Leonardo & Da Vinci
How Teaching Inhibits and Slows Down Learning from an Exponential to a Linear Process?
"In any mental process there are two kinds of energy involved. The first is that of starting, triggering or awakening the process of learning and the second that of sustaining the process and seeing it through to completion. The main function of the teacher lies in making the first happen. Once that is done, the second happens by virtue of two factors, one due to the neuroplastic BDNF or Brain Derived Neurotropic Factor that supplies an intense burst of energy, the energy of novelty of the Beginner's Brain, and two, due to the free energy of spontaneous self-organization that is essentially a balance of the psychic energy and psychic entropy. Most often the mistake in teaching is precisely this: the teacher leaves the task of providing the first kind of energy to the student and relentlessly labours to force the second kind of energy by the process of teaching. The tremendous energy of the BDNF and spontaneous self-organization is thereby ignored, inhibited, distorted and destroyed in this process."
Dr. B S Ramachandra - Leonardo and Da Vinci - The Inner Game of Meta-Learning Website
Most often, teaching inhibits learning, as it is highly decontextualized and results in fragile outcomes like castles in the air
Leonardo: In continuing with our previous dialogue, I am very curious to know about your statement, "Teaching inhibits learning!"
Da Vinci: Yes, Leonardo. Especially when one thinks teaching aids learning! On the contrary, most often, teaching inhibits learning except in those rare cases when the teacher is also a learner. As Richard Feynman says, quoting Gibbon, "the powers of instruction are of very little efficacy except in those happy circumstances in which they are practically superfluous."
Leonardo: If teaching inhibits learning we need to first review what learning is, isn't it? So that we can know how teaching affects it, positively or negatively?
Da Vinci: Of course, Leonardo. And for that we first need to understand that learning is a process of cognitive self-organization.
Leonardo: Cognitive self-organization, Da Vinci?
Da Vinci: Yes, Leonardo. For, though self-organization in nature is quite well recognized, self-organization in cognition is not necessarily so.
This is the reason for the prevailing static idea of learning, - as a nominalisation of a verb, that essentially reduces it into a thing rather than a process - that most educational systems base themselves on.
Leonardo: Oh, you mean, these educational systems consider the student also as a thing and not as a conscious individual endowed with a mind of immense complexity, in fact, a highly sophisticated complex adaptive system.
Da Vinci: Yes, Leonardo. And that is why they focus on simply giving lectures passing on information to the student and perhaps accompanied by training in the techniques of problem solving.
Leonardo: Da Vinci, how is it different when learning is considered from the point of view of the "mind as a process" rather than a nominalised verb, that is, as a thing?
Da Vinci: A crucial insight is that cognition, the process of knowing is identified with evolution, the process of life. Cognition, therefore is treated as the very process of life. Mental activity is identified as the organizing principle at all levels of life. Cognitive interactions are now treated as the basis of interaction of a living organism with its environment.
Leonardo: So cognition is the process of life! In the sense, that the student is not a passive observer or receiver of knowledge that the teacher imparts but an active participant and processor of information coupled with pre-existing data sets drawn from memory.
Da Vinci: Yes, cognition is the entire process of life. This radical view is known as the Santiago theory as proposed and developed by Francisco J Varela and Humberto R Maturana. This theory is closely related to autopoiesis, the auto-catalytic self-generation of living networks.
Leonardo: By autocatalytic I understand that a substance that emerges in the process further aids the process and sustains it to remain self-perpetuating. In the context of the student and the teacher, the student takes a cue from the teacher and proceeds to learn by oneself letting the teacher fade into the background. Rather, the teacher if wise, steps aside to make room for the student to take the learning forward?
Da Vinci: That's right, Leonardo. This self-generation is characteristic of autopoiesis. An autopoietic system undergoes continual structural changes while preserving its organizational network. One of these is self-renewal. Living organisms continually renew themselves just as neural networks do. And this is one of the factors that enables us to identify cognition with evolution, that is mental processes with life.
