Dr. Edward Roy Krishnan

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]I have heard people in the field (schools all around) telling this over and over again, “The graduates that you guys produce cannot survive in the actual school system. There is something wrong in the training and education that they are getting.”

Although my immediate reaction as a teacher-trainer is to become defensive about the training that we provide, I am more inclined to reflect on the statement and investigate where we have gone wrong.

One of the problems that I see to be common in teacher-training programs is that we tend to be more theoretical about something so practical like teaching. Instead of providing a practically-oriented education and training, we are more concerned about textbook materials and require student-teachers to memorize principles, theories, and contents. We rarely use and demonstrate the usage of various instructional strategies that we so fervently teach. We don’t model appropriate classroom management techniques. We fail when it comes to conflict resolution with our student-teachers.

When teaching practices are not demonstrated in our own classes, whatever student-teachers learn as a theoretical body of knowledge remains just that – passive knowledge. A student once wrote in her journal as a reflection about one of my classes, “Thank you for using various instructional strategies in the class. It’s one thing to learn about these in our methods classes. It’s another thing altogether when we observe our teacher teaching using these methods. By observing these strategies in action, we get more confidence about using the same when we do our internship.”

Going back to the schools – many fresh graduates possess the capability to operate at a functional level even at entry point. However, when they do try using some of the new things that they learned in the college, their older colleagues quickly discourage them. Most teachers who are already teaching for years, feel comfortable with their own methods. They don’t really care about changing. They don’t care whether their approaches are outdated or are in conflict with research in the areas of cognitive and educational psychology. They just love doing what they are used to doing, regardless of knowing that all that they are doing might not be the best things for children and their learning.

Because it is difficult to work in an environment that discourages non-conformity, these fresh graduates quickly become tuned to the traditional, ineffective practices of their older colleagues. So, instead of experimenting with new ideas and teaching practices, they shut down their creative energy and do what everyone else does.

Hence, the cause of the problem is two-pronged. On one hand, lecturers training these teachers are to be blamed for the sad condition. On the other hand, school cultures that are not conducive and progressive (closed to new innovation and creative ideas and practices) also play a role in bringing out mediocre performance in the fresh graduates who go into the profession of teaching.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Learning is an active process in which the learner uses sensory input and constructs meaning out of it. The more traditional formulation of this idea involves the terminology of the active learner (Dewey’s term) stressing that the learner needs to do something; that learning is not the passive acceptance of knowledge which exists “out there” but that learning involves the learners engaging with the world.

1. People learn to learn as they learn: learning consists both of constructing meaning and constructing systems of meaning. For example, if we learn the chronology of dates of a series of historical events, we are simultaneously learning the meaning of a chronology. Each meaning we construct makes us better able to give meaning to other sensations which can fit a similar pattern.
2. The crucial action of constructing meaning is mental: it happens in the mind. Physical actions, hands-on experience may be necessary for learning, especially for children, but it is not sufficient; we need to provide activities which engage the mind as well as the hands (Dewey called this reflective activity.)
3. Learning involves language: the language we use influences learning. On the empirical level. Researchers have noted that people talk to themselves as they learn. On a more general level, there is a collection of arguments, presented most forcefully by Vigotsky, that language and learning are inextricably intertwined (need to honor native language).
4. Learning is a social activity: our learning is intimately associated with our connection with other human beings, our teachers, our peers, our family as well as casual acquaintances, including the people before us or next to us. We are more likely to be successful in our efforts to educate if we recognize this principle rather than try to avoid it. Much of traditional education, as Dewey pointed out, is directed towards isolating the learner from all social interaction, and towards seeing education as a one-on-one relationship between the learner and the objective material to be learned. In contrast, progressive education (to continue to use Dewey’s formulation) recognizes the social aspect of learning and uses conversation, interaction with others, and the application of knowledge as an integral aspect of learning.
5. Learning is contextual: we do not learn isolated facts and theories in some abstract otherworldly land of the mind separate from the rest of our lives: we learn in relationship to what else we know, what we believe, our prejudices and our fears. On reflection, it becomes clear that this point is actually a result of the idea that learning is active and social. We cannot divorce our learning from our lives.
6. One needs knowledge to learn: it is not possible to assimilate new knowledge without having some structure developed from previous knowledge to build on. The more we know, the more we can learn. Therefore any effort to teach must be connected to the state of the learner, must provide a path into the subject for the learner based on that learner’s previous knowledge.
7. It takes time to learn: learning is not instantaneous. For significant learning we need to revisit ideas, ponder them, try them out, play with them and use them. This cannot happen in the 5-10 minutes. If you reflect on anything you have learned, you soon realize that it is the product of repeated exposure and thought. Even, or especially, moments of profound insight, can be traced back to longer periods of preparation.
8. Motivation is a key component in learning. Not only is it the case that motivation helps learning, it is essential for learning. This idea of motivation as described here is broadly conceived to include an understanding of ways in which the knowledge can be used. Unless we know “the reasons why”, we may not be very involved in using the knowledge that may be instilled in us, even by the most severe and direct teaching.

