 |
The Power of Language |
|
The Power of Language |
|
FREE
NEWSLETTER GREAT
GIFT--especially for yourself!
Contents TEACHER
THINKING EDUCATION
MYTHS
Note: Printer-friendly versions of documents on this site require Adobe Acrobat Reader. Get it free by clicking the button.
|
Printer-friendly version (PDF) “What
you hear repeatedly you will eventually believe.” Practitioners in many fields of endeavor have a set of unspoken but commonly accepted beliefs that guide their behavior. Education is no exception. "Conventional wisdom" drives much of the behavior of those involved in the teaching of students. One problem with these unconscious beliefs is that they are rarely reexamined for validity. They retain their power through the everyday language of the field that passes from one person to another much as a virus. Thought Viruses "Students must learn the basics before they can tackle more complex problems." "The primary role of the teacher is to give students the knowledge they need to function effectively in the world." "Good discipline is the basis of good teaching." Such
statements are
beliefs. Said with conviction, they take on the authority of the speaker. The mind
accepts them as truth—as factual information. Such statements are what
psychologist Robert Dilts calls “thought viruses.”(1)
A thought virus is a limiting belief—a
generalization or a distortion once drawn from experience but now separated from
its context. The danger in thought viruses is that, because they contain some
truth, because they are partly true in some
contexts, people are less likely to question their validity. Statements
such as students are motivated by grades
and students must learn the basics before
they can tackle more complex problems sound like fact. However, they are not
always true. Almost everyone can recall situations where the opposite is true.
These are not “exceptions” to a fact. They are pointers that let us know
the statement is a belief rather than a fact—IF we are paying
attention. Simple factual statements that are part of consensus reality are often context-free. Statements such as snow is white, the formula for water is H2O, and Seattle is north of Los Angeles are true in the contexts people encounter in daily life. The more complex a statement gets and the less defined are the terms used in the statement, the less likely the statement is to get general agreement. In order to reach agreement, people must specify the context and negotiate the definitions of the terms to be sure everyone means the same thing. Unfortunately, when people can think of a couple of instances where a statement is true, they frequently accept it as truth without further negotiation. This is how beliefs become established as "facts." Many educational thought viruses are so much a part of the fabric of
everyday life in schools that they are doubly hard to detect. Teachers simply nod
their heads at such statements. It's not a case of deception. It's just
that the language of education has the power to define the behaviors of
teachers. Let’s
examine a couple of the statements listed above. (To see how you have been
"infected" by similar thought viruses, see the Self-Inventory in Teaching
in Mind: How Teacher Thinking Shapes Education.) You may find
that you agree or disagree with these statements initially. The important thing is
to identify on what basis you agree or
disagree. 1.
Students
must learn the basics before they can tackle more complex problems. Have
you ever learned anything where you began with the basics and then worked your way
up to more complex concepts? Have you ever learned anything where you jumped
in at a fairly complex level and eventually worked your way down
to the basics?
Most people answer “yes” to both questions, so the original statement
is only partly true. Better stated, it
is true in some contexts but not in
others. As such, it is inappropriate to use the statement as a fixed truth or rule
for the purposes of making decisions about how to organize academic content. Yet this
statement is used as the basis for most textbooks and course outlines! 2. The primary role of the teacher is to give students the knowledge they need to function effectively in the world. This statement presupposes several things. First, that it is possible for a teacher to "give" students knowledge. Research on internally-generated knowledge calls this assumption into serious question. Second, the statement presupposes that the teacher knows what knowledge the student will need. While it's reasonable to assume that all students will need basic literacy and numeracy skills, what does this statement mean for teachers of any subject beyond those levels?
The danger in this statement is that many teachers have fallen victim to the myth
that giving students information is their primary role. Giving is part
of a "knowledge as objects" metaphor. The word give is extremely powerful in
defining the role of teachers. The original statement sounds like a statement of fact—of wisdom—of truth, yet
once again it is true in only some contexts.
It is a thought virus. Decisions
based on context-free generalizations rather than on what is actually happening in
a specific context are poorly informed. For example, habitually shushing students
based on the thought virus that a quiet
classroom is conducive to learning may inhibit learning as often as it
supports it. If
you are frequently aware that different contexts will change the truth of the statement, you’re well on the
way to recognizing the inherent danger in such limiting beliefs. To avoid
infection by thought viruses, it is imperative to question the "conventional
wisdom" of education by asking, “Is there any situation in which this is or is not true?” Teachers base their decisions on a set of basic assumptions about learning, knowledge, teaching, and the nature of students. Mindful teaching requires identifying whether those assumptions are valid or whether they are actually thought viruses. The important thing is whether the statement is true in the present context. If not, then decisions based on that statement will sometimes be inappropriate. It’s undoubtedly easier to apply the same rules to every person and every situation than to have to constantly evaluate a situation and decide on the appropriate action. The cost of that “ease” is mindlessness. To the argument that there isn’t time to evaluate each situation, I agree with Norman Cousins: “It is nonsense to say that there is not enough time to be fully informed…. Time given to thought is the greatest timesaver of all.”(2) [An extensive discussion of thought viruses and how to overcome them may be found in Chapter 6 of Teaching in Mind: How Teacher Thinking Shapes Education.] References 1 Dilts, R. B. (1999). Sleight of Mouth: The Magic of Conversational Belief Change. Capitola, CA: Meta Publications, 117. (Return to article) 2 Peter, L.J. (1977). Peter's Quotations: Ideas for our Time. New York: Bantam Books, 494
|
||
| ©2001-2002 Teacher's Mind Resources |
|||
