#Rote Learning vs Meaningful Learning

[maxlearnmicrolearningplatform]

Applying Ausubel’s Theory of ‘Meaningful Learning’ to Microlearning: A Pathway to Enhanced Knowledge Retention

In the realm of educational psychology, David Ausubel’s theory of meaningful learning stands as a foundational concept that has transformed how we understand the process of acquiring and retaining knowledge. His theory emphasizes that learning is most effective when new information is connected to the learner’s existing cognitive structure. In contrast to rote learning, where learners simply memorize information without understanding it deeply, meaningful learning leads to lasting comprehension and the ability to apply knowledge in practical contexts.

The principles of Ausubel’s theory can be effectively applied to microlearning, a modern instructional approach that delivers content in short, focused segments. When microlearning is designed with a focus on meaningful learning, it can lead to better knowledge retention, deeper understanding, and more applicable skills for learners. This article explores how Ausubel’s theory of meaningful learning can be integrated into microlearning to create a more powerful and effective learning experience.

Ausubel’s Theory of Meaningful Learning: Key Concepts

To understand how Ausubel’s theory applies to microlearning, we must first break down the core elements of his theory:

Prior Knowledge: According to Ausubel, the most important factor influencing learning is what the learner already knows. This existing knowledge provides a framework to which new information can be attached, making it easier for learners to understand and remember new concepts.

Meaningful Learning vs. Rote Learning: Ausubel distinguishes between two types of learning. Rote learning involves memorizing information without understanding its significance, while meaningful learning occurs when new information is related to what the learner already knows, leading to deeper comprehension.

Advance Organizers: Ausubel introduced the idea of advance organizers, which are introductory materials presented before learning new content. These organizers help to bridge the gap between prior knowledge and new information, making it easier for learners to grasp complex concepts.

Assimilation Theory: Ausubel’s assimilation theory suggests that new information is incorporated into the learner’s existing cognitive structure. This process is crucial for meaningful learning, as it allows learners to build on their previous knowledge and apply new information in different contexts.

Concept Mapping: Ausubel also advocated for the use of concept maps as a way to visually represent relationships between different pieces of information. These maps help learners organize and integrate new knowledge with existing knowledge, promoting meaningful learning.

Applying Ausubel’s Theory to Microlearning

Microlearning has become a popular method for corporate training, educational programs, and skill development because it delivers short, focused lessons that fit into learners’ busy schedules. However, the effectiveness of microlearning depends largely on how well the content is designed and delivered. By incorporating Ausubel’s principles of meaningful learning, we can ensure that microlearning leads to long-term retention and application of knowledge rather than short-term memorization.

1. Leveraging Prior Knowledge in Microlearning

One of the key principles of Ausubel’s theory is the importance of prior knowledge. Learners are more likely to retain new information if it can be connected to concepts they already understand. Microlearning platforms like MaxLearn can leverage this by personalizing content based on the learner’s existing knowledge and experience.

For example, MaxLearn can implement pre-assessments or diagnostic quizzes that gauge the learner’s current level of understanding before presenting new content. This allows the platform to tailor microlearning lessons to the learner’s knowledge base, ensuring that new information builds on what the learner already knows. By doing so, learners are not overwhelmed with unfamiliar material, and they can more easily assimilate new knowledge into their existing cognitive structures.

Additionally, adaptive learning technologies can adjust the difficulty level of the lessons in real-time based on how well the learner performs. This helps to ensure that learners are constantly challenged but not overwhelmed, facilitating meaningful learning that sticks.

2. Encouraging Meaningful Learning Over Rote Learning

Rote learning often leads to quick forgetfulness, as the information is not anchored to the learner’s cognitive structure. Microlearning platforms can combat this by focusing on meaningful learning. Instead of presenting isolated facts or definitions, microlearning lessons should focus on helping learners understand the why and how behind the information.

For example, in a compliance training module, rather than simply stating rules and regulations, the microlearning lesson could present real-life scenarios where the rules must be applied. This encourages learners to think critically about how they would act in a given situation, fostering meaningful learning through application rather than memorization.

MaxLearn can use case studies, simulations, and problem-solving activities to encourage learners to actively engage with the material and apply their knowledge. By making learning interactive and practical, learners are more likely to remember and use the information in their jobs.

3. Using Advance Organizers to Structure Microlearning Lessons

Ausubel’s concept of advance organizers is another powerful tool for enhancing microlearning. Advance organizers provide learners with a roadmap of what they’re about to learn, allowing them to activate relevant prior knowledge and prepare their minds for new information.

