Activities linking ... in meantime for testing only

A theoretica defence of Activities linking - esoteric education.

by Timothy Takemoto -
Number of replies: 10

My bosses, or one of them, expressed a desire for what they called "course scenarios,"
a function that is available in some Japanese software called webclass.
http://www.webclass.jp/

By that they mean a course with "depth", that one procedes into, being presented
with on thing after another to do, which once done allows one to go onto the next step.

This paradigm is probably what Martin has refers to as  the "rats in the maze."  
http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=3031&parent=13313
http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=1235&parent=4997
Moodle's all-on-the-surface (no depth) transparent layout is very intentional. 

So, to recoop, why would anyone want "linking," "scenarios" "depth"?

1) A pointed out in the threads above, some computer scientists have a dream in which they hope they will be able to force students do homework like rats in a maze. That is what I and my bosses are after. Yes, very definately yes. I am proud my desire to make my students do homework like rats. In this desire, I would like to stand up and be counted. (okay, so I am a bit ashamed, otherwise I would not be so pushy).

But this is not only for economic reasons. I think that I used to be a constructivist (socialist?) that hated the rat's maze makers (right wing?) but now I am a sort of "wet" or liberal. I want to do both, interact and make mazes.

2) I think that there is something good about mazes. First off, it seems that my students like mazes. Some sort of masochistic tendency to want to be a rat in a maze, to want to play a game, to want to be surprised, to compete for the sake of it, to be controlled, and to gain points for their ability to get to the end? In defence of mazes, images of game theory and ritual, Nash, Lacan and esoteric Buddhism flit through my head.

Here below is a post I sent to DEOS about the possible need for "esoterisim"  (scenarios = depth = concealment) in Education.

It seems to me that the purposes, that the greater part of school education is geared towards, is dumbing down or (more politely) "socialisation" and that students that are heavily dd-ed or socialised, get certain rewards, such as "good jobs," big cars and and desirable partners.

Now then, there may be some particularly hard nosed students that are able to accept that the "content" of what they are is relevant only as 'pumping iron for the brain,' so that then can prove how much they can brutalise themselves (or "train their mind"). However, most students want to believe that the learning content is useful, *not* just in the sense of being a means to get grades, jobs, and cars etc.

Hence educators are faced with a dilemma.

Leaving aside purist attempts to be Rudolf Stiener, swimming teachers, heavily vocationally oriented teachers and some language teachers; there are some teachers that are in the lucky position of imparting content that is useful to students but I would say that they are in the vast minority. Most of us are in the business of "socialising".

Accepting this fact, the dilemma for me is, in order to get students to study it seems necessary to *lie*. In order to help them to get all those consumer rewards (that most of them want), praise, and good grades, it seems necessary to lie, at least by omission, and encourage students to believe that the content they are learning will actually be useful to them.

This dilemma was brought home to me recently after auditing the class of a "very good", motivating teacher teacher. As well as having an excellent command of his subject, he also told his students how much he loved the subject and how much he wanted them to gain the same enjoyment that he gained from it. The students were very enthused and grade-wise, he gets very good results.

1) The small percentage of students likely to use and enjoy the content of what he was teaching are those that are like him, going to be teachers.

2) For most of the students the content is likely to be utterly useless to them.

However, by convincing the students that the content is useful/fun-to-non-teachers, he achieves what many educators, his superiors, and the students themselves view as good results. However, I don't think he was lying. He and many "good educators" seem to be oblivious to the fact that what they are teaching is only of use to people like themselves. They seem to be thinking "I am using and enjoying this, so the students can too," without considering the different circumstances that students are likely to face. My guess is that they are able to block the lives of their students from their minds, partly deliberately, and partly

What I am wondering is, is there a teaching theory or ethic, that recognises this dilemma, and looks at it full in the face.

I know of one: Esoteric Buddhism. It starts with the premise that it is necessary to teach pupils not-the-whole-truth, saving the the-whole-truth for later since fresh students would give up if you hit them with the big whammy at the beginning. I really feel that there is a need for a theory of "esoteric education."

In the extreme, an Esoteric theory of education might encourage teachers to tell their students that what they are learning is dreadfully important and so encourage them to study. Then finally, it might recommend that teachers get together with students, after the exams, and say "This was all pap, but you are going to go to an Ivy League school, and get fat pay checks, so let us celebrate." Doing this might be better than never telling them the whole-truth, in the manner of the "good teacher" mentioned above.