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

An angry teacher is a scary teacher. Ask anyone and he will say the same. We all have had our share of being victimized by angry teachers who refuse to keep a check on their emotion. They comfortably take it all out on students, without concern and care about the aftermath of their insensitive, intense, negative, destructive outbursts of anger. The scars left by angry teachers are permanent, psychological, and subconsciously harmful.

Although teachers are humans who undergo a variety of life stresses, frustrations, and private conflicts, getting angry and showing this anger in a destructive way to students is by no means a justifiable act. It is important to acknowledge and experience anger, but there are ways to dealing with it in a more constructive manner. The following steps would help teachers to handle and deal with their anger with caution:

1. Acknowledge that you are angry – becoming aware of angry moments or anger in general.
2. Deliberately make a way to cool down – time-out (“I will come back in 5 minutes,” or “We will start the lesson in 5 minutes.”); deliberately behaving positively despite the anger will eventually help you to become positive and more controlled.
3. Verbalize the anger – expressing anger is different from displacing it on someone helpless or less authoritative than yourself. Verbalization of anger helps you to channel the intense energy that accompanies the anger into something more positive. Verbalizing also helps you not to focus too long on the anger itself. Rather, as you begin talking about the feeling of anger, it might become clear to you that it’s not worth to dwell on the particularly negative approach to dealing with the issue at hand.

The students of PSYC384 (first semester, 2007) presented the following suggestions to prevent anger in the classroom:

1. Prepare well for lessons – there is no substitute to preventing problems in the classroom by having a good lesson planned for the students – activities, stimulating questions, open-ended tasks, inquiry, etc.; there are two types of preparation: one type of preparation deals with the day-to-day getting ready for the class to teach lessons. Another type of preparation deals with an on-going watchfulness of a teacher – for example, I read all sorts of books, magazines, internet materials; watch documentaries, movies, etc., all in the hope to gather ideas for my future lessons or for whenever they are needed. As a teacher, I am constantly thinking about making lessons interesting. This is known as an on-going preparation.
2. Continual learning – being flexible, resourceful, inventive and re-inventive; making lessons interesting is crucial to prevent disruption in behavior among students. When boredom sets in, students use their energies in things that do not help them benefit from the learning experiences provided in the classroom.
3. Have a positive attitude at all times – take it easy; remember that not every lesson will be fantastic (gauge students’ emotion and your emotion and mental conditions – be realistic).
4. Focus on positive rather than negative.
5. Develop high level of teacher efficacy (the belief that everything that you do, say, feel, etc. in the classroom affect students in significant, permanent ways); hold high, realistic, positive expectation for all.
6. Regulate emotion – acting happy will help you become happy; postpone action/decisions when in anger; give yourself a time-out.
7. Communicate the anger to your students in a constructive, harmless way (be honest, but tactful).
8. Remember that it’s okay to be a human! – so, express your anger within the right framework.