In a microlearning context, advance organizers can take the form of short introductory videos, infographics, or concept summaries presented at the beginning of each lesson. These organizers provide an overview of the topic and highlight key concepts that will be covered, helping learners to make connections between what they already know and what they are about to learn.

For example, before a microlearning lesson on data privacy regulations, the learner could be presented with an infographic summarizing the basic principles of data protection. This helps to activate their prior knowledge on the subject and sets the stage for the new information to be presented.

Advance organizers also serve as a way to prime the learner’s mind, making it easier to absorb and retain the new information. By offering a clear structure, learners are less likely to feel lost or overwhelmed, resulting in a more effective learning experience.

4. Enhancing Knowledge Retention Through Assimilation and Spaced Repetition

Meaningful learning is all about assimilation—the process of integrating new information into existing cognitive structures. To support this, microlearning platforms like MaxLearn can use spaced repetition techniques to reinforce key concepts over time. Spaced repetition involves revisiting learning materials at strategic intervals, which has been proven to improve long-term retention and combat the Forgetting Curve.

In practice, spaced repetition can be implemented in microlearning by revisiting key concepts at intervals after the initial lesson. For instance, learners could receive short follow-up quizzes or knowledge checks several days or weeks after completing a lesson to reinforce what they’ve learned.

By continually revisiting and reinforcing new information, learners are more likely to assimilate it into their existing knowledge base, leading to more meaningful learning and better retention. This approach also allows learners to apply their knowledge in different contexts, which further strengthens their understanding and ability to use the information effectively.

5. Utilizing Concept Mapping in Microlearning

Ausubel’s emphasis on concept mapping provides an excellent way to visually represent the relationships between different pieces of information. In microlearning, concept maps can be used to help learners see the connections between various lessons and concepts.

For instance, a microlearning course on project management could include concept maps that show how different skills, such as communication, time management, and risk assessment, are interconnected. This allows learners to visualize how the various concepts they’re learning relate to one another and how they fit into the broader context of project management.

MaxLearn can integrate interactive concept mapping tools into its platform, allowing learners to create their own maps as they progress through the lessons. This not only enhances engagement but also promotes deeper understanding by encouraging learners to actively organize and structure their knowledge.

Conclusion: Maximizing Microlearning Through Meaningful Learning

Ausubel’s theory of meaningful learning provides a robust framework for designing microlearning experiences that lead to deeper understanding, better retention, and practical application of knowledge. By leveraging the learner’s prior knowledge, encouraging meaningful learning over rote memorization, using advance organizers, and incorporating spaced repetition and concept mapping, microlearning platforms like MaxLearn can create powerful, learner-centered experiences that deliver lasting results.

In a world where employees are increasingly required to learn and adapt quickly, applying Ausubel’s principles ensures that microlearning does more than just deliver content—it fosters true, meaningful learning that transforms knowledge into actionable skills. By focusing on the quality of learning rather than just the quantity of content, organizations can ensure their training programs are effective, engaging, and valuable.

[leebird-simmer]

Transfer, Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving

Have you ever heard someone say...

“My student/client is just not trying hard enough.”

“They just don’t care.”

“If they would just listen to me, they would be successful.”

“I’ve taught them everything I can, but they won’t apply the skills I’m teaching them.”

It’s common for teachers/educators/counselors to blame the learner when they’re unsuccessful in applying material. In reality, it’s often an issue with the instructor not teaching for application (transfer, problem-solving, critical thinking).

Transfer

- when previous learning enhances (positive) or hinders (negative) new learning

- Types of transfer:

positive vs negative

vertical vs lateral

near vs far

Vertical transfer = there is a sequence to learning; parts of a whole.

Lateral transfer = sequence is not critical, but often prior learning gives context to new material.

General transfer = tasks are similar in both content and structure.

Specific transfer = tasks overlap in some way.

- Near and far transfer are both types of specific transfer.

Problem Solving

What are the elements of a well-defined problem?

End result clearly stated

Necessary information is available

Sequence of operations leads to correct answer

What are the elements of an ill-defined problem?

Goal is ambiguous

Vital information missing

No guaranteed means of achieving goals

Theories of Problem Solving

Trial and error (behaviorism)

Mental representation the problem (cognitive theories)

Applying principles to similar problems (contextual)

Common problem-solving techniques include algorithms (ex. PEMDAS) and heuristics, such as...

