Art criticism is a component of art education that many pre-service teachers are trained to include in their curricula (as I was) so that in addition to learning how to make art students are also taught how to view art, ask questions about art, and arriving at meanings and interpretations about art. There are a number of pedagogical frameworks for teaching students how to analyze and critique a work of art. These frameworks usually include working through a short series of steps, the first of which is typically related to an initial reaction, a looking or description, a “first impression” of sorts. From there, the steps typically progress through stages like interpretation, analysis, judgment, evaluation, etc. The goal of this process is not to arrive at any one right answer, nor to rely on experts’ interpretation (or even the artist’s intention) of the meaning behind the piece. These models for art criticism help build thinking dispositions that remind students there is more information out there that might affect the way they make meaning.
In chapter two, B&B describe Dewey’s conceptualization of the limitations one encounters when constituting knowledge based only on experience, a notion that reminds me of the first stage of art criticism: the initial experience with a work of art. To Dewey, the act of knowing is an experience derived from action plus thinking/deliberation/reflection. That is, experiences without further processing cannot constitute knowledge. This means that knowledge construction requires a deeper exploration or reflection of each experience: its context, its place in space and time, its symbols and cultural constructions, even how or why one reacted the way they did.
There is a philosophical importance in moving beyond one’s initial reactions when encountering not just art but any new experience, object, or person. Else, reality may be constructed on experiences without context, without further exploration, without dialogue, and without the benefit of multiple perspectives. Dewey’s ideas related to knowledge construction are a tad too linear for my taste but I appreciate his insistence that knowledge and understanding are made up of more than what our experiences alone can offer us. This is not to say that personal experiences are without value, they’re at the heart of Dewey’s philosophy, after all. Rather, that to construct ideas about reality and meanings about our world we must move beyond our initial reactions and search for perspectives and contexts that may not be within our realm of experience. Modeling and teaching our students this philosophical approach seems a critical aspect of 21st century education, no matter the student age or subject area. Educational research might focus on teaching practices and pedagogies that effectively build this kind of world view.
This chapter sets up the relationship Dewey sees between experience and knowledge. A particular point that I picked up on was that although experiences are widely varied, and equally valid as they are experienced, action is required to turn experiences into knowledge.
On page 43, Biesta and Burbules outline a salient example in describing the varied experiences of the word horse. How one might experience the existence of “horse” is likely shaped by where one enters the transaction, for example, from the role of jockey, trainer, zoologist or paleontologist. This example validated individual experiences, but furthered the point that “knowledge is intimately and necessarily connected with action, because the discovery of the conditions and consequences of experience “can take place only by modifying the given qualities in such ways that relations become manifest’” (Dewey 1927a, 84). I imagined this may have some bearing in causing us to consider the different roles played in research-- as researcher, teacher, and student and on the overlaps and implications of validity within those experiences.
Chapter 2 has many implications for educational research, but it was especially interesting to consider the way that Biesta and Burbules posit on page 38, based on Dewey’s theory of action, “that is it possible to transform habits into intelligent habits, and action into intelligent action.” Although I found parts of the chapter confusing, I believe in educational research, one might hypothesize possible outcomes based on observations of subjects’ habits, but the ultimate goal is not necessarily just to predict outcomes, but to be able to plot a course through reasonable action.
I think this chapter explains the dualism between hard and soft knowledge. In this case a functional definition of hard knowledge, would be knowledge of the world as "it is" whereas, soft knowledge is how one constructs meaning from events and experiences. One of the ideas that I found most interesting in this chapter was Kant's notion (p. 28) that people will never truly understand the world (or possess hard knowledge) because all of our understandings of what we know are impacted by our senses [and perception]. Because of Kant's idea, I think it is hard to separate or diminish the influence of experience on knowledge. I think this point is made even more clearly when we think about the ways in which Dewey describes a person as being both in and of the world; because an individual is already and always in the world, he/she/ they are always experiencing something and forging connections to make new knowledge. In short, I don't think deliberate action is needed to turn experience into action-- I agree with Dewey's point that knowledge acquisition is not sequential process but a simultaneous system of experiences and events (aka stimuli).
I think chapter 2 prompts a shift from educational research to knowledge/ learning/ meaning-making research. I've always viewed education as information being disseminated in a top-down system whereas knowledge is how a person processes, responds, values and internalizes the information. I think a continued focus on education (in the sense that education is focused mostly on academic content) is a point of contention and gives rises to debates around cultural relevancy and other social/ justice oriented arguments. Dewey's point about the relevance of culture on human experience (p. 29) was particularly salient. To that end, I think researchers should adopt a critical cultural framework through which they examine the influence of culture on education and knowledge acquisition.
