Sitcog and Stugov...Practical Leadership Learning!

For some reason, I haven’t been able to stop thinking about my student government group as I’ve examined this week’s readings on Situated Cognition and Metacognition.  I know that I am supposed to look at the theory from the learning perspective in the classroom, but I can’t help but think about how these topics connect with the learning goals I establish for my group.  Student Government is just as involving as the regular classes I teach.  I am responsible for 28 students from all grades. We have a learning plan to which we use guiding principles to set the foundation for our organization, and students are asked to participate with the understanding of these objectives.

The Driscoll reading suggests that knowledge is conceived as a lived practice and learning is activated through participation (Driscoll), while Artino highlights that knowledge results from “human interactions with the world” (Artino, 2013).  Stugov’s purpose may be to protect the interests of the students, advise the faculty on student body matters, and coordinate activities; however, it also serves as an opportunity for students to learn how to collaborate, understand leadership responsibilities, and foster communication between their school and community.  Sitcog emphasizes that learners are not focused on what they know from memory, but how they learn from adapting to their environment, the experiences that they are connected to, and they perceive based on peer interaction.  Sitcog’s emphasis on “all learning should be situated in authentic contexts” (Artino, 2013) gets me thinking about how I help my students to understand what it means to be a leader.  My greatest challenge with stugov is trying to support these student leaders without doing the job for them (something that’s so hard to do!); learning through real-world, authentic challenges, balancing life and responsibility, and discovering how to be effective without popular support.  These are life challenges that may not be connected to traditional content of a classroom, and cannot be learned from a textbook, but through the challenges of real-time connections to their environment. 

 

Driscoll targets the concept of a learning community as a way for students to come to task with different interests and experiences.  In stugov, we have a plethora of students with various talents that range from interest in community service, to spirit, and communication. Students are taught to embrace their skills; they “pose questions, make hypotheses, suggest solutions, and contribute information” based on their own areas of expertise (Driscoll). 

 

This week’s topics have caused me to reflect more than any of the others. When I took this role of stugov advisor, I didn’t think about my role as a teacher that supports individual student growth as community leaders; I looked at what we could do as an organization for someone else.  I think that situated cognition’s concept that learning is a shared process connected to exposure to realistic situations, perception, and action provides an interesting perspective to how I do my job, not only in the classroom, but as a mentor for future leaders.

Each week’s learning theory always triggers some sort of connection to my own sociology course and our focus on the interactions amongst people in society. This week’s reading on Piaget and Vygotsky’s theories of cognitive development may work a little more directly with a psychology course, but I can’t help but think how we use these concepts indirectly within my course intro. Piaget cites that children are motivated by adapting to their physical and social worlds through assimilation and accommodation (Ormrod 311). While Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory lends itself to the importance and specific roles of society and culture in promoting learning and cognitive development (Ormrod 350). In sociology, we celebrate this concept.

Our first concept is C. Wright Mill’s Sociological Imagination, where history and biography are essential to one’s connection to society. Each year I introduce this using the example of the Beloit Mindset List, an idea suggested by a fellow sociology teacher to explain how cultural experiences have shaped an individual’s viewpoints since birth. Beloit College puts this out to incoming freshmen to illustrate what they have been exposed to. What’s interesting about it is that it sheds some light on the realities of society. For example, #1 for the class of 2018 is,“During their initial weeks of kindergarten, they were upset by endlessly repeated images of planes blasting into the World Trade Center” (Beloit). It’s interesting for my students to use this example for our introductory to SI because it uses real-life experiences and connections to culture to understand why they are who they are, and that perhaps their understandings of the world may not be directly related just to their own selves, but to where they are placed in society.

Now, when I look into this week’s task on Piagetian and Vygotskian cognitive development theories, I can’t help but think how their theoretical approach is quite similar to our introductory sociological theories. I guess it would make sense because Sociology truly does piggy-back psychological concepts from a more wide-scale angle. Piaget’s theories suggest that learning is connected to a child’s independent, self-motivated explorations of their physical world, while Vygotsky argued that a child’s learning is facilitated and interpreted by guided exploration and instruction (Ormrod 320). But can’t one say that one’s development is built upon by the individual’s interpretations of their experiences and interactions that they have with others either directly or indirectly? Ormrod is right in stating, “neither Piaget nor Vygotsky was completely right or completely wrong….Piaget’s and Vygotsky’s theories complement each other” (321). I think I found this to be particularly interesting because while in sociology we focus on the group and not the individual, we emphasize that the relationship between individuals in conjunction with groups is foundational to how society functions overall. Piaget and Vygotsky may both agree that the child’s development is shaped by interpreting their surroundings both through assimilation (individual interpretation) and through the guidance of others and culture(appropriation) (Ormrod 292, 317), and I couldn't agree more, sociologically speaking!

Attention, Attention, Read all about it! Conetta’s Blog’s about to explain all about it!

High school is challenging for teenagers with so much going on through academics and their social connections.  The mind is constantly trying to organize everything it’s processing.  But how does one categorize and learn along the way?  This week’s readings on cognitive views of learning help to understand different approaches, but one that was most relatable was the concept of Attention.

Memory is not exact, it is constructed based on how it is introduced, and ways information is processed is determined by how the individual categorizes it.   Ormrod suggests that cognitive processes consider how people perceive, interpret, and remember (pg 141).  While this is very important, what I found central to this concept is the perception piece.  How people perceive concepts is directly related to how it is introduced both physically (visuals), verbally (discussion).  The role of Attention is essential to how students are introduced to new material.  Ormrod notes certain kinds of stimuli that tend to draw attention including Novelty, Social cues, Emotion, Personal Significance, among others (pg. 164). When reading the text as well as the discussion posts by my peers, I couldn't help think of the ways in which I use “Attention”.

It’s quite a challenge to get the average teenager to get excited about historical topics, especially when they’re constantly immersed in other things.  However, as a teacher, it’s my responsibility to support their learning through any means possible. An example can be illustrated through a look at my elective, Sociology. About a month ago, I began class with a very brief simulation to initiate my unit on social norms.  I posted three large poster-boards on the wall labeled: “urinal one, two, and three”.  The students were flabbergasted; they had no idea why I brought a fake bathroom into class; 25 seniors were stumped.  I knew the initial reactions (giggles, sarcastic jabs, jokes thrown my way) but I achieved my first goal by grabbing attention through comedy (novelty).  I then asked them to mimic the board by drawing on scrap paper, and mark the urinal which they would “hypothetically” use after I read various scenarios. Students immediately looked to their peers each time I asked for a show of hands to determine the choice scenario urinal (social cues); then, when asked for justification for reasons after each scenario, students immediately went to their personal reasons (personal significance) as to why they chose each one.  From there, we discussed how your actions are determined by societal elements that have been developed over time; the rest of my lesson began.  

The simulation still is referenced when discussion the sociological perspective.  I never really focused on why this intro activity was so effective other than the fact that it was funny and a good “hook”, but reading this week’s theory helped to understand that by making learning meaningful, relevant, personal, and unique, learning can be transferred from short-term memory to long term through the role of attention.  Ormrod is correct in that “People’s ability to attend to the stimuli around them is limited” (pg 167) and therefore it is up to the educator to do their very best to get their ATTENTION when InTrOdUcInG new MATERIAL.