It might be argued that it is valuable, for the students, to never be told the truth of the inutility of what they are learning. Or that there is some sort of valuable epifany to be had when the penny drops and the student realises that the content of his or her studies had little utility other than to teachers. Even so, even if this is a theory book that should be kept out of reach of children, for educators at least.

Finally, on a more positive note, perhaps it is possible to have what I would call a theory of mythical education, where students too would be encouraged to engage in the process of equivocation, and make their own dreams and myths.

In this, more democratic approach, teachers would be encouraged to give students the techniques for learning, consistent with constructivist, "student centered" principles, including the ability to equivocate for themselves.

For example, consider the case of someone teaching French to a group of students that have little opportunity to use it. The teacher may

1) Overemphasise the opportunities to use and enjoy French blindly (the "good, enthusiastic teacher")
2) Overemphasise the opportunities to use and enjoy French, as a lie
3) Tell the students the boring truth about the lack oppotunities to speak French, that there are innumerable opportunities, but they are very unlikely to be realised. Then instruct the students in ways of overemphasising the likelihood of these opportunities materialising for themselves. There is nothing particularly insidious about this. It is sometimes called "Image training," and the techniques are varied. Just hanging a poster depicting France on ones wall, reading something about France, seeing some French films. All these things may be encouraged by "conventional" teachers, and this mythical education only puts a new spin on them. E.g. the purpose of as making a penpal abroad is not "to practice French" (the amount of practice will in fact be miniscule) but create the sentiment, the expectation, the myth that one will have the opportunity to practice French. The purpose of
this education would be to provide students with the mythmaking skills required to enable the students to dumb themselves down, in the recognition that his is what they really want to do.

This sort of theory needs to be founded on a philosophy which recognises the  *utility* and healthiness of non-truth. I am thinking of Lacan's view of the mature self (as misrecognition) and Neitzsche's appraisal of truth

Friedrich Neitsche 1876 The Birth of Tradegy
http://www.geocities.com/thenietzschechannel/bt.htm

Timothy


 

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Timothy Takemoto

Re: A theoretical defence of integrity in education.

by John Gone -
Hi Tim,
First of all, I admire your courage for admitting that you don't always agree with the prevailing attitude of those around you. Unfortunately I have a serious dis-agreement with your opinion on the subject.
Most of the questions you've asked require you to ask a few more of yourself. Do you know any young people? Do you have a relationship with any young people that is built on trust and honesty? Can you think of any young people who look at you and know that you are a man who values truth for it's own sake? Can you put yourself in a position of trust and authority and manipulate those young minds and not feel as though you are cheating them?
In my opinion, as an under-educated citizen of a very small planet, what your students need more than anything else is honesty and an example of integrity. Hurry, don't wait in this, integrity exists in each of us but a finite amount is given to each of us when we start this journey. When yours is all gone you will be the first to know it and everyone else will discover your loss soon afterward.
I don't know what circumstance has led you to your present situation but it is a very, very important position. You have an opportunity to reach out to young people and teach them how to be valuable to themselves by giving them an example of how to learn what is important. What is important? The truth, above all else. They see right through the bs anyway.
Is it not possible to present them with your questions and let them form their own truths about these same questions? Give them an insight into your dilemma and allow them to make the choice? If only a few of them then seek your lessons for what they may gain and a few more go on to seek knowledge for what they may learn is that not the more noble goal? The undecided will at least be left with some valuable questions.
Tim, for some reason your dilemma made me sad. I don't feel sad very often but this is a sad dilemma you have. I would be very sad to learn that you have much in common with teachers everywhere.
What the world dosn't need is more mazes and more manipulation of the truth for someone elses gain. And if the students aren't gaining by this manipulation then who is, exactly?
Social constructivism, to me at least, is the art of teaching and learning based on our experiences and the experiences of those who've gone before us. Looking at our present situation I would say this is probably a good idea. Funny how experience and history is unable to support manipulation and deception to any great degree for an extended length of time... use the force, Tim, Use the Force!

John
Average of ratings: Useful (1)
In reply to John Gone

Re: A theoretical defence of integrity as life

by Timothy Takemoto -

Dear John,

I like asking questions of myself, I am afraid, so thanks for your impassioned suggestions. I am sorry I have made you feel sad. I find what I had to say too sad: "Tragic."

