21st C Literacies: Same only Different?
I've been reading about the use of the term "21st century
literacies" - is the term meaningful, accurate, useful... ? This is an important conversation - perhaps more for the process and educational journey than for a definitive outcome.
But for the most part the dialogue appears to focus on '
new media literacies' and the changing (21st century?) contexts of information/communication.
What I would like to see in this dialogue is a discussion of some other
literacies - social and emotional literacy, environmental literacy, spiritual literacy...
Literacies that are also essential to function, participate fully and be healthy and successful in the 21st century.
Are these
literacies? That depends on how one defines a literacy. If a literacy is defined as the ability to
- READ - access and interpret a 'language'
- MAKE MEANING - critically reflect on the value and meaning of the information communicated
- WRITE - successfully and meaningfully communicate or take action
in order to function effectively, participate fully and prosper in the world then I think we can - and should - talk about more than the basic '3R' literacies of reading, writing and arithmetic.
Social and emotional literacy? Communicating about relationships and feelings - the so-called '4th R' - relationships. The ability to access and interpret social and emotional language - eg body language, personal feelings - perhaps the primary language of intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligence.
Environmental Literacy? The ability to access and read the natural world - an essential indigenous literacy and - in the light of current global challenges involving natural systems - an essential 21st century literacy. Is this the primary language of naturalistic intelligence - leading at higher levels to the ability to commune with nature?
Spiritual Literacy? The ability to access and read the deep and sacred in everyday life - an essential literacy for finding deeper place and purpose in the universe. Is this the primary language for a spiritual or existential intelligence - and an important aspect of what it means to be a healthy whole human being?
Some argue that these literacies are not new - we could just as easily label them 2oth century literacies. And this may be more accurate given that we could also argue that fundamental educational change has largely skipped the 20th century :-)
Are there new 21st century literacies? Or are we talking about the same literacies in a different 21st century context? These are worthwhile conversations but we should also include the possibility of more than just 'multimedia' or 'new media' literacies.
What other symbols/meanings/languages do we need to be able to read and understand and communicate in the 21st century?
.Labels: 21stCentury, communication, literacies, spirituality, systems, worldviews
Integrating Science and Soul in Education
Sue has just completed a great presentation on Science and Soul for the upcoming
CONASTA ICASE conference in Perth. It's in two parts and is 25 mins long. Great visuals!
Part 1:
Part 2:
Labels: conceptual frameworks, integral, learning, spirituality, sustainability, systems, teaching, worldviews
Making Worldviews Explicit
I've tweaked my worldview presentations to English classes this year... partly to fit in with this year's texts and themes - and partly to say a little more about postmodernism and relativism.
The year 11/12 classes appeared to have stronger relativistic assumptions this year with many believing that we can do little more in dialogue than agree to express our own views and hear and respect the views of others.
The possibility of complimentary, inclusive or integral worldviews were very new concepts for most of the students. I spent a little more time this year introducing traditionalism,
modernism,
postmodernism and
integralism.
Our discussion around "What is Love?" covered all four integral quadrants:
As did group discussion on "The Meaning of Life."
I was then able to generalise the 'integral mapping' of any issue like this:
Both the students and their teachers have used this generalised integral map in subsequent classes. I'll do some further evaluation later on in their courses...
Labels: integral, worldviews
Gone Slightly Mad?
From the expressions on their faces - they didn't say much so that's all I had to go on - my presentation left some students thinking that either I was slightly mad, mildly gullible or needed to go on extended holiday... Most however were in very deep thought... not quite sure what to make of it all... or me. And that's exactly what I intended.
I did a 15 min presentation of an enigma - although not everyone thought it was an enigma... but then that was partly my point :-)
The presentation is part of a series planned for 50 students who have opted for some extension work to help them with their academic program and today centred on the Great Pyramid at Giza.
Why the Great Pyramid? Most believed that we have a good understanding of Egyptian History - and we do. BUT there are some things that don't fit the generally accepted view - and one of them is the
Great Pyramid at Giza.
