I thought this post was really interesting and matched with many of my thoughts last night regarding the intersection of fear and learning. We can clearly see in this video that pushing boundaries is coupled with fear. The child is breathing heavily and seeking reassurance from the parent. Learning–whether formal or informal–follows the same process. At first, all learners feel discomfort and possibly fear. Those negative feelings, depending on the experience, can make learners embrace the adventure of learning or be turned away completely. In the video, we see that the child had a very positive experience and will most likely slide down the hill again.

According to Lev Vygotsky, the “adventure stage” for children is the point of their proximal development. That is, where children challenge their own limits through adventure and play.
In last night’s graduate seminar, one colleague mentioned that the school slowly begins a process of building boundaries for children by imposing arbitrary rules (don’t play with the pencil, keep your notebook on the left side of the desk, etc.) that stifle their creative impulses.
Does stifling creativity (that is, their natural stage of adventure and play) in children interfere with their cognitive development? If so, are the schools doing something harmful to intellectual growth?

Rethinking Childhood

Last week on Facebook, a friend posted a link to this youtube clip, of a nine- or ten-year-old girl doing her first proper ski jump. The clip, filmed from her point of view, is remarkable to watch.

View original post 363 more words

The Discomfort of Learning

“…our natural tendency as learners is to confine ourselves to domains in which we already feel safe. A major task of counselor/teachers is to help the learner reach into those domain that are shrouded with fear. To grow, learners have to acknowledge discomfort and set tasks to help break the barriers of fear.” (Models of Teaching, 393). 

Chaos. Loss. Disruption.

As I go through my graduate program, I continually ask myself: what is the purpose of teaching and what is the significance of learning? It is a question whose answer is never stable and constantly taking new shape as I think about the roles of both the teacher and student in a learning environment. For this post, I would like think about the interaction between teacher and student in a context outside the traditional classroom. The teacher and student roles can be occupied by nearly anyone.

Take two people having an intense conversation, for example. Let’s suppose the conversation is about faith. Person A strongly believes in an afterlife. Person B is not so sure. Person B asks Person A a series of questions (e.g. How are you so sure that there is an afterlife? How can you prove it? What is so exciting about living in bliss?). Person A is being asked for the first time to reflect on his/her beliefs. At first, Person A responds with confidence. The confidence, however, begins to weaken as he/she realizes that he/she doesn’t all the answers. Quickly, Person A responds with “Look, I don’t know. I just believe.” Person A closes off to the conversation.

I am not suggesting that Person A is necessarily wrong in having blind faith. At some point in our lives, we all probably do. The ultimate point is that Person B has asked Person A to push boundaries by engaging in a Socratic method of intellectual probing: the asking of questions to stimulate critical thinking.

The act of teaching is semi-aggressive in the way that it pushes individuals out of their comfort zone and into a zone of possible fear. In an imagined post-conversation, Person B asks Person A, “Why did you end our conversation? I hope I didn’t make you feel uncomfortable, but I was interested in how you arrived at your point of view…” After some reflective thinking, Person A responds, “You know, I began to feel really confused…” The teacher must guide the student into an area of fear and introduce them to ways in which they can respond.

When individuals are asked to push their boundaries, they can respond in a variety of ways. (1) They can embrace the confusion and chaos as an exciting learning experience; (2) They can slowly and cautiously flirt with a new way of thinking without wholeheartedly embracing it; (3) They can close off completely and be turned away from exploring new ways of thinking. The first is rare; the second is an indication of intellectual growth and cognitive development; the third is tragic from the perspective of a teacher.

In short, true learning can be an intense experience for both students and teachers. Good teachers will oftentimes need to be aggressors by intruding into vulnerable students’ comfort zones and teaching them new tools for critical thinking and meaning making.