First of all, in answer to the questions I should put to myself: I don't know many people well, and fewer that are "young" enough to be my students (only one comes to mind). In my last post, I was questioning the value of truth. I was not suggesting that one should be an all out liar, but also that perhaps one should not be entirely honest, especially with oneself.

Bearing this in mind, your questions about whether I have relationships built on "trust and honesty," or whether there are young people that "know that I am a man who values truth for its own sake" seem to be wide of the mark. If it is the case that truth has its limitations, then we would do well not to base our relationships entirely on honesty, or to value truth for its own sake. And if there is something "better than truth", such as "life" for instance, then what does "cheating" mean? Perhaps it would be cheating (in one sense) young minds to tell the the truth of the situation in which they find themselves?

John writes
" What is important? The truth, above all else. They see right through the bs anyway."
I am not sure why you say that the truth is important above all else. I find that my students do not "see through the bs anyway".

I am not sure of the meaning of "integrity" here, but it I would like to think that it is my "integrity" that leads me to question the value of truth. But before, I hope, you stop reading in disgust, perhaps you have already, I am not as much a facist as I may seem. The next paragraph is meant to be a brag.  

Drawing on Martin's definition of social constructivism (linked!), with which I entirely agree,  
"Knowledge is strengthened if you can use it successfully in your wider environment." 
Again following Martin, I would like to emphasise the word "use" here, and go to considerably lengths to facillitate the discovery of the useful-ness, and facillitate the use of the knowledge that I attempt to impart (English language proficiency).  I do this in my "communicative approach" lessons, through introducting the only means I know of allowing real-world communication in English,  and also have started to make efforts to set up a translation agency stafffed by students (which would give a whole new meaning to those translation excercises that so many students been made to do). I create materials based on the my translations of the magazine written for students for students about student life. My last three sets of homework were to write recommendations of best in local town information, and jokes (both of which I hope to recycle into classroom materials) and to find a friend in another country. I was lucky enough to get a mail yesterday which read "I don't know how to express my joy in English, so in Japanese, I have just found my first penpal!.." And that was after I spent my Saturday afternoon judging a student speech contest, arranged by the students. End of brag.

However...I am besieged by other questions. What percentage of my students will use English? What percentage of those that try hard to learn English are motivated by unrealistic estimations of its utility? Should I be honest with these students?  What proportion of my students would study if they were aware of the utility of what they are learning? What is the utility of most academic subjects? What right, on the one hand, have my employers to set academic (and not necessarily utilitarian) targets? And, on the other, what responsibility to I have to see that these are met? What motivates my students - is it only utility? Do they like tests? Are they motivated by them (yes)? What right have I to encourage them to see through this bs? What percentage of my students may be catapulted to a level proficiency wherein the knowledge I impart actually becomes useful, if I use "bs" in its various forms? And even taking into account this, round-about-way-to-truth, is this enough to justify the use of the bs and the maze? At the end of the day, I ask, does some of the utility of academe lie in way it encourages people to loose sight of truth, in a fairly pleasurable, and socially adjusted way? Is society, is life truthful? 

John writes
> Is it not possible to present them with your questions and let them form their own truths
> about these same questions? Give them an insight into your dilemma and allow them
> to make the choice?

In my post above, I mentioned something called "mythic education." It is probably not the right word (perhaps "image training" is better). It was an education in which I share with my students the awareness that they may be involved in a lie, AND that they should do their best to decieve themselves. And teach them ways of decieving themsleves, games they can play, ways of making their own fantasies. And again, I ask myself whether this too may be "cheating" my students: "coming clean" only to save my conscience? And whether the best teachers are either those that have succesfully decieved themselves?

> Funny how experience and history is unable to support manipulation and deception to any
> great degree for an extended length of time.
Here, I am not sure I would agree. And here lies the nub. What if life, as we live it, in society, is tragic?  What if it requires us to lie?

This may be a pretty tortuous way of justifying the use of testing or "extrinsic motivation" in education. Perhaps...better suggestions would be welcome.

Tim

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Timothy Takemoto

Moodle as Maze

by Timothy Takemoto -

In answer to my own question...

Don Hinkelman suggests as more moderate way of justifying the use of quizes here with which Martin agrees here, as a "fun" "motivating," "first step."

Perhaps I should be diplomatic and agree. I almost agree. But.... if quizes were fun and motivating then I would not need the wonderful Moodle.

