Many times, when people talk about education, they relate it to the matter of politics and economy, but mostly and most importantly humanity. This is because education is the most fundamental building blocks of human development. It is a formative process of passing on the knowledge, skills, and values from one generation to the next. An impact of education is greatly. When given the opportunity to learn, people tend to contribute to the development of their lives. Once their lives are improved, people can then contribute to their communities and their countries, which finally affects in the betterment of this world. Therefore, it is essential to look at this matter on a global context.



***********************************************************************************************************

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Sometimes, education just comes naturally through life experience. But you do need a perspective to turn that experience into a life lesson.

.........................................................
By Kalyakorn Naksompop
February 23, 2010

Friday, February 5, 2010

CONNECTING to and for STUDENTS

By Kalyakorn Naksompop
Written on February 5
, 2010

A professor of mine mentioned in his class that for some reasons, as students move on to high school level, they’re expected to be good at everything. I found this very true and could totally relate to what he said. One very interesting point was made about how each subject are taught separately and not connected to each other. It is very obvious that the curriculum for each subject area is usually designed to fit the content of that particular subject but not really to each other. Yet, high school students are expected to be good in all areas even when everyone knows that there’s no way people can be perfect. It’s only natural for a person to be expertise in one or two things, good in a few others, and has absolutely no ideas about the rest. Therefore, it would only make sense if the school helps its students by connecting each subject. Then, students who thought they are only capable of being artists can realize that they may have a tiny part of themselves that are too while students who are scientists can learn more about their musical side, and the mathematicians know that they too can be athletes.

One thing teachers must remember is nobody is perfect. It’s ok for students to be bad at some certain subjects that are not their fortes. In the end, a person doesn’t need to be good at everything to succeed, isn’t that true? Do we really think that Albert Einstein can compete with Michael Jordan in basketball? Or do we really think that Paul McCartney is an even better chef than Gordon Ramsay? Well, who knows? It may be true, but does anybody care if Einstein can bounce the ball or McCartney knows how to pan fry a duck? I don’t believe so because we only look at their best capabilities and we admire them for that.

Having this connection not only helps students in relating what they learn in different classes, but also helps them to understand how this knowledge relates to life outside of school. This is because students are then able to see that knowledge of one subject is not only about that subject, but is possible to be applied to other subject areas in school. Hopefully, as they practice this ability to connect often enough, students can as well learn to use this very same principal later in life.

Somehow, as we discussed about connecting and applying knowledge of one subject to another, I could feel that there’s a link between this idea and the theory about Multiple Intelligence by Howard Gardner. Gardner purposed that there are at least eight types of intelligences that he recognized, including 1) linguistic, 2) logical-mathematical, 3) spatial, 4) bodily-kinesthetic, 5) musical, 6) interpersonal, 7) intrapersonal, and 8) Naturalist. Although most of the books we found only talk about these 8 intelligences, I remember an interview with Vanessa Race, one of Howard Gardner’s students (who happened to become Thai celebrity for her knowledge on such subject) on Thai national TV a few years ago. Vanessa accentuated during the interview that her teacher said these are only 8 intelligences that he had recognized, but he suggested that there should be more areas of human’s intelligences since he strongly believed that humans are capable of so much more.

Having heard about this theory reminded me even more how a teacher should use various techniques in teaching a subject. We (educators) always talk about how different students have different learning styles. Is it possible that they have different learning styles because they have different types of intelligences? If so, is it right to stick to one style of teaching that encourages only linguistic or logical-mathematical intelligences? I don’t believe so. This is exactly why we should develop such curriculum that allows students with different intelligences to be able to learn at their bests. One way is to create a curriculum that connects each and every subject. Therefore, students know that they can apply the subject that they are good at to other subjects that are not their fields. Meaning, they can use their intelligences, which are not necessary linguistic or logical-mathematical, to learn in all areas.