Cognition is the process of life in the sense that the student is not a passive observer or receiver of knowledge that the teacher imparts but an active participant and processor of information coupled with pre-existing data sets drawn from memory.
"Look at the number of people like Abel who were born two hundred years ago. Now there are no more Abels. On the other hand, the number of educated people has grown tremendously. It means that they have not been educated properly because where are those people like Abel? It means that they have been destroyed. The education destroys these potential geniuses—we do not have them! This means that education does not serve this particular function. The crucial point is that you have to treat everybody in a different way. That is not happening today." - Mikhail Gromov
Autopoiesis is the auto-catalytic self-generation of living networks.
And in the context of the student and teacher, yes, the student needs to take the lead and the teacher to step aside. Rather, I would say that the teacher needs to engage in some kind of learning so as to serve as an example and influence. Anyway, as to this, more later.
Leonardo: Da Vinci, this seems to match the process of learning in that every interaction the student has with the environment (that includes the teacher also) results in structural changes in the neural networks and this naturally increases the complexity, more precisely, ordered complexity, when the learning results in a desired outcome.
Da Vinci: In fact, every perception results in structural changes, Leonardo. That is why a living organism is also a structurally coupled system. Structural coupling is characteristic of living systems and this is a key distinction between living and non-living systems. A continual change in structure forms and defines its own unique structural coupling. This is the real meaning of growth for a living organism. Since a living organism is so defined by its structure and structural coupling it is also known as structure-determined.
Leonardo: Da Vinci, this means that the process of learning is also structure-determined in the sense that once a certain initial structure is initiated in the learning, it has a natural tendency to self-perpetuate by autopoietic processes. And there is no need of any external stimulation from the environment unless that can aid the process or bring a new turn to it. The teacher has only a role in initiating the learning then.
Da Vinci: Yes, Leonardo. And that is why, the teacher, after having initiated the student into the learning needs to step aside and let the learning process take over autopoietically or autocatalytically. By this continual, apparently infinitesimal, accumulation of autopoietic processes, the linear growth can eventually take on the touch of the exponential and begin to accelerate itself.
Leonardo: Ah, therefore, not to interfere with the natural autopoietic process requires great wisdom on the part of the teacher!
Da Vinci: Especially in not imposing the teacher's will on the student, Leonardo. Because, the autopoietic process also brings in an intrinsic free-will into the student. In autopoiesis, the living system is deterministic but that determinism comes from within. So both free-will and determinism coexist. This means also that it is futile to try to direct the student's learning for that direction ought to emerge from the student's own structural-determinism. The teacher can only aid in this emergence. As Maturana says, one cannot direct an autopoietic system but only disturb it.
Leonardo: So, in lectures, the teacher is actually continually disturbing the students and not directing them as is usually thought!
Da Vinci: Yes, disturbing the process of learning. And that is why in general, teaching inhibits learning. And since the student has both free-will and determinism, it is the student who ought to decide what inputs from the teacher aid and what disturb the learning. As you see, conventional teaching fails miserably in this as there is no scope for the student to exercise free-will and is artificially subject to a rigid determinism by the teacher's will, the classroom constraints, the syllabus and curriculum. The thinker and scientist Prof. Kirti Trivedi has voiced this beautifully.
Leonardo: Da Vinci, teaching inhibits learning also because it interferes with the autotelic nature of optimal experience isn't it?
Da Vinci: You mean, the flow experience, Leonardo? Yes, teaching interferes with flow by inhibiting the autotelic nature. In a flow experience, as you know, the self sinks below the threshold of conscious awareness. The actions become autotelic, that is, spontaneous and automatic, without the necessity of conscious processes as it were, though unconscious processes continue throughout thereby supporting the action. Teaching is most often directed to the conscious mind and requires the self or ego to be present. Thus, it forces the self to arise from its abeyance. Naturally, the autotelic nature is disturbed and possibly destroyed.
