Why does a civilisation dominated by experts find it so difficult to respond to reality rather than ideology? (Nigel Latta)

I think there there are few in New Zealand and beyond who will not be aware of Nigel Latta. He has been involved in a few TV series and documentaries, including around education.
Starting with a discussion about science, Nigel talked about his experience of doing a session about gravity hanging out of a window, and then another about hyperthermia...and what it's like to hang out a window in an uncomfortable harness, and then standing in a freezer for an hour and 15 minutes in a shirt. Interestingly, it was when he came out that he started to get hyperthermic.

He mentioned that he likes engaging people in education - and science is seen as a "distant aunt who doesn't come to the Christmas dinner and that type of stuff". "If you are talking to kids about climate change"..."it's all important, but as you read the supporting documents a little bit of your start to shrivel up". "It's about engaging people in the world". Rather, if you say "do you want to see something that's freakin' cool...which could is going to say no?". Nigel demonstrated with a time lapse view of the heart beat of the planet as ice forms and melts.

Using the example of the 'story' of the Harley Davison and the image as a way of hooking people in, realising that "the stuff that you've got is really cool". "Maths is the perfect example. I went all the way through school thinking that maths was boring". It was only later that he realised that maths is fascinating, and exciting! (and highlighted a podcast about Prime numbers where the speaker was incredibly passionate).

Nigel moved on to the question "Why does a civilisation dominated by experts find it so difficult to respond to reality rather than ideology?" (John Ralston Saul), and talked about some instances where experts from outside of communities make decisions that make no sense in context. It is underpinned by the notion that "providers are self-interested whereas providers in Wellington has everybody's interest at heart". He moved on to a quote by Edward de Bono "you can't dig a hole in a different place by digging the same hole deeper" - in other words doing the "same old same old stuff doesn't work" you keep doing the same thing!

Statistically stuff changes in people's lives, so if you stand close enough to some of the "worst cases" you are able to benefit from some of the reflected glory - it was said humorously, but it made a great point. He goes on to describe listing all your assumptions, and crossing off all you are sure off and then the two or three that are left over at the end of the process they are often the ones that contain the seed of what is actually happening and might be influenced.

"When it comes to thinking we are not very good at it". Nigel gave a thumbnail sketch from the beginning of the universe to now, and on the way through indicated that humans developed to cooperate, collaborate, and create. Part of this process is refining tools and tweaking them to do things that haven't been done before - and Nigel showed the video of the astronaut who made the first music video in space. In part it was to show that curiosity and 'amazement' can lead to astounding progressions...some of which are to make life better. He also made the point that "basically we are using the same stone age brain".

We also have a way of filtering what we do or do not believe, giving the example of standing on the scales weighing yourself - "if you like the number you see" you accept it, if you don't "you get off and fiddle with the knobs" etc. We are pretty poor when it comes to thinking and making decisions. Some of it, system 1 thinking is instinctual (e.g. and angry cat), the system 2 takes a lot of energy and brains don't necessarily want to expend a lot of energy, especially when humans were hunting and gathering. "If a bat and a ball together cost $1.10, and the bat costs $1 more than the ball...how much does the ball cost?" (answer below :D). We didn't develop to solve problems like this, and we haven't developed to have the number of relationships we currently do. Which means we are having to adapt and change...and that is why "change is so hard".

The more we do something the more we 'hard-wire' it into our brains. For instance, if we learn the piano it starts off as difficult but then gets easier...and we can't 'un-learn' it. So - change is really uncomfortable as we are having to 're-wire'. Human beings are therefore influenced by this, and are pretty terrible at making decisions. It's really worth checking out Daniel Kahneman and his research. As such, the idea of certainty is the most dangerous thing. We all make dumb decisions, and understanding that we make such poor decisions and planning is a myth.

All the time "opinion is reported as fact", and research is misinterpreted and incorrectly summarised and presented. Therefore, Nigel feels that data is really important and can provide parts of a puzzle that can inform the picture - and opinions - we then form. Data tells you things about the world that you don't know (however - note from me - a caveat is that it does depend on how the human(s) who collect the data, interpret it - humans have been 'certain' about things based on data, until it has been re-interpreted, often when other data becomes available).

Nigel then moved on to talk about Carol Dweck's work about fixed and growth mindsets. "If you have the growth mindset and feedback ... when you get the option you will go for the hard option" - the growth mindset. So, it's more positive to say to a young learner that 'that was really good, you worked really hard', rather than, 'that was really good, you're really smart'. The former keeps the door open, even in the face of things going wrong - encouraging experimentation and risk, the latter - when you hit a snag, suggests that you are not smart. Anything is possible for almost all human beings, it's all to do with strategy, attitude and effort. "Human beings work on a growth mindset model".

