writes in “Mindful Learning,” “‘what we teach’ may be less important than ‘how we teach.'” If teachers promote the idea in the classroom that the purpose of the class is to be engaged and to learn how to think critically, rather than to memorize a bunch of stuff and do well on exams, then I think the students will absorb this message. It may seem like an uphill battle at first, but I believe that if it is done well, students will thrive in this kind of environment.
I’m curious to hear about other’s personal experiences with mindless vs. mindful learning. Share your stories!
The Meisner Technique is an approach towards acting that focuses on external impulse. It requires an actor to be fully aware of their environment and their surroundings so that every external condition has the potential to influence the characters in the scene. The Meisner Technique embodies the “why” behind things. Why does a character move? Why does a character speak? Why does a character think the way they think? It’s important to understand that the why is based in external circumstances instead of internal circumstances (which is a different “method” all-together).
Mindful learning is an educational approach that utilizes many of the same principals as the Meisner Technique. According to Ellen Langer, “Mindfullness is a flexible state of mind in which we are actively engaged in the present, noticing new things and sensitive to context.” Similarly, Meisner is quoted as saying, “Act before you think – your instincts are more honest than your thoughts.” The connection here is actors can become trapped in the realm of thinking rather than responding to emotional instinct or impulse. In order to recognize those impulses, the actor must be wholly present, aware of the moment, and highly focused. Langer’s definition of Mindful Learning states the same principles.
Digging into the “why” as an actor or as a student is essentially the same process. The internal questions result in a disconnect from the source material both in an educational context and a theatrical context. “What are my character’s motivations” is essentially the same question as “what material will be on the test.” Instead the questions should be more focused on contextual evidence that include acute awareness of the self within the environment. The “why” suddenly becomes about impulse and instinct rather than a baseline outcome.
I’ve long believed that teaching is a form of performance art. Good teachers instinctually know how to engage their audience through a variety of theatrical techniques that all have definitions within the cannon of acting training. Through Mindful Learning, the role of a teacher is to impart this type of training onto students. Connecting mindfulness to acting technique is potentially a way to bridge the gap between mindful learning and disconnected learning. Now I’m not suggesting that every student and faculty member ever needs to undergo rigorous acting training. I spent my time studying the Meisner Technique when I was at acting conservatory and I fully recognize that acting training may not be for everyone. Creating an awareness of the connections that exist between Mindful Learning and Acting Technique could offer insight on how to engage students and redirect their purpose of asking “why.”
Mike Wesch’s piece on Anti-teaching is a very interesting reading. I have to say that I was intrigued by the reference to contemporary techniques in teaching as “anti-teaching” and then traditional teaching as “teaching”. He suggests that traditional teaching is a “hindrance to learning”. I definitely see where this feel could come from. Especially in the last decade, a lot has changed and such an emphasis on testing has made teaching about conveying facts and teaching to the test. I completely agree that this is (ineffective) teaching as it takes away ALL interesting subject matter and only focuses on what is necessary to “know for the test”. However, there is some value to didactic learning which I think is falling into this category of (ineffective) “teaching”. Some students do actually respond to lectures and ppts though I agree not everyone. Each student learns a little bit differently. The nice think about the more contemporary approach (or anti-teaching) is that it gets students to think. There is still a place for facts and figures but getting our future generations to think and problem solve is where contemporary pedagagy will be have such an advantage.
From a young age, I was taught skills in an absolute sense just as described in the readings. From middle school to high school to college, I learned to study solely for the test. I sat in large lecture halls, listened to lectures, and worked through standardized homework in a step by step fashion. I was taught how to do things in a “this is the way they are done” fashion. I was taught to not color outside of the lines and stick within the frame of the picture. However, what I needed most is to color outside the lines. What expanded my learning the most was stepping out of the classroom to help with community development and other application projects. However, I still find myself preparing content for a lecture from the start of class to the very last five minutes. Giving little time for discussion throughout the period since so much material needs to be covered over a fifty minute time span. Langer made the point that prepared class material can work against the goals of teaching. I agree with that statement too much structure may compromise the learning environment not allowing students to explore on their own curiosity. Learning skills in a conditional manner as opposed to an absolute manner can help spark questions and encourage further learning.
As I continued to read about anti-teaching and how managing the learning environment of the classroom may be more important than the content, I was also thinking about cases where this may be difficult. The description of the mass lecture hall (250 seats nailed to the floor aligned in rows, a small podium with a microphone, and massive screen) reminded of my chemistry class. This got me thinking of how it could be possible to incorporate this idea of Teaching as a Subversive Activity in a class that is more content/memorization driven such as anatomy or chemistry? Any thoughts?