Leonardo: Then, is there any way in which teaching can be done unconsciously, without disturbing the autotelic nature?
Da Vinci: Of course, but that is a subtle process and needs an equally subtle use of language such that it begins to resonate with the unconscious processes thereby aiding them. This is more like what happens in a hypnotic trance though it is not necessary to induce hypnosis and can be done in a conversational manner. Great teachers have this as an unconscious competence and that is why the listeners often come away with a talk or lecture by such teachers wondering what it was that they really learned. The learning does happen but in such a manner that one is not aware of it. So also, books written by great masters have this quality. One reads them and gets enraptured by the flow of the writing into a state of heightened awareness and thinking and the learning happens spontaneously.
Leonardo: Da Vinci, I do get what you are saying. Nevertheless, as this is so significant I would like you to elaborate it a little more.
Da Vinci: Let me elaborate on why and how teaching can interfere with learning. To truly learn effectively, it is necessary that the student gets into flow as quickly as possible and remain in it throughout the duration of the process. For this, the focussing and heightening of attention is absolutely crucial and important. I will contrast two situations, one when the student is learning from a book and another when listening to a lecture.
1) First, the student is learning from a book. He/She begins by browsing it and getting familiar with the content and then beginning to read it. Here again there are two possibilities,
"Teaching and learning are two different phenomena, and should not be confused with each other. Though projected as centres for learning, most schools and colleges are actually institutions for teaching…Nearly all of the current educational system has been designed according to the convenience of teaching, and not of learning."
- Prof. Kirti Trividi, Times of India, February 22, 2007
The major shortcoming of conventional teaching is that there is no scope for the students to exercise free-will and is artificially subject to a rigid determinism by the teacher's will, the classroom constraints, the syllabus and curriculum.
"There really must have been cases in the past where the native talent was finally completely thwarted by an inelastic system and teachers without sufficient understanding for the rare and unusual student for whom an exception should have been made. And I think this lack of consideration could continue usually with impunity because the world would never know what had been lost. The most important lesson that one could draw from Ramanujan's story about the educational system is that allowances should be made for the unusual and perhaps lopsidedly gifted child with very strong interests in one direction, at all stages of the educational system." -Atle Selberg
i) The student is using an auditory mode: In this case, it is not much different from that of listening to a lecture because if the student is using an auditory mode, the student has an internal voice going on in the mind before the content gets translated into the learning. There is just one advantage, in using the auditory mode while reading a book, the student has control over which parts to skip whereas in a lecture that is rarely possible. So reading a book, even in an auditory mode is faster than while listening to a lecture.
ii) The student is using a visual mode: In this case the student can focus attention on those parts of the book that are really necessary and skip the rest. Moreover, as the student begins to get into flow, one can experience the optimal state wherein the self, time and environment disappear from the threshold of consciousness. So the flow practically remains undisturbed as long as the student chooses to be involved in the reading. And since there is no external disturbance, this process is stable.
2) Second, the student is listening to a lecture. Obviously, then, that student is forced to use the auditory mode. Even if the teacher is writing on the board, the writing itself is dominated by the speech so the auditory mode prevails throughout the lecture. And the student is limited by the speed of the teacher. Moreover, the self or ego of the teacher being active, is a potential disturbance to the self or ego of the student. As a result the student can rarely slip below the threshold of consciousness by forgetting oneself. The time is controlled by the teacher and the environment is constrained by the presence of other students. All these inhibit the onset of flow.
So, Leonardo, you can see how the very presence of the teacher can inhibit learning by preventing flow or optimal experience. Now, there are clear exceptions to this. Take the case of the great French mathematician Henri Poincare. While attending lectures at school as a young student he usually closed his eyes and listened. He used a predominantly auditory mode. But this in no way limited his speed of learning because he was himself an incredibly fast learner and moreover a thinker of the highest order. He thought much, much faster than the teacher could ever imagine. So he was actually an exception. He merely listened to the teacher to catch some information and then went on to make his own discoveries and reach his own conclusions.