In the reading it stated, “Knowing has to do with the relationship between our actions and their consequences. It is because of this that knowledge can help us to get a better control over our actions, at least better than in the case of blind trial and error” (p. 30). This makes me think that in order to know, we must act and experience. We all have our own reality and they are all equal based on our context.
This is furthered expressed when the example of a horse trader and a zoologist is used. “It simply reflects the fact that a horse trader will have a different experience of the horse than a zoologist does because the trader “enters” the transaction from a different standpoint, from a different background, from a different history, and with different purpose and intentions” (p. 43). In my work we often say, “one’s own perspective is their own reality.” You cannot please everyone or assume that a message will get understood in the manner in which you intended. People have their own experiences and use these experiences to mold their reactions, consequences, and knowledge of certain experiences and actions. For example, if a teacher has poor experiences with a particular administrator, whatever that administrator says will be perceived in a more negative manner. Another example is found with the educational acronym PBIS (Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports). Often, teachers view this too “nice” or “fluffy” and results in students taking advantage of the system. Because of this, many teachers resist anything attached to PBIS, even if there are beneficial positive strategies. These teachers have negative experiences, which in turn effects their knowledge and perspective.
This chapter discusses so many things about knowledge I find it difficult to pick out just a few basics elements. The first notion that stood out to me was that fact that Dewey understood and wrote about the influence culture can have on a person’s experiences. While his definition is slightly different than how most of us define culture in the 21st century it is actually included in a philosophy. He found the most important aspect of culture to be language. He defined language as, “everything that has meaning” in a person’s world to include things beyond written or verbal communication. It was interesting to me that he included rituals and ceremonies in his definition of language because I would have placed them into a broader interpretation of culture. This difference has made me question how we departed from considering these things as language. Did people ever consider them as language or just a cultural activity? I thoroughly engaged with the transactional definitions of stimulus and response section. I have never really given much philosophical thought to these two commonplace terms. The notion that one cannot determine the stimulus and a response of a situation until the achievement of an end made me think back to last week’s in-class discussion about answering questions only when you know the purpose of the question.
The quote that really stood out to me from chapter two was, “In knowledge, causes become means and effects becomes consequences, and thereby things have meaning” (1929 a, 236). Biesta and Burbules (2003) clarified Dewey’s statement stating that, “knowledge has to do with inference” (p. 47). With chapter two surrounding the notion that experience builds knowledge, I think Dewey’s ideas about inference are spot on and have many implications for educational research. In particular, I would say, and I think Dewey would agree, that it is our experiences that make us inquirers. Without experience, an individual cannot make educated inquiries.
For educators and researchers, I think it extremely important that there be some level of experience with the classroom in order to construct viable research questions that are worthy of study. Knowing first-hand what goes on in schools and what challenges teachers and school leaders face, I think, is important for educational researchers to be aware of. I believe Dewey would support such a claim citing that such awareness cannot be made by learning second hand. Additionally, his ideas about transaction with the environment (p. 38) further support such a claim. I know not everyone will agree with my claim, but I think until you walk the halls of a schoolhouse and work on the front lines you cannot fully comprehend the challenges educators face on a daily basis. Dewey would claim that in order to acquire that knowledge one would have to “take intelligent action” and go get it.
Knowledge is a process that is cyclical and interdependent on one thing to another, such as knowledge and action, stimulus and response, and impulses and habits. With respect to action, organisms are already in motion. There is no stop and start. The stimulus and response are not ordered but work together. Our interactions with the environment transfers impulses (not instinct) into habits. We are the habit. It is all these things that we experience that leads us to knowledge.
The reality of experience (p. 43). Things are what they are experienced as, such as a crumpled piece of paper being used as a ball. One’s lens dictates their experience, which is why you can have many “reals of experience”. There is no wrong and no one person is right. This is the “different reals of experience.” The discussion of being and knowing further illustrates this point. Being (scared) and knowing (the source of the stress) differ and are both true. They are both real experiences with meanings dictated by the response of the person.
After reading Chapter 2 of Biesta and Burbules, I searched online for some additional readings on Dewey's theory of knowledge. An online course (American Education Reform: History, Policy, Practice) summarized knowledge as a concept of continuous reflective action and experience. We interact with the environment which influences our learning and behaviors. The concepts of experience, action, habits, meaning, symbols and reflection all contribute to our knowledge. I think this truly is understood when we think of experiential learning, knowing that we have to act and do, experience an activity before really understanding how to "do it." Maybe the thought is that we will never really understand "how to do it" because we could have another experience or environmental change that could influence our thinking.
