About being hungry, feedback and seeing differently #telic1

Reflection after session 3.

At the end of each #telic1 session we are asked to give a keyword that expresses our feeling. Last Thursday I said ‘hungry’. Not only because I really was hungry :-), but mainly because the word expressed my feeling of wanting answers to the difficult Lave paper. This paper contains a lot, and we all read the paper, reflected on it, created digital artefacts and presented them.

But what do Richard and Guy think of this? What is the essence of this paper we should take with us? Should we try to grasp everything in this paper? Are we on track? Etc.
Feeling in need for feedback…  A feeling I’m expressing in this post, but will also mention that to R & G  in person.

It is a fundamental fact of human nature that we are inquisitive. We want answers! 1

Why is that?

Because having answers creates order in our conscious minds. The scientific quest is to discover the order in the external world of space, time, energy and matter. The spiritual quest is to discover order in our consciousness.2

On feedback.

Feedback is one of the most powerful influences on learning and achievement, but this impact can be either positive or negative. (Hattie, 2007)3 It is essential how I  look towards this experience. I can either push this towards an opportunity to learn, or I can point towards R & G for not giving me feedback.

Not ‘what’ overcomes us, but ‘how’ we look at it makes us feel as we feel.

Secondly, the type of feedback is less important. Nearly any type of feedback can be valuable, only if there is a logical link with the challenge in which my mental energy is invested.4

Two types of feedback brought me back to the optimal experience of flow in the telic Msc programme:

1. I looked differently at the reading assignments. It is not per se about “all” the contents in the papers, but they contain links with the summative assignment of writing a paper: 'Learning always takes place in social contexts but is inevitably an individual achievement'.

2. My fellow-in-critical-reading-three Claire was smart enough to ask for feedback. After having contacted her (thanks Claire) she told me it was better to focus on one aspect in a paper than trying to tackle the whole thing. And relying on our common sense and instincts is more important.

I’m looking forward to reading the next paper this week.

It’s a puzzle, Richard said. Well, let’s start with the corner pieces: instinct and common sense, learning, social, individual achievement.  

1. http://snap.lbl.gov/science/why.php

2. http://www.pkrishna.org/Science-Spirituality.html

3. http://growthmindseteaz.org/files/Power_of_Feedback_JHattie.pdf

4. (freely translated from) Csikszentmihalyi, Optimal Experience of Flow, 1999, p.85

2 responses
You ask great questions and your answers are great too. By great I mean large in scope and significant in meaning. You have established a relationship with your own learning. My relationship is with that relationship. If I have an ideal in my head of that relationship it would be ideal in form. Its characteristics would be authenticity, self-determination and strong positional and relational autonomy. You are expert in yourself.
Thx Richard. Will get back to you more in detail... Having a busy day, and still have classes this evening. Bram