When the self or ego is below conscious awareness it enhances learning due to flow or optimal experience
Leonardo: Da Vinci, in all that you are speaking about, one thing strikes me as crucial though understated in general and that is that the presence of the self inhibits learning and its absence enhances it. I mean, when the self is above the threshold of conscious awareness it diminishes learning and when it is below conscious awareness it enhances learning. Could you go into this a little more?
Da Vinci: Of course, Leonardo. Now, what really is the self phenomenologically? Not theoretically, that is, metaphysically or philosophically for, that would involves us in endless chain of reasoning and discussion without any conclusive result. For practical purposes, let's take the self or ego to be like a master program among all other programs running in the brain-mind. It is the condensate or residue of all experiences. It draws upon all experiences for its existence and in turn influences them in a non-linear manner.
Now, as this is a master program it is, in the language of complexity theory, a dissipative structure in the sense that it requires psychic energy to maintain itself and in doing so it dissipates energy. When is it most active? Obviously when it is on threat or in a stress mode. But in absence of any threat or stress, it can safely sink below the threshold of conscious awareness. And when it does so all the psychic energy can flow towards the task at hand. Conversely, when all the psychic energy flows as demanded by the task at hand, the self or ego sinks below the threshold of conscious awareness. Do you get this?
Leonardo: Yes, when the self is present, the psychic energy is distributed, a major portion of it to maintain the self or ego and the remaining towards the task at hand. Of course, there could be energy used up by other processes in the organism but for the moment I am leaving that out. So, for all the energy to be deployed towards the task at hand, the self or ego needs to be absent, that is to sink below the threshold of conscious awareness. But I have a question regarding the converse.
Da Vinci: yes, go ahead, Leonardo.
Leonardo: If the self or ego sinks below conscious awareness, does it necessarily follow that all the energy flows towards the task at hand? Doesn't that depend to a great extent on the nature of the task also?
Da Vinci: Of course, Leonardo. You are perfectly right in pointing this out. Absence of the self is necessary but not sufficient for the energy to flow towards the task at hand. For the energy could be used up by other demands than by the task at hand. Such is the case when there is passive flow, that is, when the challenges and skills are low. Then, though the self sinks below conscious awareness, the energy does not flow as there is really no task at hand. A necessary and sufficient condition, therefore, for psychic energy to flow towards the task at hand is that the self or ego should sink below the threshold of conscious awareness and that the challenges and skills are above a certain minimum level.
Leonardo: Da Vinci, an insight seems to be emerging in me. It is like this. As flow ensues when the challenges and skills are sufficiently high…and as in flow…the self is absent, that is, sinks below the threshold of conscious awareness…if there is a sudden encounter with such a challenge, there is an immediate state of flow…and in that state of flow, there is no self and hence, no naming…all the energy is taken up in meeting that challenge. And one such challenge is the perception of something that is majestic, beautiful, wonderful, awesome…
Da Vinci: Go on, Leonardo.
Leonardo: When one is confronted with something that requires complete attention, in that encounter, there is no self present and hence no naming. And conversely, when there is naming, there is no complete attention.
Da Vinci: Ah, Leonardo, you are perfectly right. In fact, the great Indian seer and philosopher J Krishnamurti speaks of precisely this when he talks about choiceness awareness leading to a complete perception. That the observer disappears in a complete perception and hence, the observer is the observed. So you see, how in teaching, the very presence of the teacher acts as an interruption to the perception and thereby inhibits the learning. Learning best happens when there is no teacher and the learner is teaching oneself.
Leonardo: Da Vinci: I couldn't help catch the phrase, "Learning best happens when there is no teacher and the learner is teaching oneself." As you already mentioned, teaching aids learning only when the teacher is teaching to learn. So, when the learner is teaching oneself, teaching aids the learning quite powerfully!