Overall, I think Dewey's concept of knowledge leads to our greater understanding of educational research with the idea that we are all continuous and active learners. Our knowledge consistently changes with the changing environment and experiences that we each endure. We are adapting and changing to environments as well as contributing educational research that will influence our work and the work with our students. As educational researchers we are focusing on the human experiences that impact our work as educators and practitioners to build upon the knowledge that will influence our work.
According to Dewey, things and events get their meaning from the role they play in coordinated human actions, or the “functional use made of them.” One has only to consider the horse example in this week’s reading that many have referenced. He suggests that each understanding is just a “different real,” defined by a specific experience. Last week we discussed Dewey’s bent towards meliorism and in his Middle Works he suggests that we look upon “future possibilities with reference to attaining the better and averting the worse.” In one of our first discussions we saw that one of the crucial elements of scholarly inquiry and student learning is understanding major controversies and identifying growth points of a field. When I think about all these ideas together, and the implications each has on research, I am reminded of my recent personal experience writing a literature review. In my look at a plethora of information, I found that many writers addressed their research question(s) with a conclusive statement but included caveats. Many researchers found that in looking deeply at their issue or subject they . . . opened the door to further research or found that their conclusions begged another question or that it led to a different question [the answer to which might lead to a different conclusion than their own.] I think that Dewey would appreciate such caveats as acknowledgements that research should and will reach conclusions based on information known and explored. These conclusions, however, may be ephemeral. As researchers we should be mindful that our ideas and conclusions may be revised and refined and perhaps rejected by other seekers with “different reals.”
It is widely accepted that as beings mature, their knowledge usually grows which is an ongoing process. The Biesta and Burbules chapter “From Experience to Knowledge” sheds even further light on this notion. Knowledge is described mostly with the verb “knowing.” This implies that knowing is an action through which knowledge has been acquired. This “knowing/knowledge” is gained from experience. As stated in chapter two, “Experience covers a whole range of human possibilities. Dewey referred to these dimensions as modes of experience. Knowing is one mode of experience, but it is only one mode among others” (Biesta & Burbules, 29). “Dewey characterized knowing as the mode of experience that supports action” (Biesta & Burbules, 30). It was continuously mentioned that action must be taken for one to truly “know” the truth or falsity in anything (Biesta & Burbules, 2003). These actions do not have to tangible in that one must suffer the consequences of having taken action on something unknown. They can be simulated in the mind and intelligibly reasoned through based on knowledge gained from prior experiences.
Educational research is aided by this theory of knowledge. Research should be based on experience, action, reflection, reactions, learning from consequences, and much more. The field of education is continuously changing just as knowledge. That is why educators and researchers much be lifelong learners in order to have a positive impact on the field in which we strive to enhance.
Knowledge is the product of transaction (interaction) in a way that encourages action and response. Knowledge is the development of meaning between yourself and the interaction of the environment. I was particularly interested in the notion of the role of thinking and reflection. Both thinking and reflection are critical tool used to process transactions/interactions yet Dewey suggests that is not enough. Dewey suggests that in order to gain knowledge some type of action must take place. This action participates in the process of constructing a cause and effect interaction that results in a specific outcome. Dewey’s position is situated in the development of knowledge through experience. This knowledge is not immediately developed but initiates the process of knowing. Experience provides details of interactions, those interactions give space to process then, it ultimately forms information that one uses to formulate a response. For educational research the moment of action is critical. Knowledge is the outcome of a series of reflections and thinking (our research observations, conducting research, developing critical questions) that result in action specific details that educators could use in practice. When theories are adopted in practice then the teachers are using the newly constructed knowledge as a tool. I am challenged by the idea that not all education research gets to the action phase. Is the knowledge equally as valuable if the action is limited? In the conclusion, the author writes that ultimately we need to view knowing as a process of interactions that lead to action. If not, and we believe knowing is static then knowing is actually not possible. With that, education researchers are responsible for building and developing observations and exploring interactions in order to push knowledge.
According to chapter 2, knowledge comes from thinking and reflection AND action. He wrote that knowledge itself is an action, it's a "reflective transformation of experience" (p. 42). The possibility of mistakes is introduced when we try to create meaning from an experience. The experience itself is true as it is, but the meaning we create from it requires an inference. This applies directly to research as we go out attempting to observe and take note of things happening in the educational system. By attempting to record these actions we take note of and create some sort of meaning from their collection, we introduce the possibility of error and falsity. As Dewey wrote, we have "different reals" because of our differing backgrounds, standpoints, history, purpose, or intention. What we are able to notice, what we choose to record, and the meaning we then make in our research is affected by who we are as researchers. It also means that research is always evolving because it is built on that which came before it and cannot be held up as final. As research in education is about a place and way of learning and gaining knowledge, the hall of mirrors becomes quite confusing as we think about how our view of knowledge affects our research. I was intrigued by the idea of not only how we define knowledge, but also how we define learning, as both of these are pertinent in educational research. learning is not an "acquisition of information about how the world 'out there' really is," (p. 37), but instead about how we acquire a complex set of predispositions that help us act. This is what our research is about and also what our research is attempting to help us do as we continue to make changes to improve our educational system.