After all, every student should have equal right to access their learning. How can we say that we provide every student equally if we only use curriculum that’s only suitable for students with certain types of intelligences. Isn’t it true?


.............................................................
REFERENCES

Armstrong, T. ‘Multiple Intelligences.’ In Thomas ArmstrongRetrieved February 3, 2010 from http://www.thomasarmstrong.com/multiple_intelligences.htm


Race, V. (September 5, 2007). An interview by TV show ‘Ta Sawang’, broadcasted on ModernNine TV. In Wisdom Inside. Retrieved February 3, 2010 from http://th.wisdominside.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=377&Itemid=67


Smith, M. K. (2002, 2008). 'Howard Gardner and multiple intelligences'. In INFED: the encyclopedia of informal education. Retrieved February 3, 2010 from http://www.infed.org/thinkers/gardner.htm

*Illustration from http://www.childfirst.com.cn/gifs/en_soundcurr05.gif

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Creativity & Play

Another video about creativity that I found very interesting. It's a speech (with many valid points) by Tim Brown, CEO of the "innovation and design" firm IDEO. Well, enjoy!

Sunday, January 17, 2010

WHY IS THAT?


It seems a little strange to think about the importance of emphasizing thinking ability in school and how this issue has been recognized widely among educators. In fact, there have been numerous studies dedicated to find ways to boost up this cognitive ability. Yet, throughout history we see many or most schools haven't been practicing enough methods that would encourage this ability in students. The strange thing is not the idea of understanding the importance of this matter, but is rather the fact that even when everyone seems to know, not enough people have put the ideas into action. Why is that?

What is even more strange is that it's not because we don't know how. Socrates, whom everyone respected as a great thinker from ancient Greek, recognized that a way to stimulate rational thinking is by using a form of inquiry and debate base on asking and answering questions. That was thousands of years ago. So, even before we see all these modern studies about how to increase the cognitive power, we might already have some ideas, but we chose not do it. Why is that?

Education in different places was formed for different purposes. However, the education system that we're now using world widely was designed in 19th century (Robinson, 2009) . Yes, it's about the time we first heard the word "industrialization". The schools back then were found in order to produce workers, not thinkers, to suit the changes in society, mainly for economic reasons. With such design, students were trained with skills to work, not to think as individual. But that was more than 100 years ago. Nonetheless, not enough people seem to be worried about the fact that our world has tremendously changed while our education system has paused since 1900s. Why is that?

Is it too difficult to stimulate rational thinking?

Does it require too much from the educators?

Or is it easier not having to change what has been existed for more than 100 years?

Or is it just easier to control people who cannot think?


.............................................................
REFERENCES

Garlikov, R. The Socratic Method: Teaching by Asking Instead of by Telling. In Richard Garlikov. Retrieved December 17, 2009 from http://www.garlikov.com/Soc_Meth.html

Phillips, C. (2003). Socrates Cafe: A Fresh Taste of Philosophy. Cambridge, UK: The Lutterworth Press.


Robinson, K. (2009). Transform Education? Yes, We Must. In The Huffington Post. Retrieved December 14, 2009 from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sir-ken-robinson/transform-education-yes-w_b_157014.html

The Role of Socratic Questioning in Thinking, Teaching & Learning. In The Critical Thinking Community by Foundation for Critical Thinking. Retrieved December 17, 2009 from http://www.criticalthinking.org/articles/the-role-socratic-questioning-ttl.cfm

Friday, January 15, 2010

A Thought on DISCOVERY LEARNING


How can students be engaged to lessons being taught in class? Isn’t that one of the most asked questions among educators? Many thinkers tend to believe that one way to do that is to engage students with active learning process. With this learning style, students are encouraged to learn through experience by building on their prior knowledge “to search for new information and relationship based on their interest". Such method, according to Jerome Bruner, is called "discovery learning".