Da Vinci: Exactly, Leonardo! This is where the role of teaching really becomes significant and efficacious. You see, Leonardo, teaching is a very powerful action. But it is effective when used in the right context. And this right context is when the learner is also the teacher and teaches oneself. In all other situations when the learner and the teacher are different, teaching is quite naturally, limited.
Leonardo: There, then is really no context wherein an external teacher is really effective?
Da Vinci; Except to the extent that the external teacher evokes the process of learning in the learner and then steps aside to let the learning happen by itself, spontaneously. And it is no easy matter for the teacher and requires great wisdom on the part of the teacher to know how and when to step aside, hand over the process of learning to the learner and leave the learner to his or her own resources.
When one is confronted with something majestic that requires complete attention, in that encounter, there is no self present and hence no naming
"It is quite strange how little effect school—even high school—seems to have had on the lives of creative people. Often one senses that, if anything, school threatened to extinguish the interest and curiosity that the child had discovered outside its walls. How much did schools contribute to the accomplishments of Einstein, or Picasso, or T. S. Eliot? The record is rather grim, especially considering how much effort, how many resources, and how many hopes go into our formal educational system." - Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly. Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention
Leonardo: This reminds me of what Richard Feynman says that the best teacher is one who makes oneself redundant in the shortest possible time.
Da Vinci: Yes, now that you mention Feynman, the great theoretical physicist Julian Schwinger, who was Feynman's contemporary and also shared the Nobel prize with Feynman and Tomonaga, was a phenomenal teacher. As a Ph. D thesis advisor, he happened to meet a particular student just a single time in his whole doctoral period. And that was sufficient for that student to do excellent work and go on to eventually become an excellent theoretical physicist himself.
Leonardo: So, Schwinger's evocative power was very high!
Da Vinci: Yes, his lectures were masterpieces of presentation and put the listeners into a trance-like state in which they absorbed all that he spoke, for the most part, unconsciously though their conscious mind was quite baffled most of the time.
Julian Schwinger
It was only when they went back after the lecture and tried to put together all that he had presented that they realised that there were so many missing pieces in the lecture that they did not understand. And trying to figure out those missing pieces led them to a profounder understanding than would have been if they had understood everything consciously. And of course, in the case of Schwinger, the lectures were packed with so much original information that he was yet to publish and was not to be had anywhere else, and discoveries that he made right in the lectures that he also presented to them then and there. So his lectures were knowledgeable, informative and evocative at the same time.
Leonardo: The best teacher, therefore, teaches more by example and influence than by instruction.
Da Vinci: Yes, paradoxically, the best teacher teaches without teaching.
Leonardo: Ah, so learning by spontaneous self-organization is autocatalytic, autopoietic, and autotelic! What a combination! No wonder it eludes conventional education!
Da Vinci: Yes, conventional education is in most part dominated by rote learning. Teaching rarely aids students though it aids the teachers!
Leonardo: How so, Da Vinci?
Da Vinci: Because teaching is the best way to learn! And as teachers teach they can learn. Unfortunately, most teachers teach by rote. I mean, they practice rote teaching!
Leonardo: By rote teaching you mean there is no increase in ordered complexity and therefore learning is inhibited?
Da Vinci: Exactly! Most teachers don't teach in such a way that they can learn. And most often, it is not their deliberation but due to the constraints placed on them by the educational systems that force teachers to conform to a rigid pattern of syllabus and curriculum and evaluation by equally rigid examination methods.
Leonardo: Da Vinci, rote learning is manifestly an inhibitor, I agree but nevertheless, I want to hear it from you as I am sure you are aware of subtleties no one has thought of before.
Da Vinci: Let's go into rote learning, then, Leonardo. Put simply, rote learning is more or less taking in information in an unprocessed manner. In other words, it is like feeding in a data set per se into one's brain. And unless that data is processed it does not make any sense to the brain.
Leonardo: Ah, that also explains why nowadays there is so much stress on analysing data via machine learning. Because, once machine learning is deployed effectively, the data can become meaningful information that can serve a certain purpose.