This page is a collection of quizes in Japanese and this is a quiz software and forums and chat rooms lots of ways of using English particularly penpals, and many more to provide my students with use of english. If I want to provide quizes, as fun, then there are pages and page of them on the Internet. If I want to provide chat and forums and ways of interacting, then there are pages and pages on the Internet. Resources likewise. I have mountains of great recourses. However, in my own experience only penpals (the most utile/realistic interaction) provides sufficient interest to promote the participation of some of my students. None come to my forum. Few come to chat with me, from out of their own motivation. I also stock the local reading room with reader books that I like and recommend. Few students (last semester 2 students) take the books out.   

All this changes if I evaluate, of course, since all my students want to graduate. And I do evaluate any participation in all the above.With my blog and the help of some other teachers here, I am able to provide some of the most interesting resources, opportunities to interact, in all modes and channels.

The reason why I came to Moodle is for its ability to put my "rats" through a maze. If I wanted interaction, reality, student-centered materials, I would and could get them elsewhere.   

Moodle, with its user verification and evaluation provides, the framework for a maze. Moodle is nearly there! Nearly at the point at which its developer may not have wanted to reach.

But whatever the creator's intentions, that is why I am here. That is why I need Moodle. I don't need Moodle for its interactive forums. Better that my students join external forums. I don't need its ability to provide resources, better that my students find their own, with my guidance, that interest them. I need Moodle for the possibilities of control. 

I like to think (that means I am not sure) that putting 'rats through mazes' is good. And that the creator and I should be proud of our ability to provide that service, as part of the process that our academic institutions provide.

So, for the reasons above, I say no to out-and-out constructivism. I am a wet. We, as educators, should control too.  It is good that Moodle is maze. Bring it on.

Tim

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Timothy Takemoto

Re: Moodle as Maze

by Martin Dougiamas -
Picture of Core developers Picture of Documentation writers Picture of Moodle HQ Picture of Particularly helpful Moodlers Picture of Plugin developers Picture of Testers
Thank you for the long explanations of your thoughts, Tim - your point is made. I'll just point out that your own focus (teaching English to Japanese students whom you have in face classes already) is a very particular case from which it may be unwise to generalise to all of online learning.

Moodle is open source. You are free to use it and modify it as your needs require, just as I am free to set my own development priorities according to how I see their importance in the whole scheme.

I can only assume your many long posts recently are an attempt to manipulate those priorities - I have long ago stated I'm not against activity locking as a feature, just that it needs to be done right, and that there are things that need to be done first. A lot is currently going on in Moodle development that may not be apparent from your current perspective.
Average of ratings: Useful (1)
In reply to Martin Dougiamas

Re: Moodle as Maze

by Ger Tielemans -

OK, you can open the classroomdoors, burn the blackboards (No Martin, the chalkboards), break down the walls, and give students the freedom to start a rich learning life..
It is for a GOOD TEACHER difficult to accept that students will start to invent the wheel again, spoiling so often precious time...  AND that are the students that at least move and try during groupwork.. 
How long will it take before the parents and the board will reconstruct the old final-exam-situation?
(I see again the ICT-examples around me.)

Lets take another dream example: In The Netherlands portfoilio is HOT in education: give a student an electronic bag to put in all his splending learning results and he will proudly show it to everyone and improve the content more and more: Nothing wrong with this dream, but reality is HARD:
I took these outcomes from the KALAMAZOO-website. (before they got a sponsor)

- students do not put effort in the bag, unless they get grades for it
- students do not improve products that passed the (teacher-)check
- students say that it only helps students that do it on their own already
- teachers from other classes do not take your portfolio-teacher serious
- the portfolio has no value: you still have to do a final exam before you get your certificate

I then illustrate this situation with this cartoon (Sorry for the rats)

Of course, Portfolio is a good idea but it does not work without the guiding hand of a teacher, lots of managing work for him, even when he does managing by exception: but his helper is good old Moodle: Lets students fill-in wish-lists, ask them to start with activities on that list, monitor all that in Moodle, make overviews in Excel and help them during their process, help them evaluate and reflect on the difference between wish and reality...so help them grow..

I went to University in the seventies: Maslow (hierarchie of needs), Rogers (Learning in freedom), Papert, Russian psychology (Vygotsky / Dutchman: Van Pareren), John Lennon (Imagine) Pink Floyd ("we do need no education"), Allende (The third way) were our heroes. American behaviorists and our professors (even the s-o-r men) were at our faculty the bad guys: Skinner (programmed instruction) and even Gagne were masters of the evil power.

