Author: ichosewords

Most of the time I am reading through articles and blogs, I am learning something new. Then there are times when I can relate to an article. However, there are rare times, when the article says exactly the same thing I wanted to share for so long. It is so good to read them and realize that your feelings have been expressed somewhere by someone.

I am talking about an article on the myth of multitasking. I was never good at multitasking and that article helped me realized the truth: multitasking does not exist. One can do many tasks switching quickly from one to another but one can only do one task at a time. Of course, the tasks that either have been mastered or that don’t require the same parts of the brain may be performed simultaneously.

I have been told by many people that they can multitask like listen to me, understand it, reply back and still continue the other work and every time I used to ask them how they can concentrate on them at the same time, I would just hear some arguments, like it is all practice or you just have to train your brain, which were not convincing enough. Well, I have the answer now: they weren’t concentrating. They may be good and quick at switching but they can’t be doing all of it simultaneously. When we think of multitasking, one important thing that we tend to forget, we are humans. A machine may be designed to complete several tasks at the same time with different memory allocations for different tasks but we still have one brain with limited nodes. The brain has limited sections and can only handle a number of tasks. Even our machines hang up at times when they are overworked even if they are designed to perform such tasks. So it makes sense that humans fail at that as our brains are not designed for that.

I am not sure about future and with evolution may be the brain’s design is modified so much that humans can multitask. But right now, if you were trying to write a blog/comment while reading this article (or a couple of others on multitasking: 1, 2), discussing with a friend and listening to the podcast on the myth of multitasking (in case reading was not enough), stop right there. Do them one by one and you will get the most from all of them.

Each one of us makes hundreds of decisions in a day, from the time we get up (or whether to) until we are asleep like a log (and some even after that). Some decisions are involuntary like brushing the teeth (you are no lion and need to do it every day, maybe twice) while some are very hard and require significant brainpower like whether to take a shower (come on, I just took one, last week!). The involuntary and voluntary parts of the decision-making are very important. I am not the only one who thinks that, Shankar Vedantam thinks like that too (the fellow is a Nieman Fellow at Harvard, you got to respect that at least), you can read it here. He says we really need to know when the ‘autopilot’ mode of our brain is on and whether we should allow it to go on the autopilot.

Every decision that we make matters and has an impact on our mind. From choosing the color of our toothbrush (fine, blue is my favorite too) to the person we choose to sit next to in the bus (I know Blacksburg Transit is awesome and there is hardly any space to stand), everything is recorded by the mind. Alexa (Amazon assistant, at least she has a name!) might miss some of the things that you say (or everything in my case, she doesn’t get my accent) and do but the brain won’t. It is VERY important to understand this because this is where we are training our brain what to do in the autopilot mode. Now don’t call on your brain when it takes some stupid decisions like nominating and confirming a white-male judge, accused of biased opinions and possible assaults, for the highest court of the country. You taught your brain to do that. You were responsible for training it well. When you didn’t and allowed it to go on an autopilot (when you really should not have), it may play a little and take some innocuous wrong decisions.

Our brain is a machine, it wasn’t born with its own mind (you see what I did there). But it learns and how. It becomes very powerful and can take its own decisions without you even knowing what you just did. However, we are the one in control. If we fed it junk, it is fine, happens, we can still make it unlearn that and start giving it some fresh veggies and fruits (Go vegan, you’ll). It is never late because we don’t want to be sorry!

P.S.: I was writing this with ‘autopilot mode’ on, so please excuse my irritating commentary (but why was I commentating, it is my own blog, ahh, whatever).

I always get very excited whenever I think about teaching. I am so passionate about it that whenever I am reading an article related to teaching, my mind wanders off in its own world, thinking that I would do this and that in my hypothetical class. I even start imagining the responses from the students and if they would take it in a good spirit or not. That’s why I am not just excited but also very nervous. Sometimes I fear that what if I mess up everything and ruin the kids’ interest completely. That fear is enough for me to reconsider the decision whether I should teach or not. I have always thought that if I would be a teacher, I should not be like the ones that I have encountered in my early life, who were there just because they were getting paid. Teaching is one profession where you have immense power at your hands. If the right directions are given, and the minds are ignited properly then the fire can change someone’s life in a manner that will not only help the person but can have a huge positive impact on the society. Whereas on the other hand, bad teaching has also powers to kill the passion and interest and may turn out to be the reason for less than satisfactory life for someone. I understand that the above statements may feel exaggerated but it is possible (the Butterfly effect).

I felt a bit better after reading the article by Sarah E. Deel. The article details her journey to become the teacher that she is now. She took the long route of starting from scratch and exploring everything by herself. She asked herself many questions and after trying to find the answers in the articles and textbooks on pedagogy, understood that much important information is missing. At one point, she thought it would be good to be a popular professor and tried to be one. However, she soon realized that copying the traits of some other professors who were assumed cool, is not something she could do forever. I could really connect with her here. Whenever I have imagined the way I would teach, I would always start with my favorite professors and their way of teaching and how I could incorporate that in my own way. However, I never thought if I have the same characteristics in myself as they have.