Talking about the problem

Brainstorming

Working backwards

Visual imagery

Using an analogy

Strategies That Facilitate Transfer and Problem Solving:

meaningful learning, as opposed to rote learning

thoroughly learning the material before transferring it to a new context/situation (some skills can become automatic with practice)

similar settings to real-life

understanding the rule, not just the facts

lots of practice in different situations

teach material shortly before it will be used

emphasize differences in ideas/skills to avoid negative transfer

use authentic activities (relevant to learner’s life)

discovery activities with direct instruction/support (scaffolded)

Ex. of Useful Problem Solving Model: STEPS

Say what the problem is AND define the goal.

Think of possible solutions.

Evaluate what’s good and bad about each solution.

Pick the one you think is best.

See if it works. If it doesn’t, go back and pick a different one.

[Note: obviously this method only works in situations where you have the opportunity to try again.]

Critical Thinking

definition: evaluating the accuracy, credibility, and worth of information and lines of reasoning.

focus: achieving a goal

includes:

verbal reasoning

probabilistic reasoning

scientific reasoning

Promoting Critical Thinking in the Classroom

- Foster intellectual skepticism.

- Offer many opportunities to practice.

- Scaffolded small group discussions focus on argumentative dialogue.

- Give some assessment tasks which require critical thinking.

[kidslearnergames]

The Advantages of Kindergarten Games

In the realm of early childhood education, kindergarten games serve as more than mere sources of entertainment; they are invaluable tools for fostering holistic development. From cognitive skills to social interactions, these games offer a plethora of advantages that contribute to a child's growth and readiness for future academic and social challenges.

The Importance of Kindergarten Games

Kindergarten games are specifically designed to engage young minds in playful learning experiences. They provide a structured yet enjoyable environment where children can explore, experiment, and develop essential skills. Unlike traditional academic methods, which may rely heavily on rote learning, games stimulate multiple areas of development simultaneously, making learning a dynamic and interactive process.

Cognitive Development

One of the primary benefits of kindergarten games lies in their ability to enhance cognitive skills. Through activities such as puzzles, memory games, and strategic challenges, children develop critical thinking, problem-solving, and decision-making abilities. These games encourage mental flexibility and creativity, as children learn to adapt their strategies to achieve desired outcomes.

Social and Emotional Growth

Kindergarten games also play a pivotal role in fostering social and emotional development. Many games involve cooperation, teamwork, and turn-taking, teaching children essential social skills such as communication, empathy, and conflict resolution. Moreover, through both winning and losing experiences, children learn valuable lessons in resilience, sportsmanship, and emotional regulation.

Physical Skills

In addition to cognitive and social development, kindergarten games can also promote physical skills and coordination. Games that involve movement, such as outdoor activities or active play, help children develop gross motor skills, balance, and spatial awareness. Fine motor skills are honed through activities like drawing, building, or manipulating game pieces, laying the foundation for later tasks such as writing and crafting.

Language and Literacy

Many kindergarten games incorporate language-rich experiences, supporting the development of literacy skills. Whether through storytelling, rhyming games, or vocabulary-building exercises, children are exposed to language in meaningful contexts that encourage listening, speaking, and comprehension skills. These games lay the groundwork for future reading and writing proficiency.

Creativity and Imagination

Kindergarten games often spark creativity and imagination, allowing children to explore fantastical worlds, create imaginative scenarios, and express themselves through play. Whether constructing elaborate structures with building blocks or inventing characters and narratives during pretend play, children exercise their creativity and develop a sense of wonder and curiosity about the world around them.

Introducing The Fidget Game: "Unicorns vs. Dragons"

One exemplary kindergarten game that encapsulates the spirit of playful learning is The Fidget Game's "Unicorns vs. Dragons." This innovative game combines elements of strategy, dexterity, and storytelling to create an immersive and engaging experience for young children.

"Unicorns vs. Dragons" invites players to embark on an epic adventure as they navigate a whimsical world filled with mythical creatures. With colorful game pieces, dynamic gameplay mechanics, and a captivating storyline, children are drawn into a world of imagination where they must strategize, cooperate, and problem-solve to emerge victorious.

Through "Unicorns vs. Dragons," children not only hone their cognitive skills as they devise tactics and make strategic decisions but also cultivate social and emotional competencies as they collaborate with peers and navigate challenges together. Moreover, the game's emphasis on creativity and imagination encourages children to explore their storytelling abilities and express themselves freely.