The nature of knowledge comes from experience and action. To bridge the gap between experience and knowledge, there needs to be action. While reading this chapter, I took experience as being the “transactions” of human beings and what surrounds them. There are many outside factors that continue to influence experience. Therefore, Dewey describes “modes of experience” that refer to the how humans are “in the world” (page 29). As stated on page 44, Dewey’s thinks about knowledge as being about reflection and action. How does reflecting on previous experiences relate to future actions? In other words, Dewey suggests that to gain more knowledge, there must be experience and action taken. He reflects on learning by reflecting on the cause and effect of the experience and action and what meaning it has.
As educational researchers, we are individuals that have our own have experiences and actions that contribute to our own knowledge. The experiences and actions that shape the knowledge are always changing because of habits, reflections, symbols, and etc. Educational researchers continue to look at how other experiences (outside of our own) relate to our work and how these experiences contribute to the knowledge of our work.
It seems to me that knowledge, as the chapter and Dewey suggest, is a formulation of continual processes over time which eventually produce discrete moments of acknowledgment. These moments act as experiences, and unless toyed with and segregated from the symbol or symbols do not become knowledge. As such, knowledge necessitates an inference of what an experience means or represents from a symbol, and knowledge is created through repeated experiences that separate into distinct knowings. Without the struggles to decipher certain knowledge out of various symbols, a person does not gain knowledge. As such, knowledge is inherently interactive and subject to the course of time, that is, it can be gained and lost when experience is neglected over time. For educational research, I think this suggests that any scientific investigation into academic gains or knowledge progression has to be longitudinal, and perhaps subject to more scrutiny as experience with the research process in itself can change the temporal trajectory of knowledge for students.
Dewey’s pragmatism, based on Biesta and Burbules, discusses knowledge as “intimately and necessarily connected” with action and environment. Therefore in order to “get knowledge” we need action tempered with meaningful reflection. This also comes back to the idea of Social Cognitive Theory or Social Learning Theory. We obtain knowledge through our environment by learning from our actions essentially. The implication of this educational research seems to be related to understanding learning through the environment and through actions or behaviors. Based on this concept, we will need to continue to build on what we know about the social, environmental, and behavioral interaction in new ways. As our environments advance or change we have to continuously think about how it will impact behaviors or how our behaviors have impacted the environment and what can we learn or grow from that.
Dewey's view on knowledge builds in the frame of his naturalistic transnationalism. I think his idea of knowing somehting is interesting, based off experience. Taking this into consideration, I think Dewey would argue that educational researchers should have practiced teaching, as "action" then the knowledge thats learned from this feeds back into "action" which could be research to support policy change? Maybe I'm skewing Dewey's view to fit my own lense?
Dewey's view of knowledge is based on the idea of cause and effect, or actions and their consequences. In the first chapter he mentions that knowledge is based on experiences and this fits right into his theory. We have certain experiences and then we evaluate what worked and what didn't and then change our behavior accordingly. We have the knowledge based on our past experiences, actions and the consequences that impact our behavior. I think Dewey's idea of knowledge is a special education researcher's dream. We are all about trying various interventions and collecting tangible evidence and data on it. This data illustrates the consequences of our actions and therefore we gain knowledge on said interventions.
Knowledge can be viewed as a collective transaction between the subject and the object. From Dewey, the interaction of knowledge is connected to our experiences. It is not an entity that stands on its own, but comes from the action of experience. Knowledge is an inference from our experiences. It depends on the meaning we make from consequences of our actions and experiences. Because inference implies futurity, there is also uncertainty and risk. So, there is a need to find "control" by associating objects with meanings. For educational research, this understanding implies that we should analyze our current knowledge base and the meanings associated with it. It makes me think of semiotics and interpreting signs (symbols of things). From semiotics, learning occurs from the constant cycle of meaning-making that we do. So, it's like an ongoing process of converting experiences into our knowledge base. I think educational research and education in general should consider more critical approaches to understand knowledge construction and validation practices. There are many ways to form knowledge and many ways that people validate the knowledge. Often knowledge practices are only valued from the dominant group in a society. But, diverse knowledge construction and validation practices should be acknowledged as we teach and conduct research with people of diverse backgrounds.