Da Vinci: Exactly, Leonardo. And in the human brain, learning serves an identical role just like machine learning does for the computer. After all, the idea behind machine learning is inspired from human learning. Coming back to rote learning, since the information is unprocessed, all that the brain can do is to store it as it is in visual or auditory forms.
Leonardo: So, since the information is stored as it is, the student can only recall it as it is but not remember it.
Da Vinci: Leonardo, that's a crucial observation that you made. The student can only recall it and not remember it. Ah, what a capital distinction you have made.
Leonardo: Yes, Da Vinci, I realised that when information is stored in an unprocessed manner, as it is, the whole thing is like a single chunk. And this chunk can only be recalled in the visual or auditory form it was stored. And that is why this kind of stored information can never be learning. Learning is an outcome of remembering, not recalling.
Da Vinci: Yes, Leonardo, it helps to keep in mind that recalling is the way computer memory works while remembering is the way human memory works. Leonardo: I think elaborating a little more on this is helpful, Da Vinci.
Da Vinci: Yes, Leonardo, in recall as in computer memory, the stored chunks are brought into play as they are. I mean, the mutual configurations remain almost intact. In re-membering, the stored chunks are reconfigured every time the re-membering happens, in a unique manner each time. So during this reconfiguration, new, apparently imperceptible changes take place. And this is learning as opposed to mere memory retrieval. And when the imperceptible changes accumulate sufficiently, a noticeable change can also take place and this brings fresh perspectives into the learning.
Leonardo: And when the imperceptible changes accumulate to such an extent that a dramatic change can be perceived, it becomes research rather than learning, isn't it?
Da Vinci: Of course, Leonardo and that's a good way to characterise research from learning, the emergence of fresh and original insights.
Leonardo: Isn't that also the reason why putting together existing things in a completely novel manner is also said to be an act of creativity.
Da Vinci: Yes, Leonardo. Because whether this happens unconsciously in the brain or undertaken consciously, the outcome is something original and impactful.
Leonardo: So since rote learning does not result in learning at all, there is neither originality nor creativity involved in it. It is rather, a sheer waste of time and effort.
Da Vinci: Except when it severs a purpose, Leonardo.
Leonardo: Because when it serves a purpose, it becomes ordered?
Da Vinci: Yes, Leonardo. When it serves a purpose like stocking up memory.
Leonardo: Can you elaborate this a little, Da Vinci?
Da Vinci: Well, Leonardo, in certain historical contexts and situations, this stocking up of memory has played a supremely significant role. Like in earlier eras, when the transmission of knowledge was primarily through verbal modes, it was necessary to be able to transmit it as faithfully as possible, to the very letter as it were. And there, obviously, reconfiguration of chunks was detrimental to the purpose. Though it is impossible for the human brain for absolute recall without any reconfiguration. This ensured also that the information could be preserved and handed down across generations. This is one significant role for "rote learning".
Leonardo: And is there any other, Da Vinci?
Da Vinci: Quite so, Leonardo, yes, there is another equally significant one. And that is in facilitating flow or optimal experience.
Leonardo: But isn't rote learning opposed to flow, Da Vinci?
Da Vinci: Leonardo, we must understand the role of "rote learning" as active memorization in this context, then. Indeed, the great Hungarian polymath and psychologist, Csikszentmihalyi, draws attention to this in his profound book, "Flow." Let me quote it here as it is extremely insightful:
"But for a person who has nothing to remember, life can become severely impoverished. This possibility was completely overlooked by educational reformers early in this century, who, armed with research results, proved that "rote learning" was not an efficient way to store and acquire information. As a result of their efforts, rote learning was phased out of the schools. The reformers would have had justification, if the point of remembering was simply to solve practical problems. But if control of consciousness is judged to be at least as important as the ability to get things done, then learning complex patterns of information by heart is by no means a waste of effort. A mind with some stable content to it is much richer than one without. It is a mistake to assume that creativity and rote learning are incompatible. Some of the most original scientists, for instance, have been known to have memorized music, poetry, or historical information extensively." - Csikszentmihalyi Mihaly
Leonardo: This is a completely new perspective on rote learning, Da Vinci. Then, when rote learning is aligned with a purpose like facilitating the acquisition of a symbolic domain, it plays a significant role. And this means that it must be employed with understanding, care and wisdom. When thrust blindly on students it is one of the major sources of inhibited self-organization.