Conclusion

Kindergarten games are more than just entertainment; they are powerful tools for promoting holistic development in young children. From enhancing cognitive skills to fostering social interactions and nurturing creativity, these games offer a myriad of benefits that lay the foundation for future success. By incorporating engaging and enriching experiences like The Fidget Game's "Unicorns vs. Dragons," educators and parents can harness the transformative power of play to support children's growth and learning journey.

[stoweboyd]

On the Firstline with Lee Bryant: The Quantified Organization

I have interviewed a few practitioners and visionaries this fall in a Microsoft-sponsored inquiry into the Firstline workforce, the workers who are

the first point of contact with customer, the first touch point with the supply chain, those who have first hand experience with products they build or the services they deliver.

These are the retail clerks, construction workers, and the teams on the factory floor. Employees who may spend their shifts standing, talking with customers in a shoe store, assembling an electric car, or turning wrenches on a building site.

Lee Bryant is an old friend, a colleague I first met in 2004, I think, and who leads Post*Shift, a consulting firm helping clients throught the complexities and channels of transformation into 21st-century business practice.

Other posts in the Firstline series include On the Firstline with Euan Semple, Why Frontline Employees Should Make All The Important Decisions, and Poking in the Shadows: What about ‘Hard Work’?. 

Lee Bryant

  …

THE PROVOCATION

Stowe Boyd: We live and work in an accelerating, interconnected, and hyper-competitive world, where it’s increasingly hard to know what’s over the horizon, and where innovation, agility, and vision are more essential than ever. For business leadership this means it’s essential to develop and communicate a clear understanding of the company’s trajectory in the world as the basis for concerted action, moving from the boardroom and C suite across the company, and out to the firstline workforce: those who are the first point of contact with customer, the first touch point with the supply chain, those who have first hand experience with products they build or the services they deliver. How can leadership make that vision an organizing force, bringing the firstline into greater alignment with the company as a whole, and to help the firstline workforce to adapt to a new, rapidly changing business economy? Companies must become more agile than ever before to respond to constantly changing business realities, and that requires increased innovation not only at headquarters, but out at the firstline, where the company meets its customers, competitors, and greatest challenges. So the firstline workforce must be able and empowered to experiment, to innovate, try out new ideas, and to learn from those attempts to better fit the changing marketplace. What are the barriers that might block this from happening? The key to success, even in this sped-up economy, is still the productivity of the workforce. Getting more with less and achieving better outcomes means a workforce more connected and more efficient than ever before, maximizing everyone’s contributions. This requires a digital transformation of the business, one that reaches to all operations of the business. How will the transformed firstline workforce — in manufacturing, retail, hospitality, construction, healthcare and other industries — operate in the near future, and what role will technology play in that transformation? The shift to greater agility and efficiency requires a rethinking of the role of the firstline workforce, even as we rethink the business as a whole, to better engage and empower them. Their insights about what’s going on at the core of the business are often the best, and can be critical to company-wide innovation and improvement. What changes must be made to get the firstline workforce more engaged, to gain higher customer satisfaction, business performance, and workforce retention?

THE INTERVIEW

Lee Bryant: There are lots of angles and aspects to this, but for me, some of the questions that need addressing include the following questions:

1. How to mitigate the inefficiency of hierarchical communication and work coordination for firstline workers who need to work at customer speed, not corporate speed. The model they need is closer to a mesh network that connects them as peers than a centralised network that sees them as servants of the centre.

SB: I recently read some research that supports this. Microsoft researchers Mary Gray and Siddharth Suri investigated the communications patterns of Mechanical Turk workers (as reported by Emily Anthes in The shape of work to come). They discovered that the concept many have of these gig workers laboring as soloists has to be reconsidered. They found that there was an extensive social network of MT workers communicating and collaborating. And those who had connections to at least one other worker on the platform were more likely to gain 'master' status, discover new work more quickly, and had higher approval ratings. As Gray said, 'they need each other'.

I wager that the same is true for firstline workers. While their work may be formally structured as rote processes without great attention to the communications between firstline workers--and often as a work list of independent tasks--your mesh network grows organically in the face of actual work.