Art criticism is a component of art education that many pre-service teachers are trained to include in their curricula (as I was) so that in addition to learning how to make art students are also taught how to view art, ask questions about art, and arriving at meanings and interpretations about art. There are a number of pedagogical frameworks for teaching students how to analyze and critique a work of art. These frameworks usually include working through a short series of steps, the first of which is typically related to an initial reaction, a looking or description, a “first impression” of sorts. From there, the steps typically progress through stages like interpretation, analysis, judgment, evaluation, etc. The goal of this process is not to arrive at any one right answer, nor to rely on experts’ interpretation (or even the artist’s intention) of the meaning behind the piece. These models for art criticism help build thinking dispositions that remind students there is more information out there that might affect the way they make meaning.
ReplyDeleteIn chapter two, B&B describe Dewey’s conceptualization of the limitations one encounters when constituting knowledge based only on experience, a notion that reminds me of the first stage of art criticism: the initial experience with a work of art. To Dewey, the act of knowing is an experience derived from action plus thinking/deliberation/reflection. That is, experiences without further processing cannot constitute knowledge. This means that knowledge construction requires a deeper exploration or reflection of each experience: its context, its place in space and time, its symbols and cultural constructions, even how or why one reacted the way they did.
There is a philosophical importance in moving beyond one’s initial reactions when encountering not just art but any new experience, object, or person. Else, reality may be constructed on experiences without context, without further exploration, without dialogue, and without the benefit of multiple perspectives. Dewey’s ideas related to knowledge construction are a tad too linear for my taste but I appreciate his insistence that knowledge and understanding are made up of more than what our experiences alone can offer us. This is not to say that personal experiences are without value, they’re at the heart of Dewey’s philosophy, after all. Rather, that to construct ideas about reality and meanings about our world we must move beyond our initial reactions and search for perspectives and contexts that may not be within our realm of experience. Modeling and teaching our students this philosophical approach seems a critical aspect of 21st century education, no matter the student age or subject area. Educational research might focus on teaching practices and pedagogies that effectively build this kind of world view.
ReplyDeleteThis chapter sets up the relationship Dewey sees between experience and knowledge. A particular point that I picked up on was that although experiences are widely varied, and equally valid as they are experienced, action is required to turn experiences into knowledge.
On page 43, Biesta and Burbules outline a salient example in describing the varied experiences of the word horse. How one might experience the existence of “horse” is likely shaped by where one enters the transaction, for example, from the role of jockey, trainer, zoologist or paleontologist. This example validated individual experiences, but furthered the point that “knowledge is intimately and necessarily connected with action, because the discovery of the conditions and consequences of experience “can take place only by modifying the given qualities in such ways that relations become manifest’” (Dewey 1927a, 84). I imagined this may have some bearing in causing us to consider the different roles played in research-- as researcher, teacher, and student and on the overlaps and implications of validity within those experiences.
Chapter 2 has many implications for educational research, but it was especially interesting to consider the way that Biesta and Burbules posit on page 38, based on Dewey’s theory of action, “that is it possible to transform habits into intelligent habits, and action into intelligent action.” Although I found parts of the chapter confusing, I believe in educational research, one might hypothesize possible outcomes based on observations of subjects’ habits, but the ultimate goal is not necessarily just to predict outcomes, but to be able to plot a course through reasonable action.
I think this chapter explains the dualism between hard and soft knowledge. In this case a functional definition of hard knowledge, would be knowledge of the world as "it is" whereas, soft knowledge is how one constructs meaning from events and experiences. One of the ideas that I found most interesting in this chapter was Kant's notion (p. 28) that people will never truly understand the world (or possess hard knowledge) because all of our understandings of what we know are impacted by our senses [and perception]. Because of Kant's idea, I think it is hard to separate or diminish the influence of experience on knowledge. I think this point is made even more clearly when we think about the ways in which Dewey describes a person as being both in and of the world; because an individual is already and always in the world, he/she/ they are always experiencing something and forging connections to make new knowledge. In short, I don't think deliberate action is needed to turn experience into action-- I agree with Dewey's point that knowledge acquisition is not sequential process but a simultaneous system of experiences and events (aka stimuli).
ReplyDeleteI think chapter 2 prompts a shift from educational research to knowledge/ learning/ meaning-making research. I've always viewed education as information being disseminated in a top-down system whereas knowledge is how a person processes, responds, values and internalizes the information. I think a continued focus on education (in the sense that education is focused mostly on academic content) is a point of contention and gives rises to debates around cultural relevancy and other social/ justice oriented arguments. Dewey's point about the relevance of culture on human experience (p. 29) was particularly salient. To that end, I think researchers should adopt a critical cultural framework through which they examine the influence of culture on education and knowledge acquisition.