So dreams enough, but now back to reality: how can you help your students to take control over their own (learning-)life. And like the montessori teachers You have to guide not ione but a herd of students.. TRUST? of course, but a slightly modified old Dutch saying is:

TRUST IS GOOD, MONITORING IS BETTER

If you find ways to monitor a herd of students in their selff-choosen learning adventures, you can give them feedback and help them to make better choices the next time: students learn from their mistakes, so create situations that can provoke mistakes, that's not lying: If you can create an environment where they can make only small mistakes and then feel they sweet taste of succes:
You give them a great time!!

I now reread a book from Gagne: conditions of learning. I look at it in a complete different perspectiv as 30 years ago: he gives me nice ideas for a better Moodle..

Reminds me of a joke: Gagne and Merrill are discussing discovery learning.
OK, says Gagne: lets go on a discovery trip: I set the hiden goal, you choose teh equipment.
Well, says Merrill, where do we go: It makes a difference if we go to the Northpole or Hawaii.
I am not allowed to tell you that, it is discovery learning...

So how can Moodle help to organise and construct a rich and inviting learning setting for students, and how can it help us to monitor all these students who will jump like froggs in all directions in the created Moodle-learningspace.. (Sorry for the froggs)

I am afraid Timothy has a point about lots of students, just working for SHORT TERM rewards..

(The cartoon says: "And at the end they have to DO some multiple choice tests)

  

Attachment maze.jpg
Average of ratings: -
In reply to Martin Dougiamas

Re: Moodle as Maze

by Timothy Takemoto -

Thank you for your response Martin,

I agree that the situation that I am in is a particular case. I do not mean to manipulate your priorities. 
Perhaps I would like to influence the general theoretical stance of the Moodle community, a little.Or widen the theoretical stance a little.

While I am not aware of its precise nature, I have no doubt that a lot is going on at the moment in Moodle development. What little I am aware of, seems like a lot.

Tim

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Martin Dougiamas

Re: Moodle as Maze

by Athena Winchester -

I'm just glad to know that this idea is in your mind, and we just need to have patience to wait for it to come out.  Besides it's FREE!!!  Can you say, "looking a gift horse in the mouth"??  I'm just glad you care enough about education that you are providing this wonderful script!  Besides, if this kind of thing is needed enough, count me as one that does, then someone, somewhere, smart enough to hack it, will do it and then upload it here.  Maybe Martin can even have it as an "add-on" if someone does create the hack.  smile
Blessings,
Rev. Lady Athena

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Timothy Takemoto

Re: Maze as Metaphor

by Tom Murdock -
Tim, friend, even if we agreed 100% on your role of education, I think I would be worried about some of the language you are using to explore and explain it.

In the past two or three days, in a forum of educators who are very keen on developing better and better practices for themselves, you've equated (with metaphor) students with rats. You've also described teaching as a kind of lying. I think the language that you are using to describe good intentions is creating a liability. It is tough to reply casually to messages when the language employed within them leaves you scratching your head in confusion.

I think you are trying to say something important about teaching by using those specific metaphors (they don't seem accidental), but at first (and second glance), the root of the intention is not clear.

Maybe more dialogue between some of us about education and metaphors might be useful, but perhaps we need to create a discussion elsewhere because the conversation doesn't seem to have everything to do with Moodle or its goals. Hey, I know some great software that might facilitate such a conversation! big grin

best,
Tom

p.s. Anyone have any server space for EDUCATION AND METAPHOR: a philosophical and practical discussion about goals and means?

p.s.s. I also recognize the way that moodle.org does inspire a person to want to "test drive" a lot of "gradually shaping" ideas. There is a creative dialogue here that doesn't happen in many faculty rooms.
Average of ratings: -
In reply to Tom Murdock

Re: Maze as Metaphor

by Timothy Takemoto -

Dear Tom, John and Ger

Since the questions of appropriateness has been raised, I think that perhaps I should take this thread to a more appropriate spot. It was my fault for starting it here. Please see the thread "Moodle philosophy,"  (Started by Martin) here below.
http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=2802
I will link back ot this forum in the hope that people come and see your excellent posts. I particularly like the cartoon.