What's interesting is to see how different people react to this contradictory evidence. Some get quite emotional and become defensive or aggressively offensive. Others rationalise the whole thing away saying that it "doesn't really matter" or "who knows" or "you're probably wrong"... Others have a blind faith in the authority of recognised science, textbooks or experts. One student said: "If there was really a problem we would know about it."
Behind all of this is
Transformational Learning Theory and the idea that you can expand a person's worldview or perspective through the use of enigma or paradox. This is what I tried to do in this short presentation. There was no time for a rigorous look at the evidence just a peek through a small window into an alternate worldview.
A smaller group attended a follow-up lunch-time session and while the majority appear to look at the world through the eyes of
scientific empirical rationalism it was very clear that some had very different worldviews...
Students have the opportunity to continue the Great Pyramid discussion in an online forum. In a couple of weeks I intend to present some coherent theoretical frameworks based on
4 Quadrant Integral Theory to help students make sense of how worldviews (lower left quadrant) might affect inquiry in the remaining three.
But perhaps before I do that there is time to stir the pot and stretch my credibility a little more with some further enigma and paradox... :-)
Photo sourced from Flickr - Creative Commons LicenseLabels: engagement, learning, metacognition, transformation, worldviews
Integral Futures
All education is futures education according to Australian futurist
Richard Slaughter. He says most schools are about preparing students for active citizenship in the future. And
"young people do not need to be persuaded to consider the future. They already have powerful interests in the self-constitution of their own lives."
However he also says:
"The challenge is to re-invent schools on a new philosophical and operational basis, not see them over-whelmed by economic rationalism, still less by the over-hyped 'communications revolution'. "
I'm reading Futures Beyond Dystopia: Creating Social Foresight by Slaughter and think it has much to inform current curriculum initiatives - particularly now in Tasmania with Personal Futures and World Futures 'essential learnings' for K-10 and Futures a key purpose in the new Post-Year 10 Framework.
To avoid shallow and often overly Westernised and empirical futures perspectives Slaughter calls for an integral approach to futures at all levels of education including students, teachers, curriculum leaders and administrators. "The need is for a broader and deeper view of futures enquiry."
'Integral futures' is about including subjective inner realities along with objective outer realities - something often called for by holistic educators. Slaughter shows how Wilber's 4 Quadrant AQAL Integral Model provides a powerful conceptual framework that gives breadth, depth and balance to futures literacy, futures methodologies and futures tools.
In this way the critical importance of looking at cultural values, assumptions and worldviews (lower left quadrant) and the inner world of individual identity, meaning and purpose (upper left quadrant) as key aspects of any transformational process is not forgotten.
Slaughter maps pop futurism, problem-oriented futures work, critical futures studies, epistemological futures, and environmental scanning across Wilber's quadrants showing the strengths and gaps in each approach over the last century.
Of course with all this talk of futures we need to remind ourselves that futures education is about empowering students in the present - or better still perhaps in the 'NOW' which includes and expanded sense of past-present-future.
I recently saw this Alan Watts Flash presentation on an Integral Education Forum which graphically shows the dangers of always looking to (waiting for) the 'future'... well worth a look if you haven't seen it.
With the current global focus on transforming learning and teaching an 'integral futures' perspective seems timely as we look at possible, probable and preferred educational futures - lest we forget the critical place of both individual and collective inner realities... for both students and teachers.
Labels: 21stCentury, conceptual frameworks, integral, metacognition, worldviews
Thinking, Learning and Futures
Here are some of the key ideas I got from the
presenters at this
conference.
Thinking is about learning. Piaget said “Intelligence is knowing what to do when you don't know what to do.” (Claxton)
We now have fourth-generation theories on thinking/learning. Learning dispositions are transferable from one context to another and are transdisciplinary (Claxton).
We need to educate for the unknown by providing powerful conceptual systems, global perspectives and coherent big picture stories (Perkins, Eckersley, Olson, Slaughter).