In the reading it stated, “Knowing has to do with the relationship between our actions and their consequences. It is because of this that knowledge can help us to get a better control over our actions, at least better than in the case of blind trial and error” (p. 30). This makes me think that in order to know, we must act and experience. We all have our own reality and they are all equal based on our context.
ReplyDeleteThis is furthered expressed when the example of a horse trader and a zoologist is used. “It simply reflects the fact that a horse trader will have a different experience of the horse than a zoologist does because the trader “enters” the transaction from a different standpoint, from a different background, from a different history, and with different purpose and intentions” (p. 43). In my work we often say, “one’s own perspective is their own reality.” You cannot please everyone or assume that a message will get understood in the manner in which you intended. People have their own experiences and use these experiences to mold their reactions, consequences, and knowledge of certain experiences and actions. For example, if a teacher has poor experiences with a particular administrator, whatever that administrator says will be perceived in a more negative manner. Another example is found with the educational acronym PBIS (Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports). Often, teachers view this too “nice” or “fluffy” and results in students taking advantage of the system. Because of this, many teachers resist anything attached to PBIS, even if there are beneficial positive strategies. These teachers have negative experiences, which in turn effects their knowledge and perspective.
This chapter discusses so many things about knowledge I find it difficult to pick out just a few basics elements. The first notion that stood out to me was that fact that Dewey understood and wrote about the influence culture can have on a person’s experiences. While his definition is slightly different than how most of us define culture in the 21st century it is actually included in a philosophy. He found the most important aspect of culture to be language. He defined language as, “everything that has meaning” in a person’s world to include things beyond written or verbal communication. It was interesting to me that he included rituals and ceremonies in his definition of language because I would have placed them into a broader interpretation of culture. This difference has made me question how we departed from considering these things as language. Did people ever consider them as language or just a cultural activity? I thoroughly engaged with the transactional definitions of stimulus and response section. I have never really given much philosophical thought to these two commonplace terms. The notion that one cannot determine the stimulus and a response of a situation until the achievement of an end made me think back to last week’s in-class discussion about answering questions only when you know the purpose of the question.
ReplyDeleteThe quote that really stood out to me from chapter two was, “In knowledge, causes become means and effects becomes consequences, and thereby things have meaning” (1929 a, 236). Biesta and Burbules (2003) clarified Dewey’s statement stating that, “knowledge has to do with inference” (p. 47). With chapter two surrounding the notion that experience builds knowledge, I think Dewey’s ideas about inference are spot on and have many implications for educational research. In particular, I would say, and I think Dewey would agree, that it is our experiences that make us inquirers. Without experience, an individual cannot make educated inquiries.
ReplyDeleteFor educators and researchers, I think it extremely important that there be some level of experience with the classroom in order to construct viable research questions that are worthy of study. Knowing first-hand what goes on in schools and what challenges teachers and school leaders face, I think, is important for educational researchers to be aware of. I believe Dewey would support such a claim citing that such awareness cannot be made by learning second hand. Additionally, his ideas about transaction with the environment (p. 38) further support such a claim. I know not everyone will agree with my claim, but I think until you walk the halls of a schoolhouse and work on the front lines you cannot fully comprehend the challenges educators face on a daily basis. Dewey would claim that in order to acquire that knowledge one would have to “take intelligent action” and go get it.
Knowledge is a process that is cyclical and interdependent on one thing to another, such as knowledge and action, stimulus and response, and impulses and habits. With respect to action, organisms are already in motion. There is no stop and start. The stimulus and response are not ordered but work together. Our interactions with the environment transfers impulses (not instinct) into habits. We are the habit. It is all these things that we experience that leads us to knowledge.
ReplyDeleteThe reality of experience (p. 43). Things are what they are experienced as, such as a crumpled piece of paper being used as a ball. One’s lens dictates their experience, which is why you can have many “reals of experience”. There is no wrong and no one person is right. This is the “different reals of experience.” The discussion of being and knowing further illustrates this point. Being (scared) and knowing (the source of the stress) differ and are both true. They are both real experiences with meanings dictated by the response of the person.
After reading Chapter 2 of Biesta and Burbules, I searched online for some additional readings on Dewey's theory of knowledge. An online course (American Education Reform: History, Policy, Practice) summarized knowledge as a concept of continuous reflective action and experience. We interact with the environment which influences our learning and behaviors. The concepts of experience, action, habits, meaning, symbols and reflection all contribute to our knowledge. I think this truly is understood when we think of experiential learning, knowing that we have to act and do, experience an activity before really understanding how to "do it." Maybe the thought is that we will never really understand "how to do it" because we could have another experience or environmental change that could influence our thinking.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I think Dewey's concept of knowledge leads to our greater understanding of educational research with the idea that we are all continuous and active learners. Our knowledge consistently changes with the changing environment and experiences that we each endure. We are adapting and changing to environments as well as contributing educational research that will influence our work and the work with our students. As educational researchers we are focusing on the human experiences that impact our work as educators and practitioners to build upon the knowledge that will influence our work.