Tim

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Timothy Takemoto

Re: A theoretical defence of integrity as life

by John Gone -
Hi Tim,
Perpetual bliss would eventually pale if not compared against something less, occasionally, so no matter really a little sadness as it triggers introspection.

In reply I will try to address your specific points.

"In my last post, I was questioning the value of truth. I was not suggesting that one should be an all out liar, but also that perhaps one should not be entirely honest, especially with oneself."

I think you can't try to deceive others until you,ve learned to try to deceive yourself. Anything less than the truth is deception. The mess we're in at present is due to our attempts at deceiving ourselves. These attempts at deception are futile, of course, as nobody really believes that bs is going to prevail as an answer to anything. To even attempt to quantify what is an acceptable amount of deception, in any circumstance one finds themselves, is an attempt at deceiving oneself. This can not be done successfully, and everyone knows this. How can you question the value of truth? A lie is a lie is a lie. Look around and tell yourself that a little deception is OK. Part of the problem may be that a lie, if quantified, looks different to all who measure it's size. Any lie, to me, is a big lie, to someone else maybe irrelevant. Young people need to be exposed to people that don't think that deception is OK as a means to an end. One needs to be entirely honest with oneself if they are to learn anything on this wondrous and precious journey we are all on together. In my opinion that is the most valuable lesson you can teach anybody, anywhere. Too much of our world is already built on a foundation of shifting sand and it's beginning to show.

"If it is the case that truth has its limitations, then we would do well not to base our relationships entirely on honesty, or to value truth for its own sake. And if there is something "better than truth", such as "life" for instance, then what does "cheating" mean? Perhaps it would be cheating (in one sense) young minds to tell the the truth of the situation in which they find themselves?"

That's a very big if. Those who go through life seeking the truth are rarely deceived. You must know what the truth looks like if you are to recognize it when you see it. The deceivers are only deceiving each other. Truth has no limitations and deception is finite, the truth always surfaces and deception always dies a miserable death. Life is meaningless without truth so truth has a value equal to life itself. We all know this and this fact is inescapable, conscience offers no reliable escape. Many try, many die.

"I am not sure why you say that the truth is important above all else."

What could possibly be more valuable?

"I find that my students do not "see through the bs anyway" "

Oh, but they do. You've just learned to deceive yourself and possibly had a hand in teaching them how to practice deception, after all, they've made you believe that they don't see through the bs.

"I am not sure of the meaning of "integrity" here, but it I would like to think that it is my "integrity" that leads me to question the value of truth."

Integrity, as I define it, can't exist without truth. One who doesn't value truth, for it's own sake, likely doesn't value integrity enough to define it.

"And again, I ask myself whether this too may be "cheating" my students: "coming clean" only to save my conscience? And whether the best teachers are either those that have succesfully decieved themselves?"

Teach them how to seek the truth, and the value of truth, to save their conscience. Your conscience is not their responsibility. Their conscience is your responsibility. You're the teacher. Better yet, watch them, really watch them, and observe the honesty that is obvious in the way they act with each other. The student has just become the teacher of a very valuable lesson. Constructivism. It's only after we teach them to decieve that it becomes difficult to detect this honesty.

"- John "Funny how experience and history is unable to support manipulation and deception to any
great degree for an extended length of time."
- Tim "Here, I am not sure I would agree. And here lies the nub. What if life, as we live it, in society, is tragic? What if it requires us to lie?"

What tragedy? Life is full of wonder and beauty and fun and laughter and love and optimism and anticipation and too many other positive gifts to list here, fill in the blanks. The tragedy manifested in our society comes from the manipulation and deception perpetrated on us by those who've gone before us and felt it was acceptable to serve their own needs over ours. We're learning to question the results of what we've experienced and are adjusting our expectations for the future. As we make these adjustments we are creating new expectations and new experiences. Constructivism. We are not required to lie. There is no nub.

Mazes, games, quizzes etc. are tools. Exercises. Life is an exercise. Constructivism. The intention can be positive or negative. You're the teacher, make these tools serve a positive end. A mirror can destroy or enlighten. The only difference is the subject in the mirror.

We have entered an era where the truth, without caveats, is required to allow us to survive. The ultimate test of evolution. Will we be strong enough to survive the weak? Will we be strong enough to accept our responsibilty? We will, for one truth is stronger than many lies. Use the force...

The students you are influencing are very important to me. We're all sharing the same world.

I don't wear rose coloured glasses and yet my world is full of roses... hmmmm?

John

Average of ratings: -