What teacher can probably do, for example, is to assign a project that allows each individual to focus more on sub topic of their choice. The obvious positive side to this method is that students can each develop their learning process based on their learning style at their own pace. It allows each individual to find what's the best way to learn about what they want to learn. In other words, students are asked to do what they want to do. As a result, learning becomes more fun and motivation in classroom is highly promoted. Moreover, students can develop "self system" where they can practice to think and do things for themselves.

This is actually a very interesting method to suggest to teachers, especially today where students can be even more easily distracted from class with all the modern technology that we all know of. In some schools, each student brings a lap top to class. How can teacher know if each student is paying attention to class? It's not very easy, isn't it? Even if the teacher walks around the room to make sure students are doing what they're supposed to do, students can just easily switch the pages on their computer screen back and forth. Then, the solution is probably not the attempt to detect the not-to-do, but is perhaps the attempt to encourage the fun side of learning. Therefore, students can be motivated to learn from within. That's when their attentions to the lessons will come naturally.

Friday, December 25, 2009

Merry Christmas (^_^)

Send your own ElfYourself eCards

Thursday, December 24, 2009

Reflection on Thai National Curriculum

By Kalyakorn Naksompop
Written on December
24, 2009

Last week, I had the opportunity to learn some interesting information about Thai curriculum in comparison to California curriculum from my classmates. As listened to the information given by my classmates, it was impossible for me not to get personally involved, simply because I spent more than half of my school life in Thai education. It's always more difficult for "outsiders" to really criticize Thai education. I, however, believe that I have every right to do so. I am Thai who was born and raised in Thailand. I went through normal Thai schools until elementary, fortunately went to international school, then back to Thai government university. Literally, I am the product from this educational system.

Being in Thai schools is never rough (unless, of course, you have your own opinions and love to share them). Just need to lay low, be ordinary, only remember what you are taught, and do what you are told. For final exams, you need not to fear because it's all multiple choices. Just know what strategy to use when you have to guess for answers. After final exams, if you feel like throwing everything you learned in classes away, it is ok because you will not need it anymore. Well, at least, not until you have to start preparing for the big Entrance Exam, which is far yet to come.

That's basically how I got through my elementary (pratom) years.

Then, I went to international school for probably the most unexpected reason: my older sister was asked not to continue in high school because her grades were not "high enough". Despite what the school said, my father knew my sister is smart and believed that it was not her fault. He decided to put his daughters in another school where they can be educated with different system and curriculum, which he thought should be more "appropriate".

My sister took half a year studying English, finally got accepted as an ESL student, and was moved to regular class after one semester. Then, she became top of the class, tutored her friends after school, and graduated with an honor roll. Now? She's about to open her second restaurant in Los Angeles. So, she's certainly not stupid. Moreover, she's doing just fine.

You see. If the same girl failed in one school but turned out to be top in another school, there must be a problem somewhere.

For my part, it was not the same roller coaster ride. But thanks to my sister, I found myself having fun and eager to learn what is taught in class for the first time. I started to raise my hands and answer questions. I also learned to state my opinions and finally learned to develop the likes and dislikes for each class. That was a big step for me. Knowing likes and dislikes means you have learned about what you want. You then develop the motivation and passion for what you "like". Through this process, you are able to look back at yourself, find who you are and what you want in life. The key is to know how to think for yourself. This is probably the most valuable knowledge I ever received from a school.

Then, I went back to Thai education by applying myself to the most famous art university in Thailand and all the memories literally came back to haunt me. In high school, my works used to be about story telling and concepts. It's my nature when creating art pieces. I didn't have the best skills or techniques when first attended university, but I knew how to create stories through my works. That, however, did not seem to be what my teachers wanted. I remembered a class called "Composition". The first week, when all my friends did something quite similar to each other: concentrating on the lines and colors, I did something totally different: making two art pieces using concept "Life and Death". Loud and clear, my teacher said, "This is not the time to explore on concepts or stories yet. I want you to focus on improving all the basic skills first. Then, you can move on to conceptual stuffs later." So, that was what I did for two entire years: practicing my techniques and forgetting all about story development. I was finally allowed to start developing my own concepts and stories in the third year. Somehow, two years of not practicing ability to think really got to me. In the first few months, I stuck. I could not think the way I used to. Even when I learned to think again, my thoughts could not flow like the way it used to. As it turned out, my techniques were improved while my creativity was killed. Worth it? I don't know..