As with anything, if you keep looking for answers rather than the answers to come to you, the probability is high that you will stumble upon them. Sarah also found her answers after struggling for a while. She realized that there is no one way of being a perfect teacher and the key is to be herself. This realization changed everything for her. Being oneself takes away at least half the burden of teaching. The only thing to focus then is the content for the class. The toll of acting like someone that you are not is heavy and once that is gone, automatically there is an energy boost with the happiness of being your own self. So, the only thing that remains now is to find my true self and if you have not already noticed the title of this webpage, I am on that mission for a while now.

Whether I would be a good teacher or a bad one, time will tell. But at least with such brilliant articles and discussions that happen in the class, I definitely have some hope. And hope, they say, is a good thing, maybe the best!

“….Money alone won’t improve graduation rates. After students make it past the bursar, they need to attend classes that set their minds on fire.”

These were the ending lines from an article on igniting students’ minds published in The Chronicles of Higher Education. These lines caught my attention because it was only the last week I was commenting on a blog how making education free/cheaper could change the focus from making money after education to actually diving deeper into your passion. However, this is a very realistic statement. Garnering interest in a field is an arduous task and it is very easy to kill the passion with the conventional pedagogical methods.

As I read Sam’s story in the chapter “Arc-of-Life Learning” in the book, ‘A New Culture of Learning’, it can be understood the classroom learning is just not going to be enough to ‘cultivate’ knowledge. We have to take a step back and understand the drawbacks of the classroom system. While we learn the negatives, we still need to make sure not to forget the benefits that the face-to-face teaching can provide, as detailed in this article. The article suggests four purposes where classrooms can be used as modeling thought process,  sharing cognitive structure, giving context and telling stories. The author described in detail the four purposes. Towards the end, the article informs what has not been considered for those purposes: information transfer and inspiration. I do not completely agree with those points. I think both the information transfer and inspiration are required during the lectures. Modeling the thought process and sharing the cognitive structure both needs information transfer. If the process is performed properly, the inspiration is passed involuntarily. I accept that information transfer and inspiration should not be the only reasons for the lecture but in most cases, it is not a reason anyway. They both are an inherent part of classroom teaching.

The question that we now face is if not classroom learning then what could be an effective method? The answer is that there is no definite answer. The article in The Chronicles of Higher Ed and the book chapter suggests that we have to incorporate technology in the classroom. More importantly, they suggest how the technologies should be used to connect students outside of the classroom. As we discussed in the class last week, humans (and other animals) have evolved by “doing” stuff and continuing forward we need to keep that factor always involved. Having a lab aspect of the classroom can help. If the resources are not enough for that, have a collaborative project on it. If it is possible to integrate a game, it can do wonders as can be seen from several examples in both the article and the chapter. If a game is not feasible, online interaction with a broader community on certain projects can gather interest. The bottom line is to actively engage students such that they can easily forget to party. If the education is fun in itself, there would be no need to look for fun from outside sources.

It is very clear that the world is fast changing and adopting new technologies every day. The pedagogy has to keep pace with that. Otherwise, we would keep enrolling students but could never educate. Sometimes to complete a marathon, it is necessary to take a step back and change the strategy to overcome the challenges.

The time spent online by an average American is about 24 hours. It is more than the half of the full work-hours in a week. The internet has become a necessity rather than a luxury. This infographic describes in detail the online consumption habits of different age groups. Without any surprise, the Gen Z (born after 2000) consumes the most amount of content online. Hence, the social media is used extensively to influence the Gen Y and Gen Z.

The content available can have an impact. Increasing the presence of academics online can make a big difference. With the research out in the open, people would not have to wait for the media organizations to pick some ‘hot’ topics or research. With wide knowledge of the research, it will not only help in the collaboration but will also help in the direct inclusion of the community that might be affected by the research. This changes the thinking of the researchers. Pedagogical methods would become different. As the community will be more open, the resources and needs can be understood better. As George Kuh recommends in his “high-impact practices“, the idea of education should be of inquiry, and learning. The practices were written in 2008, hence, digitalization and its impact is not well incorporated in them. But, as mentioned earlier, the online habits have changed dramatically over the years. Gardner Campbell has captured its importance in detail in the article on networked learning.

Blogging gives the opportunity to indulge better in discussion with the community members. As more people from academia start doing it, it will become a regular thing and not restricted to specialists. When people from all walks of life will be taking part in the discussion, there will be more meaning to the learning and research. Diversity and inclusiveness will have to become a necessary element in everything. It will allow the education to grow. The learning will be more “humanity” and “reality” based.

However, it is easier said than done. There are two factors that may deter the people concerned. First, it is a big responsibility. When someone states something, they should mean it. It may be tiring for some to answer the people who are there just to kill the time. Next, the online presence may have to be increased which may take a toll on the professional and personal life. As we are already spending about 24 hours after the 40 hours of work, the time spent on essential things may change and can have an adverse impact. It can certainly be avoided with proper planning, however, at times, it becomes difficult to manage. The overall positive of ‘going online’ may be overshadowed by the negative, if things go astray.