LB: Yes, I agree. This also mirrors emergent communication and collaboration among Uber drivers, who share tips on how to operate and also sometimes coordinate availability to maximise surge pricing. When the user case is useful enough, social networks seem to emerge almost naturally. So, whilst companies may think work happens within their formal hierarchical chains of command, the reality is that this is mitigated by a lot of peer to peer collaboration that is happening laterally.

2. How to switch from a process-centric to a service-centric approach to the organisational capabilities that support firstline workers. Rather than impose more processes on them driven by corporate or compliance needs, how can we create the service platform they need to help evolve firstline functions in conjunction with customers.

SB: How do you envision that evolution taking place?

LB: I think it starts with a change in mentality. For example, rather than HR or IT being central functions that just exist as centres of power in an organisation, they should be required to define their SLAs and APIs and be managed and measured as service units to support others doing work. But it goes much deeper. In the old slow-to-change world, we could believe it is possible to design a process as a solution to a challenge and then optimise the process to maximise efficiency. This then becomes seen as ‘the work’ and we train people to operate the process rather than teaching them how to think about and address the challenge the process was designed to solve.

But what we really need is evolutionary work environments consisting of lots of connected services and micro-services that each specialise in one part of the puzzle, but operate within an open and connected environment. That way, as each service evolves to become better at what it does, we also benefit from emergence as a second order effect. I think of top-down design of fixed processes as the ‘intelligent design’ counter-part to the evolutionary approach.

The job to be done for each service or service team is to solve a problem, not operate a process (we will have RPA for that!), which means they always need to be thinking of better ways to do it.

3. How to use firstline workers as the eyes and ears of innovation and continuous improvement - similar to what Dave Snowden calls the ‘human sensor network’ - so that they create the user stories for the organisation. This is a necessary precondition for the methodology we call the Quantified Organisation.

SB: Business is looking to gain new levels of productivity from that innovation and improvement at the firstline, and it has to come as an outgrowth of the firstline workers in contact with customers, and wretling with established ways of delivering value. Can you expand a bit on the Quantified Organization?

LB: The role of the organisation (i.e. its structures, practices and process) is to enable employees to create value for customers, but the way we run these organisations is often the reverse. How do we know the organisation is fit for purpose and how do we know what needs fixing? Related to the point about service-orientation above, I believe we can define the services or capabilities the organisation provides to employees and customers and give them organisational health metrics to track how well they are performing. We can track these heath metrics using either data sources (e.g. SNA data derived from social systems) or by asking the human sensor network, and this gives us a much better starting point for transformation or change activities than starting from the top. Instead of pointing our big data laser at individual performance, let’s turn it around and point it at the systems and structures that shape (or hinder) performance to ensure we are always evolving our organisations to become fit for purpose.

4. How to create meaningful management roles at the interface with the customer that stimulate mastery and continuous improvement, rather than being seen as lowly shop floor management - e.g. head chef vs fast food team manager. How do we incentivise people with skills to stay at this level and not seek generic management roles in the centre?

SB: Right. It must be possible for someone who has gained vital skills at the edge to stay at the edge, and not wind up as a 'manager' sitting at a desk or in conference rooms all day. Basically, there has to be a mastery track, like a software engineer that becomes a 'fellow' rather than being promoted away from coding. 

LB: Yes. Hopefully, we will lose the majority of management roles as the coordination of work becomes more connected and management becomes more algorithmic. We do not need people to carry information from place to place, judge results and then call meetings to tell people to improve. We do, however, continue to need leaders, supporters, coaches and great communicators who can inspire collective action.

The Firstline series is sponsored by Microsoft, but the opinions expressed are those of the individuals involved, and not Microsoft.

[ladyloveandjustice]

OK, it’s bugging me, because I need to talk about Grant Morrison vs Original Wonder Woman and how Morrison failed at homaging it. 

It ties into stuff that’s been discussed elsewhere, like with the Star Trek reboot- if you really want to capture the spirit of something that was socially challenging 40 or 70 years ago, you can’t just reproduce that thing. Because what was groundbreaking or shocking 40-70 years ago isn’t socially groundbreaking now. Instead, you’ve got to look at what IS groundbreaking in today’s society and go with that. 

Wonder Woman was genuinely controversial when it came out in the 40s.Some parts of it were standard for it’s day- the jingoism and racism was typical bigoted white guy bullshit that dominated most of media- but the core message of it was genuinely shocking. Emphasized over and over again was this idea women are just as good as men but society was holding them back, that women can break free of that and be strong if the help each other, that they don’t have to aspire to being submissive to a man, that they can be dominant. It depicted marriage as a form of oppression, it has a main character whose WORST NIGHTMARE was being married to a man, if was dripping with so many queer implications Frederick Wertham declared it the spawn of Satan and the worst of all comics.