I remember listening to my more privileged high school friends recount their experiences traveling from college to college during their junior or senior summers.In those days the only real way to investigate universities was to go there; so they would pack into a car and take a road trip. The internet existed at that time, but it was a pretty rudimentary tool. It certainly didn’t have the capacity to adequately inform a prospective student about campus life, dining options or places to listen to cool bands. A little over a decade later we live in a very different environment. Students are able to pull up in just a few minutes enormous amounts of information about the school, its academics and the places they’re located.
In this environment attracting students has become much more competitive and schools have to spend considerable resources marketing themselves. I looked at the mission statements from two schools in fairly close proximity to Virginia Tech to see how they compared. The first was UVA, whose statement highlighted it’s commitment to academics and a set of “foundational” ideals. This short statement painted a picture of an environment where serious scholarship could take place in a place dedicated to excellence. Next I looked at Radford University’s mission statement. Radford’s statement was written in a more informal tone; besides giving some basic information about degrees, they chose to highlight the athletics at the school.
These mission statements may have highlighted some important differences in both priorities and philosophy between the schools. I think the different statements were also meant to attract different groups of potential students. While UVA may have been aimed at students whose main aim is achieving academic goals, RU may be trying to attract students who are looking for colleges based on academics, as well as sports or career programs.
I find it quite interesting, while crossing into other areas of study, you run across terms that are the same but hold vastly differing meanings.
Take mindfulness for example. In the world of counseling, being mindful is being purposefully and actively aware of your sensory experiences in the moment without judgment. There are many wonderful exercises and techniques to help ground you in the moment, help slow down your thoughts, and bring your attention and focus to being fully present in the moment. It is a calming thing. It is quite helpful for those who struggle with anxiety or racing thoughts. Being mindful can help you “get out of your head”.
However, in the world of education, being mindful is something a bit different. Ellen Langer, in her book The Power of Mindful Learning, defines mindfulness as being open to new information, new categories being continually created, and awareness of multiple perspectives. She continues to discuss how we can learn “the basics” to various things and practice them so much that the skills become “overlearned”. This causes a risk to miss the nuances of the individual components and lose out on the ability for fine tuning adjustments.
Maybe, these widely different terms are more closely related than I initially thought upon a first read. Possibly, through the magic of amalgamation, these separate things can converge into one interesting thing.
Perhaps that is just it. We miss out on things we really can learn when we are not focused on the moment or are tuned-out by the repetition of muscle memory tasks. Being open, purposeful, and actively aware in a learning environment may help us suspend our previous thoughts and ideas, either as teachers or as students, and gain awareness to new categories and multiple perspectives. If we “get out of our heads” regarding teaching, learning, and pedagogy, then more creative, organic, and interesting methods of learning can come into our awareness.
Now, with a mind full of thoughts on how to look at education and learning with a mindful approach, I am excited to see what new ideas and perspectives pop up. I hope that quieting and stilling my mind can open me up to seeing and understanding more in the world of education, as well as counseling. And in true counselor form, I will practice my mindfulness and continue to allow my thoughts to roll gently past, like fluffy white clouds against a bright blue sky. I will suspend judgment and notice what all happens.
Hello, Readers! It’s good to see you again. I’ve been off for a while, writing about the current standing of the American college, but I’m back today to talk about a concept called mindful learning. It’s a concept originally coined by Ellen Langer, a professor of psychology at Harvard, that seeks to explain the current myths surrounding education and inspire a movement toward new ways of thinking about thinking. Her current state of worry about student learning is complex and takes up the greater part of a book. Now, I’m aware that many of you may not have the time for such a read, so I’ve included a video by Micheal Wesch, Author of his own article Anti-Teaching, because I believe the concerns of Dr. Langer are mirrored nicely and briefly in the youtube video below:
Scary right? Like Horror movie scary. But hey, that’s school. However; according to Dr. Langer, it doesn’t have to be. To combat this mindless drudge through the campus, she suggests a new type of learning; Mindful Learning. In Langer’s book, she states that this style of processing and learning would include the following: “the continuous creation of new categories; openness to new information; and an implicit awareness of more than one perspective.” In short Dr. Langr is making way for a style of teaching that is flexible and learner-centered. She wants educators and students to think critically about situations before accepting them.