Da Vinci: Yes, Leonardo. When this purpose is clear and rote learning is placed in the right context, it becomes a powerful aid to learning. And the crucial term here is purpose again. When there is a clear purpose, rote learning itself can be performed in an effective manner. When inspired by a great purpose, students would have no hesitation at all to engage in rote learning in a lively manner. And in that very process of rote learning, real learning can begin to take place. Now, there takes place an interplay of memory and understanding. Rote learning and creative learning begin to go hand in hand enhancing and intensifying each other. This has been emphasized by Csikszentmihalyi Mihaly in his book "Flow."
Leonardo: So, rote learning contributes to inhibited self-organization when done without a clear purpose.
Da Vinci: And most often, educational systems fail in precisely this, Leonardo, in that they don't understand the role and significance of purpose.
Leonardo: And since purpose is at the very pinnacle of reason, its lack means lack of recognition of rationality itself. Thrusting a task like rote learning on students without a purpose is to ask students to engage in a task without meaning. And no human being can function without meaning.
Da Vinci: Yes, that's why, rote learning as practiced by present day educational systems is meaningless as it lacks purpose.
Leonardo: And therefore, rote learning affects students psychologically by boredom.
Da Vinci: Yes, Leonardo, psychologically by boredom and neurologically by stupor. Boredom because the challenge is so low though the skills of the student may be quite high. It induces the brain to secrete serotonin, the sleep hormone rather than endorphins, the growth hormones.
Leonardo: And emotionally by fear, Da Vinci. Because though the challenge may be low after a while it looks as if it actually becomes high since it requires a huge amount of effort to take in information as it is in an unprocessed form. This begins to cause anxiety to the student.
"A person who can remember stories, poems, lyrics of songs, baseball statistics, chemical formulas, mathematical operations, historical dates, biblical passages, and wise quotations has many advantages over one who has not cultivated such a skill. The consciousness of such a person is independent of the order that may or may not be provided by the environment. She can always amuse herself, and find meaning in the contents of her mind. While others need external stimulation—television, reading, conversation, or drugs—to keep their minds from drifting into chaos, the person whose memory is stocked with patterns of information is autonomous and self-contained. Additionally, such a person is also a much more cherished companion, because she can share the information in her mind, and thus help bring order into the consciousness of those with whom she interacts."
- Csikszentmihalyi Mihaly
Da Vinci: That's a good observation, Leonardo. So by causing fluctuations between boredom and anxiety the student is put off from flow.
Leonardo: And anxiety induces fear as the student cannot see any way to get back to flow.
Da Vinci: Actually, yes, Leonardo. For, when human beings are made to do something without rational explanation, they dread it as it is against the very spirit of homo sapiens. And this initiates a cascade of negative hormones like cortisol and norepinephrine in the brain that begin to chronically disintegrate the human being.
Leonardo: Da Vinci, the way rote learning is used for active memorization...seems to be so distinctive from the way it is practiced conventionally. What exactly is this distinction? I mean, both in a sense essentially result in memorization, whether active or passive isn't it?
Da Vinci: You mean to ask whether they are esssentially the same, Leonardo? Since they seem to result in the same thing, the stocking up of memory? And your query is quite natural. Let me go into it a little. Well, both rote learning and memorisation may result in the stocking up of memory. However, the stocking up of memory need not happen by rote learning alone. It can happen either by passive or active means. The passive one is of course by rote learning. And the active, by engagement. When the brain engages itself in the processing of information via learning, it happens that much of the information may be absorbed by the brain unconsciously and stored up. This happens without deliberation, without any conscious effort at memorisation. And this may be called active memorisation as there is no effort involved. Whereas in rote learning often, a huge amount of effort is involved in forcing the brain-mind to store the information. Many great personalities are seen to possess this kind of memory and they have acquired it without conscious effort merely by engaging in reading or writing.