‘Knowledge’ is problematic because it is increasing rapidly, is context fixated and for most people it is full of misconceptions (Perkins, Senge, Slaughter). Knowledge is a social phenomenon (Senge).
Local and global challenges are pressing and we require empowered positive thinkers capable of cross disciplinary synthesis, systems thinking, collaboration and shared intelligence (Eckersley, Moran, Ritchhard, Olson, Slaughter). We are beyond simplistic solutions (Moran, Senge, Eckersley).
Psychological and social well-being (mental, emotional, spiritual) are important for deep thinking and learning (Wood, Eckersley, Senge, Slaughter).
Spirituality (not religion) is a key emerging transformation of the late 20th/early 21st centuries (Senge, Eckersley, Olson).
Personal and social foresight requires a level of futures literacy as well as futures tools, methodologies and strategies (Slaughter).
Changes in Australian values, assumptions and access to ICT are leading to 'citizen centered' democracy where a market and economic forces are no longer the primary drivers in government and the public service bureaucracy. We need multidisciplinary risk-taking thinkers (Moran).
We need to be explicit about our assumptions and world views because they underpin our thinking and colour our perceptions (Senge, Olson, Slaughter, Varey). Memes and value systems are crucial factors in thinking, learning and the envisioning of desired personal and world futures (Barber, Perkins, Slaughter, Varey, Janson).
The world is not in crisis - our worldviews are (Varey). Our languages (eg mother tongue, bilingual, mathematical...) also filter our experiences, influence our comprehension and affect our sense of morality and hope (Gupta).
Thinking, learning and inquiry are important both within disciplines (ways of knowing and inquiry) and across disciplines (Perkins). What we teach is just as important as how we teach (Perkins).
We need to teach problem-prevention as much as problem-solving (Wood, Perkins). We need both individual and collective thinking - multiple intelligences and shared intelligence (Ritchhard, Wood, Moran). And collective creativity and inspiration (Mol).
With the advent of new 21st-century technologies individuals have access to knowledge and resources that can have an enormous detrimental impact on local and global communities. We need ethical understanding and spiritual perspectives (Olson, Slaughter).
PresentersMarcus Barber - Swinburne
Guy Claxton – Bristol University, UK
Art Costa – California State University, Habits of Mind, USA
Richard Eckersley – National Centre for Epidemiology & Population, ANU, Australia
Sunetra Gupta – Mathematician, epidemiologist and author, Oxford University, UK
Jan Jansen - Sweden
Terry Moran - Secretary, Victoria Department of Premier and Cabinet, Australia
Jan Mol - Ad!dict Creative Lab - Brussels
Molly Olson - Eco Futures Australia, US Gov Advisor on Sustainability
David Perkins – Harvard, USA
Ron Ritchhard – Harvard, USA
Peter Senge – Society for Organisational Learning, USA
Richard Slaughter - Foresight International, Swinburne, Australia
Fiona Wood – McComb Foundation and Australian of the Year
Will Varey - Integral theorist, AustraliaLabels: 21stCentury, curriculum, learning, worldviews
Making Sense of Student Development
I've sent out the next email installment on Integral Theory - this time looking at how various lines of development can be mapped across generic stages of growth. I'm not sure who will have time to read it given that reports are due this week!
PY10 leaders have begun to think about our college handbook for 2006. We need to look at our pre-requisites in terms of the ELs Standards and Progressions - this is no easy task because only a few of us have had time to look at them. Lots of work to be done here.
While on the subject of ELs I've been looking at the new Victorian ELs (VELs) to be implemented by all Victorian teachers in 2006! Also found links to the Northern Territory 'EsseNTials' and the South Australian ELs .
Labels: growth, integral, worldviews
I've been reading about the use of the term "21st century literacies" - is the term meaningful, accurate, useful... ? This is an important conversation - perhaps more for the process and educational journey than for a definitive outcome.