According to Dewey, things and events get their meaning from the role they play in coordinated human actions, or the “functional use made of them.” One has only to consider the horse example in this week’s reading that many have referenced. He suggests that each understanding is just a “different real,” defined by a specific experience. Last week we discussed Dewey’s bent towards meliorism and in his Middle Works he suggests that we look upon “future possibilities with reference to attaining the better and averting the worse.” In one of our first discussions we saw that one of the crucial elements of scholarly inquiry and student learning is understanding major controversies and identifying growth points of a field.
ReplyDeleteWhen I think about all these ideas together, and the implications each has on research, I am reminded of my recent personal experience writing a literature review. In my look at a plethora of information, I found that many writers addressed their research question(s) with a conclusive statement but included caveats. Many researchers found that in looking deeply at their issue or subject they . . . opened the door to further research or found that their conclusions begged another question or that it led to a different question [the answer to which might lead to a different conclusion than their own.] I think that Dewey would appreciate such caveats as acknowledgements that research should and will reach conclusions based on information known and explored. These conclusions, however, may be ephemeral. As researchers we should be mindful that our ideas and conclusions may be revised and refined and perhaps rejected by other seekers with “different reals.”
It is widely accepted that as beings mature, their knowledge usually grows which is an ongoing process. The Biesta and Burbules chapter “From Experience to Knowledge” sheds even further light on this notion. Knowledge is described mostly with the verb “knowing.” This implies that knowing is an action through which knowledge has been acquired. This “knowing/knowledge” is gained from experience. As stated in chapter two, “Experience covers a whole range of human possibilities. Dewey referred to these dimensions as modes of experience. Knowing is one mode of experience, but it is only one mode among others” (Biesta & Burbules, 29). “Dewey characterized knowing as the mode of experience that supports action” (Biesta & Burbules, 30). It was continuously mentioned that action must be taken for one to truly “know” the truth or falsity in anything (Biesta & Burbules, 2003). These actions do not have to tangible in that one must suffer the consequences of having taken action on something unknown. They can be simulated in the mind and intelligibly reasoned through based on knowledge gained from prior experiences.
ReplyDeleteEducational research is aided by this theory of knowledge. Research should be based on experience, action, reflection, reactions, learning from consequences, and much more. The field of education is continuously changing just as knowledge. That is why educators and researchers much be lifelong learners in order to have a positive impact on the field in which we strive to enhance.
Knowledge is the product of transaction (interaction) in a way that encourages action and response. Knowledge is the development of meaning between yourself and the interaction of the environment. I was particularly interested in the notion of the role of thinking and reflection. Both thinking and reflection are critical tool used to process transactions/interactions yet Dewey suggests that is not enough. Dewey suggests that in order to gain knowledge some type of action must take place. This action participates in the process of constructing a cause and effect interaction that results in a specific outcome.
ReplyDeleteDewey’s position is situated in the development of knowledge through experience. This knowledge is not immediately developed but initiates the process of knowing. Experience provides details of interactions, those interactions give space to process then, it ultimately forms information that one uses to formulate a response. For educational research the moment of action is critical. Knowledge is the outcome of a series of reflections and thinking (our research observations, conducting research, developing critical questions) that result in action specific details that educators could use in practice. When theories are adopted in practice then the teachers are using the newly constructed knowledge as a tool. I am challenged by the idea that not all education research gets to the action phase. Is the knowledge equally as valuable if the action is limited? In the conclusion, the author writes that ultimately we need to view knowing as a process of interactions that lead to action. If not, and we believe knowing is static then knowing is actually not possible. With that, education researchers are responsible for building and developing observations and exploring interactions in order to push knowledge.
According to chapter 2, knowledge comes from thinking and reflection AND action. He wrote that knowledge itself is an action, it's a "reflective transformation of experience" (p. 42). The possibility of mistakes is introduced when we try to create meaning from an experience. The experience itself is true as it is, but the meaning we create from it requires an inference. This applies directly to research as we go out attempting to observe and take note of things happening in the educational system. By attempting to record these actions we take note of and create some sort of meaning from their collection, we introduce the possibility of error and falsity. As Dewey wrote, we have "different reals" because of our differing backgrounds, standpoints, history, purpose, or intention. What we are able to notice, what we choose to record, and the meaning we then make in our research is affected by who we are as researchers. It also means that research is always evolving because it is built on that which came before it and cannot be held up as final.