Nonetheless, what struck me more than the fact that I was not allow to think was to see how most of my friends struggled when it came to thinking, analyzing, or creating. Many times, when students were asked to write report and present the topic to the class, many of my friends did not know even know what to do with the topic. The thing is I don't believe that my friends are stupid. Looking at what they can do when they know how to do something, they are certainly some of the most creative people I ever met. What is the problem then?

To be clear, I am not trying to say that only international schools can offer best curriculum by any means. I am just trying to point out what it is that I saw having experienced in different school systems and curricula. With the stories I told you, don't you agree that there must be something wrong?

You see. As I was taught to question, to brainstorm, and to analyze, my friends were taught to shut, to listen, and to memorize. That is a big difference. I was taught and trained to think while my friends were taught to do what teachers tell them to. But once they moved to college level, teachers suddenly asked them to think by themselves. Yes, there are special people who may be able to jump from 1 to 10, but what about the rest?

I personally believe that people are born with the ability to think and be creative, but they must practice to use this ability under the appropriate environment. To be honest, I don't believe that what most classes in Thai schools provide is the appropriate environment, judging from what I saw and had been through. I also believe that the big part of the problem is the people resources. In other words, Thai educators are not able to pull out this ability in students. Well, that's what I used to think. Listening to some of the facts my friends presented, I found that maybe the root of the problem is not at teachers anymore, but is more likely to be at the system. Yes, teachers can be a little more supportive in students' ideas and opinions. However, we must remember that it was how they were taught when they were students. What they do in class reflect their belief, their culture, and their background. They act base on what they know.

Thus, the problem is not only the people, but it must be something bigger. Perhaps, it's the entire system that makes Thai education ineffective. For example, looking at Thai National Curriculum, it does not provide enough information for teachers in doing their job. Meaning, teachers are off to do whatever they want. What are the odds when teachers are not provided with enough details, guidelines, or criteria on what they are supposed to do? Well, some great teachers may use this opportunity to bring their curriculum to the level no one has ever reached before. Other good teachers may try to find out what should be taught and how, then create the curricula that are appropriate to their students as well as the instructions. What about the rest? Well, they can do whatever they want. There is no way anyone can judge whether they are doing good or bad since there's no criteria to base on. In other words, there is no guideline for anyone, either the teachers or the schools. Meaning, there is no standard nor system to control the content being taught as well as the capability of people who teach. Due to this fact, no matter how beautiful objective of Thai curriculum seems, it will never be effective. Besides the problem mentioned above, such lack of guidelines result in huge gaps between schools throughout the country. In the end, whom has the damage been done to? Well, who else but the students that we called "future of the nation".

THE SUN IS GREEN

If I say the sun is green, what would you say?

Of course, if you have seen the sun, you would probably think I'm crazy because the sun is supposed to be red or yellow. But if you really look at it, you would probably see the same thing I'm seeing. It's not the sun that is green, but it is my imagination that made it green. It is not the fact, it's just a thought.

However, that is not the way we run the classrooms, isn't it? It is obvious that the education now is developed out of knowledge of today. We we made assumptions of how education should be using researches and philosophies, not to forget about traditions of the education. Nonetheless, what we found today will become history as soon as the sun sets, which basically means that we developed the system of education based on history and beliefs. Yet, what we are doing as educators is to prepare our students for the future. The future that is yet to come. The future that even we are uncertain of. The future where what is right today maybe wrong then. Who knows, the sun may really turn green tomorrow.