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]I just came back from my first class for today…and you know what? I re-lived and re-assured myself of the importance and power of engaging teaching methods. The portion today was on ‘expertise’ (cognitive psychology class)…but instead of lecturing and presenting (in less than 5 minutes) all the characteristics of an ‘expert’…we spend 1 hour and 20 minutes doing it…hehehe. This is what we did.

I asked each student to write down an area (knowledge or skill) he/she is expert in. Then, I asked them to describe (in at least 5 sentences) their expertise. Then, I asked them to find a pair and share their expertise (and whatever they have written about their expertise). After that, I asked both to put their ‘heads together’ and identify a characteristic of an expert … seen emerging from the commonality of whatever they have shared with each other.

Then, I ask each pair to share their answers (to the whole class). Each students talks about the other person’s (partner’s) expertise. This gave each one of them to feel proud about themselves today!!! I saw smiles…many blushed…and many others were laughing away…when their expertise was shared with the whole class. Isn’t this what we call teaching for emotional intelligence? Then, I asked the pairs to share the one characteristic of an expert. We identified 12 characteristics altogether…where did all these come from? from the textbook? NO…they all come from EACH AND EVERY STUDENT who came to learn…and they took responsibility for their learning. I felt so good…coz I saw engagement throughout the class period. We had fun…at some of our friends’ expertise :p 

Of course, I also presented them with points from the textbook…but doing what I did…I related to my students that THEY TOO CAN CONTRIBUTE TO THE EXISTING BODY OF KNOWLEDGE…if only they are asked and encouraged to do so. They are smart…and that’s a fact!

E.g. students’ expertise that made us laugh:

1. expert in making soup – this student is seen everywhere picking up whatever leaves she can get to cook soup…hahaha (she’s a ‘karen’ person)

2. expert in sleeping and eating – can sleep wherever and whenever; can eat 7 meals a day and still feel hungry

3. expert in physical activities (a short/chubby girl) – I teased her and asked if it is aggressive activities she is talking about (wrestling?)…!!!

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

Of all the educational objectives a teacher would desire to accomplish, one remains to be the most vital, yet challenging. It is the objective to engage students in critical and creative thinking in the process of learning. This is a particularly difficult objective to fulfill in an oriental setting, where students come from a collectivist socio-cultural background. Despite learning and utilizing a variety of innovative teaching methods that encourage and require critical and creative thinking, teachers find that students from the collectivist cultural orientation do little or nothing to push their creative-imaginative prowess to invent and produce new knowledge.

An encounter with ‘quiet’ students

Such was my experience when I started teaching at Mission College, an international college situated in Saraburi, Thailand; in 2003 (Mission College caters to the educational needs of an international student body). Discussions in classes were often dominated by outspoken and courageous students from the west. Asian students hardly talked or contributed their opinions about issues, even when an issue directly related to their lives and future. It was difficult to get them to talk. There were times when I had to wait for two to three minutes before a one-word answer emerged from the lips of an Asian student. It was tiring, frustrating, and to a great extent, scary. Scary because I couldn’t imagine how these students would one day become leaders and yet, govern without being able to think and express their thoughts with confidence. The scenario seemed truly bleak. It still does.

The difference between East and West

Contemporary research in education and psychology propose that students learn the best when they are allowed a great amount of freedom in the process of learning – to choose when, what, why, and how they would learn what they would want to learn. In other words, learning and the highest form of it – thinking – are enhanced when teachers employ student-centered teaching. Student-centered teaching requires that students are made responsible for their own learning. They are their own bosses, deciding, and judging what is good and bad for them. Nothing is imposed. Teachers merely play the role of a supportive mentor or guide.