In rote learning great effort is involved in forcing the brain-mind to store the information by unintelligent repetition
Leonardo: Ah, that means, in a sense, those teachers and educational systems who are practicing rote learning to make students memorise could in fact achieve their objective in an effortless manner if only they are sufficiently intelligent to engage students in active memorisation.
Da Vinci: Of course, Leonardo. And this is the capital distinction between the educational systems of ancient times and the present. During earlier times, memorisation was significant and important and was performed by active means. This not only resulted in a well stocked memory but also enabled students to make creative use of memory. Presently, the rote learning that is being practiced results in passive memorisation and thereby not only deadens memory but distorts, diminishes and destroys creativity.
Leonardo: Da Vinci, can we go a little more into why teaching is a major inhibitor of self-organization?
Da Vinci: Of course, Leonardo. Teaching is indeed a major inhibitor of self-organization. And by this I am assuming the conventional meaning without going into effective teaching that is quite rare but nevertheless practiced by truly great teachers.
Leonardo: We leave aside great teachers then as they are exceptions to the rule.
Da Vinci: So, teaching, that is conventional teaching inhibits self-organization. Let us see why and how it does so. As to why, take what teaching is in general. Teaching most often is classroom teaching and this in turn is nothing but lecturing. Now, most often, lecturing consists in presenting some subject or topic in a visual and auditory manner, writing on the blackboard and talking to the students. And often, it is simply the passing on of information from some book in this manner. Most often, this does not contain any new understanding or insights from the teacher to the taught. And in the present information era, this is quite redundant as the same information is already and readily available on the internet. The only utility could then be if the teacher can curate the information so that it facilitates cognitive ease. Yes, even this could be significant as it is quite likely that the students may suffer from cognitive load when unable to sift the vast information content in the internet.
Leonardo: And Da Vinci, what about the way teaching inhibits the pace of learning of students?
Da Vinci: Yes, that's another thing, Leonardo. Teaching that is done by lecturing forces the students to adhere to the teacher's pace and this interferes with the brain-mind's unique rate of processing information. This is also the reason why books as instruments of learning are more effective for the active learner, one who is already mature to a certain extent. While the audio-visual mode is effective for the student who depends more on the teacher to explain the subject matter.
Leonardo: In that sense, the audio-visual mode does not lend itself to accelerated learning?
Da Vinci: Most often no, unless the student is already in an accelerated mode of learning and can make use of the lecturing to rapidly move forward in the learning.
Leonardo: Da Vinci, how does the personality of the teacher play a role in inhibiting self-organization?
Da Vinci: Again, if the teacher is an inspiring personality, one can evoke self-organization in the students by example and influence. Otherwise one could inhibit it by an authoritarian mode of presentation.
Leonardo: So, teaching indeed inhibits learning when not endowed with a worthy purpose and when done in an unintelligent manner! It would be good to revisit this sometime.
Da Vinci: Yes, and this has far reaching consequences, Leonardo. This mode of inhibited learning carries on into one's career and later life and as Dr. Edwards. W Deming said, results in learning to please people rather than working to improve the systems that serve people!
"The relationship between a boss and subordinate is the same as the relationship between a teacher and student," he said. The teacher sets the aims, the student responds to those aims. The teacher has the answer, the student works to get the answer. Students know when they have succeeded because the teacher tells them. By the time all children are 10 they know what it takes to get ahead in school and please the teacher —a lesson they carry forward through their careers of "pleasing bosses and failing to improve the system."
Peter M Senge, The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization
Stay Informed
When you subscribe to the blog, we will send you an e-mail when there are new updates on the site so you wouldn't miss them.