John Hattie's research, “Visible Learning”, has collected data that illustrates, for example, class size doesn't matter, but micro-teaching and feedback does (you can find a brief summary on this site). The most powerful predictor of success is students' expectation of themselves. So, if you have an environment with young learners and a constant focus of raising expectations of themselves, there is likely to be a consistent raising of achievement. You can change people's expectations of themselves!
Nigel brought us back to engagement, and how to engage people - or how people become engaged. Often big industries are risk averse, such as TV. He told the story of how he got worked to get the opportunity to make a programme in the Antarctic. What he really hopes is that "kids will start to watch this and think science is really cool", and want to get into science as a profession. "There are jobs that you can do in science that are astoundingly interesting". This has led him to make a science show to bring science back to TV - and making it interesting, fun, and relevant.

I really enjoyed this session - entertaining, thought-provoking, a little bit provocative. It definitely provided some ideas around 'how'. Your thoughts? Please share in the comments below :D




Images

'2011-07-29' http://www.flickr.com/photos/84554176@N00/6298140320 Found on flickrcc.net

'Cave Deer' http://www.flickr.com/photos/28110584@N04/2973134645 Found on flickrcc.net

'AK3'  http://www.flickr.com/photos/34097675@N04/5275351422 Found on flickrcc.net

Answer to maths problem = 5 cents

The 12 dimensions of thinking infusion

Lane Clark unveiled her new thinking at the International Conference on Thinking in Wellington, the perfect place!

The 12 dimensions of thinking infusion from EDtalks on Vimeo.

Teacher's metacognition

Alejarndra Martinez is a psychologist has been working with teachers, initially in rural Chile. She is interested in how teachers view themselves as learners. Currently working on her PhD at the University of Melbourne  Alejandra has been working in professional learning teams, to investigate links between courses and students' outcomes.

One of the focus was to move thinking about my student to our student. The key aspect to inform our teaching from this perspective is the skill level of the students. The variables that are collected around numeracy, literacy, student outcomes, classroom practices, PLT functioning, beliefs and attitudes, and metacognition. Further research on teachers'  professional learning is required in order to understand the characteristics and development of their metacognition (Dinsmore, 2008). The key focus, therefore is how teachers see themselves as learners, and how this impacts their own practice.

The main aim is to analyse the extent to which the shift from a deficit to a developmental approach to assessment and learning influences teacher metacognitive awareness of their professional practice. The study uses a teacher metacognition framework that has 5 elements, which are part of a cyclical process: Comprehension of differentiated teaching practice; self evaluation of current competence; planning professional learning; monitoring professional learning; and evaluation of the progress made.
The Metacognitive Awareness Inventory was adapted (16 questions), and other new questions were added. Two forms were developed (A and B) with 14 common questions to enable comparison. After a calibration process using Item Response Modelling 7 questions were removed, as they were discriminating less the the expected model.

The data was analysed using an item/person map with level descriptions. Teachers were then given the results that indicated that the level they were at, rather than a specific 'score'. The initial findings were based on 359 teachers. There was a large number of teachers at Level A, Level D, and Level F. A learning readiness report on metacognition, which has individual feedback which is linked to the 5 stage cyclical model.

The students who grow the most who are at the lower level, whereas the top level the students do not grow the most. We need to connect differentiated teaching, not only to student needs, but also to teacher needs. Some of the challenges are the links with student performance. There are some aspects of metacognition that needs to be captured with qualitative data; so the next step is to conduct some interviews with the teachers. This is longitudinal research, and data has been collected in year 1 and this year data will be collected to illustrate changes.

Image: '_繁華燃燼，那一面斑駁｡' - Found on flickrcc.net

Practical strategies to help you think deeply at work

Another gem from The Learning Wave blog, this article gives a brief overview of how we can make sure we can maximise our thinking. The article offers an insight into 'why' (how brains work), as well as some practical ideas around how to make use of your understanding of the why, such as using a short distractor task to help refocus your mind, scheduling four-hour blocks of time to focus on key tasks, tackling demanding tasks first thing in the morning, and, chunking your ideas when you are heading toward overload.
Here is a taster:

A study of 6,000 people conducted by the NeuroLeadership Groupin collaboration with a large healthcare firm asked respondents questions about where, when, and how people did their best thinking. Only 10 percent said it happened at work. At the NeuroLeadership Institute, we've been looking at ways to bring more of that deep thinking into the workplace. More specifically, we've been conducting research into what brain science shows us about how leaders think, develop, and perform, and recently we've been studying the role of the unconscious mind.
We've identified three particularly promising techniques, backed up by research, than can help you think more deeply

(Click here to access the original post in full: Three Ways to Think Deeply at Work, by David Rock, Harvard Business Review, September 28, 2012)