While this sounds like a fabulous idea, it doesn’t work all that easily. Even in a highly individualized society like the United States, a lot of students refuse to engage in the processes of thinking pertinent for improved learning and academic achievement. For most of us, thinking, just like reading, is an effortful, energy-draining task. We choose to borrow and use the ideas and suggestions of others rather than come up with our own, simply because we want to save time and mental energy.

However, compared to the western society, students from Asia have a more difficult time to open up, think, and express their thoughts. Somehow, student-centered teaching does not suit learners with a collectivist socio-culture background because of differences in societal values.

This is also true of Asian students who study abroad (even at graduate and post-graduate levels), in places like the UK or US. They are often considered ‘good students’ – because they quietly listen to and absorb whatever is handed down to them by the teacher – but by the standards of current development and advancement in education, they are the worst because they have not learned the art and science of thinking, critically, and creatively. In the end, they lose out. They become mere reflectors of other people’s thoughts. They are unable to bring out and nurture their innate abilities to be original, innovative, and inventive. These students return to their home countries to continue in the same old vicious cycle of being ‘copy/cut-pasters’ of ideas and knowledge.

Why doesn’t it work here?

Coming from an Asian family structure myself, this is a phenomenon that is easily understood. The Asian family and school structures require children to listen and obey. No questions are entertained and most decisions, big or small, are made by parents (at home) and teachers (at school). An individual grows up, programmed to conform to a variety of norms, without challenging the same. Thinking and asserting individual opinions are out of place. In fact, these are considered disrespectful. Hence, it is a commonplace for Asian students to submit to authorities, and inaudibly abide by the rules and regulations imposed on them. From very young, Asian students are taught to ‘go with the flow’ and avoid ‘everything that depart from status-quo’. This is also seen at school; in how teaching and learning transpire. Students are not allowed to think. Teachers think for their students and spoon-feed them with whatever knowledge deemed necessary.

Years of being exposed to such an upbringing makes it extremely difficult to break the pattern of brain function, even at neurological level. When asked to think, speak up, and express their thoughts, Asian students freeze and shut down socially first, and then, emotionally, and neurologically too.

The way to go

Trying to implement student-centered teaching in schools with many Asian students would prove to be unwise. If our aim in education is to inculcate patterns of mental processes and behavior that elicit maximum amount of thinking on the part of students, a culturally sensitive approach is required.

My suggestion is for schools to begin with learning-centered teaching and gradually transit into student-centeredness. Directly plunging into students-centered teaching would be catastrophic because Asian students are not used to taking responsibility for their own learning and thinking. They are more comfortable following directions from an authoritative figure. Hence, getting them into a new learning pattern would require a gradual move from being completely passive to becoming completely active and creative.

Learning-centered teaching encompasses methods and approaches that make use of findings in brain research, and how learners learn the best, as humans. In addition to this, learning-centered teaching makes use of cooperative teaching strategies to harness the potential of students in non-threatening environments. When students (particularly Asian students) are allowed to develop critical and creative thinking skills in small groups (less intimidating because they come from a collectivist background), they would eventually develop the confidence required to apply the same learning tools in a wider perspective, even at an individual level.

Student-centered Teaching: The Way to Go![/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]“Keep Quiet…”

As children enter into the classroom, the most common expectation a teacher would have is for them to take their seats, sit quietly, take out their books, and wait for the next instruction. However, this is an inevitably unrealistic and impractical expectation.

By nature, students, who are social beings, crave to establish communal connections with one another, the moment they come in contact with each other. The seating arrangements in classrooms reflect this interactive component of student-life. Nevertheless, the actual social interaction (in the form of talking about academic or non-academic matters) is officially, formally, and systematically discouraged to allegedly ensure learning.

The Real World

Imagine sitting all alone on a bench in a recreational park. Because you are by yourself and the bench is still spacious, someone comes along and sits next to you. For a moment, there is complete silence in the air. This is a good silence. It is an indication that both you and the other person are thinking hard about ways to break the ice and start a conversation.