I like Dr. Langer’s proposal, and I’d like to take a moment to highlight her brilliance in one specific section. In one of her early chapters she discusses her use of the word “how”. She mentions that phrasing a question of absurdity by prefacing it with the word “how” is critical because it shifts the origin of thought on the subject from a fact of impossibility to a quandary of possibility. This shift in thinking, she claims, is mindful. You see, it’s not about the specific question, but rather how it was asked. The question she presented in this scenario was an open ended question with a variety of answers. in addition, she did not let the students laugh it off. Forcing them to answer the question put them into a hypothetical space that required them to respond and think in new ways. In the video above, students are seen holding up various signs with the problems of today (War, Crime, Poverty) these are questions that require the same kind of thinking that Dr. Langer is encouraging in her students. By making a move toward mindfulness, one could argue that her pupils are better prepared for these challenges than those who have gone the mindless route of wrote preparedness. what cracks me up about all of this, is that what she is suggesting is neither new nor novel. What she is recommending is an education in philosophy with an emphasis on Socratic teaching. Thousands of years ago, a student named Plato recorded the teaching methods and advice of his teacher Socrates in a series of books: The Republic, Phaedrus, etc. He recorded his teacher, in dialogue, asking complex questions, in an open answer format, to try and get the young men of Athens thinking about the problems that the world faces in a way that was meaningful. when one of the students would laugh a problem off, Socrates was prone to put that issue into a context that might actually occur. Sounds quite similar to our Dr. Langer no? So what has happened to make Dr. Langer avoid this obvious connection? Has the whole world forgotten about philosophy? I don’t believe so, but I believe (To use Dr. Langer’s psychology terms) it has repressed it, and I believe the Great Depression is to blame. Around the 1930’s America was so tired of being poor that we forgot what it meant to be educated. We became concerned with production and stopped worrying about proaction. Philosophy saw a sharp decline, because it didn’t produce anything (at the surface level). There were no philosophy factories turning out products. Philosophy, as a major in college, became a joke. Children who had grown up poor turned to careers where they would produce things that would, in turn, feed them. In their education, they demanded to be taught the absolute minimum to go out and get a job producing as quickly as possible. Education, which used to be a lifelong pursuit, turned into a four-year dash. But this hurt them in the long run. we forgot that it takes meaningful thought to invent the future, and now we need that philosophic teaching that we threw out. but we did too good a job of branding it negatively with jokes about the practitioners of philosophy and fast food. It’s hard to pick up tools that have been discarded for so long, but I think Dr. Langer is doing just that. she has rebranded philosophy under the new title of mindful thinking and is attempting to cajole it back into common curriculum. I for one am glad. I think we will need it if we are to face the future with open minds. let mee know what you think.
To different degrees, all these week’s readings deal with the issue of students’ low efficiency of learning. In Wesch’s words, education has lost “significance” to students. Other authors also expressed similar concerns of the inefficiency of present education. While I admit this observation has its insight, I would argue that this issue might have been over-exaggerated due to one reason or another.
I think part of the reason that contemporary education is not as efficient as it is expected to be actually arises from the question itself. Modern education’s assumption is based upon this fundamental assumption: all children should be educated. While this assumption has been taken for granted, it was not true in the past. From ancient time to very recent centuries, most adult human beings on our planet were simply illiterate, or close to illiterate. The vast majority of kids would not have the concept of going to schools at all. Keep in mind that the first major book was only printed in Europe as late as 1455. Education in the past was indeed a high privilege of the very well off, if not the very top members of human societies. In this situation, people would pursue education only if they not only had the resources, but also possessed an absolutely strong drive to learn. It is not hard to imagine students in the past would make every effort to absorb knowledge. Curiosity and interest were probably not a relevant concern at all. Simply put it, kids in the past drove themselves to learn.
In recent centuries, however, the tide was reversed. Education has stopped being a privilege; instead, it is assumed to be a basic human right and education has become an industry. A class is like an assembly line and teachers of different subjects are workers standing at different spots. Students are the products. The more students a class has, the less attention each of them can receive, given the number of teachers fixed. Ken Robinson in his video mentioned the importance of individualized education and appreciated the education of Finland. It is easier said than done. With their oil money from the sea and their small populations, of course it is easy for those Northern European countries to hire enough teachers to perform “individualized” education for their kids. This is hardly practical for countries with large populations like America, not mentioning those crowded countries like China.
That being said, a growing number of students going to school should not be the excuse to downplay the quality of education itself. After all, education quality is part of living quality in a general sense. If human beings’ general living conditions are improved in history, there is no reason to leave education behind. If you can make students attracted, why bore them?