The bondage stuff was also genuinely pushing the envelope as far as controversy goes, people were very upset about it and believed it would encourage perversion. Sex wasn’t talked about openly back then. But the feminism and gay panic were just as huge. Marston would explain the deep (and often bullshit) psychological reasoning behind all his decisions with the utmost sincerity. He truly believed the bondage thing was essential  

Letters came pouring in. Professionals denounced it. The editor was constantly frantic and concerned, he kept talking to psychologists to make sure this was okay. He friggin’ interviewed Lauretta Bender, the head child psychologist at Bellevue hospital, who was so impressed by the feminist aspect she didn’t even mind the bondage aspect and espoused the then-radical idea that kids can’t “learn” to be kinky or “perverted” from media, it just makes them aware of desires they already had. If they aren’t actually interested in bondage, this comic will not awaken that interest and they likely wouldn’t even really notice the bondage. What was more important to her was that the comic taught kids women and men should be equal, since she did very passionately believe comics could educate, comfort children and teach morality.

In contrast, another women thought the sex stuff was unforgivable and the feminism aspect was uncomfortable. But note how women were consulted about this. Note how Alice Marble, a female editor, was bought in, and it was her idea to do a back-up that highlighted “Wonder Women of History” which gave information about badass historical ladies to further inspire girls and impress on boys women have always been awesome (there is even a later story where a young boy complains to Wonder Woman he hates studying women in history because “girls are sissies”, so she makes him time travel with her and introduces him to all the amazing, overlooked things women have done, at which point he changes his mind and becomes interested in women’s history).  

So let me say it first- if Morrison really wants to reproduce the feel of 1940s Wonder Woman, he has to involve women in the process somewhere, because even in the 19-fucking-40s a woman was involved with producing Wonder Woman. He also would have to tie his comic deeply with the modern feminist movement. Stuff in Wonder Woman was deliberately evocative of first wave feminism and tackled first wave feminist issues. But those issues aren’t as relevant today. You can’t just have a stereotypical gross guy make some sexist comments and have Wonder Woman throw him to the ground and be like “there i’ve addressed feminism just like Marston did”. It has to be GENUINELY CONTROVERSIAL FEMINISM. For today, that would mean weaving in commentary about abortion, about toxic masculinity, about rape culture, trans issues- being blatantly opinionated about stuff that’s genuinely controversial.

Depicting bondage isn’t controversial in modern day comics. it’s been done. Writers have put their kinks blatantly on display for quite a while. Depicting two women kissing in a super sexualized way isn’t controversial or pushing any envelope, we see it all the fucking time. Having the heroine ditch her girlfriend and literally stomp her in the dirt so she can mack a dude is not controversial either. Nothing in Wonder Woman: Year One by Grant Morrison is genuinely controversial. Women will be groaning about it because they’ve seen this bullshit so much, not because it’s new and shocking. It isn’t pushing any envelope.

If Morrison wanted to be genuinely controversial and groundbreaking, he could have had trans amazons. He could have had Wonder Woman take her girlfriend with her on her adventure and tell Steve she was going to have to accept she was polyamourous and her gf wasn’t going anywhere if he wanted a relationship. He should have done a story full of political commentary. He could have hired an artist who was involved in doing pro-feminist cartoons, because Harry Peter, the original Wonder Woman artist, caught Marston’s attention because of his pro-suffrage cartoons. He shouldn’t have hired someone who draws women like they’re constantly orgasming. 

No stereotypical cis straight male is gonna read WW Year One by Morrison and feel threatened. They may feel pretty turned on by it, but it’s gonna be another in the pile of comics they masturbate too, no big deal. 

And you know why they won’t feel challenged? Because Morrison doesn’t sincerely believe that people can find freedom through loving submission and bondage is the key of happiness, he doesn’t genuinely believe women should take over the world and also sexually dominate men, he isn’t a person with a lot of connections to the feminist movement and he doesn’t publish controversial opinions about queerness.

Marston once published an book that claimed “homosexuality” shouldn’t be treated as abnormal and being “perverse” was healthy. That was genuinely a huge, unusual, shocking opinion to have in the 1940s. Marston took a risk in publishing it. Has Morrison done anything like that? Is he living an “alternative sexual lifestyle?” No. 