ReplyDeleteAs research in education is about a place and way of learning and gaining knowledge, the hall of mirrors becomes quite confusing as we think about how our view of knowledge affects our research. I was intrigued by the idea of not only how we define knowledge, but also how we define learning, as both of these are pertinent in educational research. learning is not an "acquisition of information about how the world 'out there' really is," (p. 37), but instead about how we acquire a complex set of predispositions that help us act. This is what our research is about and also what our research is attempting to help us do as we continue to make changes to improve our educational system.
The nature of knowledge comes from experience and action. To bridge the gap between experience and knowledge, there needs to be action. While reading this chapter, I took experience as being the “transactions” of human beings and what surrounds them. There are many outside factors that continue to influence experience. Therefore, Dewey describes “modes of experience” that refer to the how humans are “in the world” (page 29). As stated on page 44, Dewey’s thinks about knowledge as being about reflection and action. How does reflecting on previous experiences relate to future actions? In other words, Dewey suggests that to gain more knowledge, there must be experience and action taken. He reflects on learning by reflecting on the cause and effect of the experience and action and what meaning it has.
ReplyDeleteAs educational researchers, we are individuals that have our own have experiences and actions that contribute to our own knowledge. The experiences and actions that shape the knowledge are always changing because of habits, reflections, symbols, and etc. Educational researchers continue to look at how other experiences (outside of our own) relate to our work and how these experiences contribute to the knowledge of our work.
It seems to me that knowledge, as the chapter and Dewey suggest, is a formulation of continual processes over time which eventually produce discrete moments of acknowledgment. These moments act as experiences, and unless toyed with and segregated from the symbol or symbols do not become knowledge. As such, knowledge necessitates an inference of what an experience means or represents from a symbol, and knowledge is created through repeated experiences that separate into distinct knowings. Without the struggles to decipher certain knowledge out of various symbols, a person does not gain knowledge. As such, knowledge is inherently interactive and subject to the course of time, that is, it can be gained and lost when experience is neglected over time. For educational research, I think this suggests that any scientific investigation into academic gains or knowledge progression has to be longitudinal, and perhaps subject to more scrutiny as experience with the research process in itself can change the temporal trajectory of knowledge for students.
ReplyDeleteDewey’s pragmatism, based on Biesta and Burbules, discusses knowledge as “intimately and necessarily connected” with action and environment. Therefore in order to “get knowledge” we need action tempered with meaningful reflection. This also comes back to the idea of Social Cognitive Theory or Social Learning Theory. We obtain knowledge through our environment by learning from our actions essentially. The implication of this educational research seems to be related to understanding learning through the environment and through actions or behaviors. Based on this concept, we will need to continue to build on what we know about the social, environmental, and behavioral interaction in new ways. As our environments advance or change we have to continuously think about how it will impact behaviors or how our behaviors have impacted the environment and what can we learn or grow from that.
ReplyDeleteDewey's view on knowledge builds in the frame of his naturalistic transnationalism.
ReplyDeleteI think his idea of knowing somehting is interesting, based off experience. Taking this into consideration, I think Dewey would argue that educational researchers should have practiced teaching, as "action" then the knowledge thats learned from this feeds back into "action" which could be research to support policy change?
Maybe I'm skewing Dewey's view to fit my own lense?
Dewey's view of knowledge is based on the idea of cause and effect, or actions and their consequences. In the first chapter he mentions that knowledge is based on experiences and this fits right into his theory. We have certain experiences and then we evaluate what worked and what didn't and then change our behavior accordingly. We have the knowledge based on our past experiences, actions and the consequences that impact our behavior. I think Dewey's idea of knowledge is a special education researcher's dream. We are all about trying various interventions and collecting tangible evidence and data on it. This data illustrates the consequences of our actions and therefore we gain knowledge on said interventions.
ReplyDeleteKnowledge can be viewed as a collective transaction between the subject and the object. From Dewey, the interaction of knowledge is connected to our experiences. It is not an entity that stands on its own, but comes from the action of experience. Knowledge is an inference from our experiences. It depends on the meaning we make from consequences of our actions and experiences. Because inference implies futurity, there is also uncertainty and risk. So, there is a need to find "control" by associating objects with meanings. For educational research, this understanding implies that we should analyze our current knowledge base and the meanings associated with it. It makes me think of semiotics and interpreting signs (symbols of things). From semiotics, learning occurs from the constant cycle of meaning-making that we do. So, it's like an ongoing process of converting experiences into our knowledge base. I think educational research and education in general should consider more critical approaches to understand knowledge construction and validation practices. There are many ways to form knowledge and many ways that people validate the knowledge. Often knowledge practices are only valued from the dominant group in a society. But, diverse knowledge construction and validation practices should be acknowledged as we teach and conduct research with people of diverse backgrounds.
ReplyDelete