Thus, the question is, what knowledge do we have to pass on to our students?

Brutally, the answer is probably no, we don’t actually have any of today knowledge that we are sure to be relevant 30 years from now. Then, what is our job? What is our role as educators, particularly as teachers? Is teacher a lecturer? Is teacher an instructor? Is teacher a facilitator? Well, if we don't have absolute right knowledge to teach, what can we lecture them about?

In this case, being a facilitator seems to be a little more appropriate for our job description. The key is probably to facilitate the learning for learning. In other words, we should equip our students with foundation for their life as a whole, where learning can continue throughout life in a self-directed manner. “The central task of education is to implant a will and facility for learning; it should produce not learned but learning people,” Ayn Rand. Our job is to facilitate students to develop their motivation in learning as well as their abilities to process the learning.

As mentioned above that the task is to implant the facility for learning, what is it that we have to do to facilitate the learning? Allow students to develop the personal growth, perhaps? Yes, there is the system where we still have to provide information and facts from text books, but do you think we should also leave some room for students to be themselves, express their thoughts and play with it a little bit? Meanwhile, they may have time to look back at themselves, learn about who they are, know what they want, and would eventually learn by themselves that learning is one way to achieve their goal.

As reading this, some people may start to nod their heads as educators around the world are also starting to appreciate the thought of educating the whole child. Not only we have to focus on literacy, we also need to focus on creativity, as Sir Ken Robinson said, "creativity now is as important in education as literacy and we should treat it with the same status." Unfortunately, though many schools and teachers are aware of this fact, the accentuation of creativity is yet not widely practiced. In 1999, a report on the importance of promoting creativity and culture in schools were sent to English government. A year later, a response made by the government, agreeing with the report. Today, "there has certainly been cultural activity in schools but even the strongest champions of creative and cultural education would have to admit that the report - called All Our Futures - has not dominated schools policy" (Baker, 2009). This is just one example of how the idea is already out there but has not been practiced.

Now, a much simpler example. We sure do provide enough time for students to practice on reading, writing, calculating and all those, but do we leave enough space for students to practice their creativity in classrooms? Do we have enough room for them to think and practice their imagination?

I remember an art class I had in kindergarten. The teacher taught me to paint the sun with red, water with blue, and mountains with green. I don’t remember if anyone asked why, but we were told it is what is it. This is the simplest example of how we are taught to be so limited in our imagination. A lot of times, education does not leave room for the learners to see what “it” can be because they were told what it is or what it should be even before they can start thinking about it. I was told the sun is red even before I could think about what color the sun could be. Once information is given by someone you believe to know more, in many cases, you just assume that it is the fact. No more questions needed to be raised, no more thinking needed to be processed because the answer is already there for you.

But even if I really thought the sun was green, do you think I would dare not to paint the sun red? The funny thing is we often hear someone says, "everyone is born creative." Isn't that true? Don't you agree that children are always creative? They always find ways to be so imaginative. Is it possible that because they "know less"? Since children know less, they see less boundaries when it comes to thinking or imagination. We were probably used to be as creative and as imaginative when we were smaller. Somehow, through education, we were put into, as Robinson said, right-or-wrong system and all the capability of being creative just seemed to fade away as we became someone who's afraid of being wrong. "If you are not prepared to be wrong, you will never come up with anything original" (Robinson, 2006). Nonetheless, that is how the education is until these days. We were told what is right and what is wrong. We were told the sun is red and the water is blue. What happens if you do the wrong things, you know that teacher can deduct your points and you would fail. And you if you keep on doing the wrong things, you would keep on failing and failing until you can become a failure. That is scary. It is always scary to be a failure. Then, it becomes a loop of not being able to think freely and be creative because you're afraid to fail. And what will happen to your creativity?

Well, if painting the sun green should make me be a failure, then I would always use red and only red.


..............................................................

By Kalyakorn Naksompop
Written on December 6, 2009
(original article)

*************************************************************