Morrison doesn’t actually buy Marston’s politics, which could be said of most people today and is largely a good thing because they’re deeply flawed even if they were groundbreaking in their day in some ways. Yet he still tried to reproduce them beat for beat and it resulted in a garbage precisely because he wasn’t sincere. He doesn’t actually believe in this shit. Marston’s sincerity is what made Wonder Woman groundbreaking, but it isn’t present in WW Year One.

Instead, he amps up the fetishy aspect, throws queerness in there solely for titillation, show a women being chained up and threatened with rape as sexy and alluring and there is no substance to any of it. It’s a shallow, rote recreation of the 1940′s comics with none of the good elements of it present, because the guy behind it doesn’t understand he has to be sincere for this to work. 

You want to know how badly Morrison missed the point and doesn’t get what the original comics were doing? He states that he thinks it’s boring the relationships between the women in the original comics were so supportive, so he’s going to add in some antagonism.

 Despite the fact “women supporting each other brings out their truth strength and if they do that they can overthrow patriarchal society” was THE MAIN POLITICAL MESSAGE of the original comics and is STILL so controversial today that every single adaptation really downplays it and tries to present the Amazons as “bad” for relying on each other instead of men. Even the movie drastically downplayed that aspect by having Diana mostly only interact and form bonds with men after leaving the island, with Etta getting only a bit role. It’s also why the "daughter of Zeus” thing has replaced her original origin, even modern day people cannot fucking stand the idea of a woman who doesn’t need a man to be involved in her life and to be the source of her power. 

But no, Morrison thinks that part is bullshit and wants to depict women as holding each other back.He thinks “female oppression” should be depicted as some random woman being put on a leash by a guy as she sexily eats from a dog bowl with her ass on full display, and it shouldn’t get more nuanced than that.

If you really want to pay homage to Marston and reproduce what Wonder Woman means, you have to take risks. You have to trumpet a feminist idealogy you SINCERELY BELIEVE IN. You have to tie it deeply into the modern feminist struggle. 

Morrison did not do any of that, and that is precisely why his comic failed at paying any kind of meaningful tribute to Wonder Woman and is instead an offensive mess.

[mervenurozet-blog]

Radical Constructivism reflection Paper

Radical constructivism has its roots in epistemology and it explores the nature of knowledge. It studies how do we acquire knowledge and how can we ensure its validity and reliability (von Glasersfeld, 1996). This theory mainly assert that learning is all about constructing knowledge, and knowledge is not independent of the subject who seek for it. Educators have applied this theory to the classroom, resulting in various pedagogical activities, such as problem-solving, guided exploration and active learning. Before moving on to its application in education it is necessary to discuss Radical Constructivism in epistemology and its philosophical roots.

  Before Kant the metaphysical realists believed that truth was always tied to some notion of objective validity and the claim that something is true only if it corresponds to an independent objective reality. The dominant view was that our knowledge is a knowledge of the world independent of the knowing mind. However, in The Critique of Pure Reason,  Kant claimed that reality is mind-dependent and is not 'discovered' by the scientist. He believed that our mind does not look at the nature and learn the regularities and refine laws. It acts upon it(von Glaserfeld,1995).  Basic premise of Kant’s view was that our knowledge and reality are actively constructed by mind and mediated by interpretive frameworks or experience. Therefore,  our knowledge about the world can not be an accurate reflection of it .  Due to unreliability of human senses it is not possible to ensure the reliability of knowledge . Another reason for not reaching the knowledge of real word is that there might not be correspondence between our experience and the world in itself. As a result, instead of truth, there is the viability of experience (von Glaserfeld,1991). Viability vs truth discussion in radical constructivism separates it from other types of constructivism (von Glaserfeld, 1996). In radical constructivism, rather than there being one correct representation of reality, there are multiple representations. Those representations that fit concepts in one’s experiences and previous schema are viable, and those that do not, are not. It is not possible to know the real world and reach universal truth due to the confines of our experience. Kant argued that the act of knowing entails a constant change of the mind or altering the mind. Mind alters the preexisting categories. Mind is not a tabula rasa or blank slate. It is important to underline the difference between constructivism and radical constructivism to clarify the premises of the radical constructivism.