This example shows that by nature, humans like to engage in the enterprise of social interaction, in response to anything that remotely resembles a social interactive situation. Talking and interacting with another yield many psychological and accompanying physical benefits. Hence, it is a biological, psychological, and sociological survival tool that humans have used since time immemorial.

Warming-up in the Classroom

Students go through a variety of experiences at home the previous day and night. They get excited about sharing some of these with their classmates the next day at school. Most often, the first and most appropriate opportunity (in their minds) they get to do this is in the class, before a lesson begins, or just after a lessons ends.

How does a teacher deal with this situation? Should he/she ask students to “Keep quiet!” and expect them to be about their business as learners? Or should he/she be concerned about decorum and discipline, and ignore the fact that students do want to interact and socially connect before they begin plunging into the process of learning?

Personally, I would answer this question by saying, “It is wise and appropriate to allow students to talk, about anything they are interested in before beginning a lesson.” There are times in my own teaching that I entered into the classroom, and contrary to conventional practice, announced, “I want all of you turn to someone nearby and talk to that person about your weekend…” Of course the noise level goes up; however, my intention for doing this is to ensure that students are emotionally ready and prepared to undertake and follow through the lesson for that particular day.

I realized that every time I allowed students some time to talk about something non-academic before beginning with a lesson, they were more relaxed, positive, and geared up for learning.

To make things better, sometimes, we talk about an issue, related to the previous day, or week, as a whole class. This becomes a more interesting and energizing discussion and leads the whole class into a thinking mode. Students loosen up and contribute their opinions and ideas without hesitation. There is no right or wrong answer. They can be themselves and express their emotion and thoughts without the fear of evaluation.

Consequently, students realize that the teacher is interested in an issue that they are concerned about. The gap between the teacher and students is significantly reduced, and a neutral, stimulating, positive platform for teaching and learning is created. Students feel comfortable to take an active role in the learning process without feeling like they were being pushed or unreasonably forced.

What Brain Research Says?

Studies in brain processing (storing and retrieving information) reveal that there is a strong connection between reason (cognition) and the three-pronged elements required in learning – emotion, activity, and meaning.

Scientists have discovered that the same areas of the brain that are involved in processing emotion are also involved in processing memory. The connection is so strong that reason, emotion, and bodily sensations and functions affect each other at neurological levels.

Emotion activates attention, the primary and most vital component of any learning or information processing act, which then triggers the short-term and long-term memory, and eventually makes the overall learning process possible. In other words, learning does not take place at optimal level in the absence of emotional arousal. Apart from being responsible for initiating and activating cognitive processes, emotions are also responsible for behavioral responses of individuals.

Since the relationship between emotion, cognition, and motion is inevitable and real, it is necessary for teachers to get students to become emotionally involved, before initiating teaching and learning. When students are emotionally captivated in the initial stage of learning, the chances of them paying attention is significantly increased. Increased attention enables students to be highly engaged (mentally and physically) and hence gain maximum benefit from whatever is taught or discussed.

The more emotionally engaged a student is, the more likely he/she is to learn. Furthermore, having positive and favorable feelings toward a task (academic or non-academic) helps students to feel that they have done the task well. Similarly, when they experience negative and unfavorable feelings toward a task, they experience difficulty.

“Let’s Talk…”

Allowing students to talk to each other about non-academic matters, before or in-between lessons, is an appropriate teaching practice. Instead of depriving students of their basic social need to interact and feel good about being connected with one another, teachers might want to consider taking a more progressive approach in harnessing the emotional gains that accompany such a practice.

The best learning takes place when a positive feeling toward a task enables students to use what they already know, motivates them to extend that knowledge and build on it, even to the extent of constructing new knowledge. Casual talking with peers allows students to experience a positive emotional arousal, which serve to improve their own learning. This is true at psychological, as well as, neurological levels.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]