 It is essential to elaborate on the epistemological premises of radical constructivism to understand how its principles can be applied to classroom environment. What makes radical constructivism radical is concerned with the relation of knowledge and reality. Whereas in the traditional view of epistemology, as well as of cognitive psychology, there is a correspondence or match between reality and knowledge. It is important to note that constructivism is not a theory about teaching. It is a theory about knowledge and learning. Drawing on Piaget and Philosophers such as Kant, Glaserfeld (1995) discussed the nature of knowledge, acquisition of knowledge in the framework of radical constructivism. He argues that knowledge is temporary, developmental, socially and culturally mediated, and non-jective. Learning is largely assumed  a self-regulated process.  

  In relation to the nature of knowledge, there is the problem of conceptual difference. Glaserfeld claimed that there are conceptual differences between languages . As Ferdinand de Saussure argues words do not refer to things in a real world. Words are mainly concepts which are in the heads of those speaking. Similarly, Piaget stated that conceptual structures in different head can not be the same as they are constructed through individual experience of empirical abstraction and reflective abstraction. As concepts we have in mind do not match with the attributions done by others, it is hard talk about a mutual understanding. As a result, it is not possible to propose that words refer to things, conditions and events that are unquestionable and objective.

Based on the theoretical stance of radical constructivism in epistomology it is possible to argue that it rejects the behaviourist learning theories. Rote-learning based on passive receive of knowledge is replaced with construction of knowledge. Radical constructivism stresses  individual learner's construction of his or her knowledge. In a way "students actively construct their ways of knowing.  Moreover, Radical constructivism assumes that learning process is highly personal and individual. It is an on-going process that proceeds through collaborative activities. Von Glaserfeld (1982) summarized its main tenets in education.

Learning is not     the result of development; learning is development. It requires invention     and self-organization on the part of the learner.

Disequilibrium     facilitates learning. "Errors" need to be perceived as a result     of learners' conceptions and therefore not minimized or avoided.     Contradictions, in particular, need to be illuminated, explored, and     discussed.

Reflective abstraction is the driving     force of learning. As meaning-makers, humans seek to organize and     generalize across experiences in a representational form.

·         For constructivism, the foundation of cognition is adaptation which serves the organisation of the experiential world rather than the discovery of real processes and structures (von Glasersfeld, 1989: 182).  

Educational significance of radical constructivism lies in its emphasis to active learning. Learners actively construct their knowledge through operations. At the end of these operations in the form of assimilation and accommodation, experience becomes meaningful. Through the evaluation of the experience, learners create learning goals. It is not wrong to say that learning takes place in the experiential world of the learners and it is a goal-directed activity. Role of the teacher is to present situation that will trigger higher order thinking mechanisms of students. From this perspective teachers should avoid exposing learners to ready-made knowledge. Min job of teachers is to guide learners in their conceptual thinking process.  In order not to interrupt the thinking process and discourage learners, it is most advisable to give constructive feedbacks.

As first step of classroom instruction based on radical constructivism, teachers should have an idea of the theories and concepts that learners have in their mind. Based on these theories teacher can lead the discussion and elicit the ideas of learners. Teachers can present a problem or real-life situation to help learners think and evaluate their previous schema on the topic and form hypothesis based on the newly-acquired knowledge. Conducting discussions is a key aspect of concept forming. Class discussions and conversations on the topic can enable learners discover the gaps in their knowledge. Discussions on the students’ ways of thinking trigger the operational consciousness of the learners. Learners can gain the habit of explaining the ways of thinking to himself in time and his operational consciousness can improve.

  Radical constructivism is criticized due to its emphasis on individual learning and exclusion of the social and historical aspect of learning (Olssen,1996). Gaining some skills especially language skills has a social aspect. Therefore, opponent of radical constructivism criticized the view on the grounds that it foregrounds individual agency to the exclusion of social dimensions of learning (Olssen,1996). Moreover, it is argued that in formal education learners do not construct knowledge at early stages. Most of the knowledge are gained through interaction with the environment.

References:

Olssen, M. (1996). Radical constructivism and its failings: Anti‐realism and individualism. British Journal of Educational Studies, 44(3), 275-295.

Von Glasersfeld, E. (1989). Knowing without Metaphysics: Aspects of the Radical Constructivist Position.

Von Glasersfeld, E. (1991). An exposition of constructivism: Why some like it radical. In Facets of systems science (pp. 229-238). Springer, Boston, MA.

[irishteachers]

Guest Blogpost; Meaningful vs. Rote Learning

http://bit.ly/2Qv06xO - Irish Primary Teacher