3rd Global Conference
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Friday 9th February - Sunday 11th February
2007
Sydney, Australia
Conference Programme, Abstracts and Papers
Session 8: Creative Engagement as Creative
Learning
Chair: Lyn Hawkins
Critical Thinking, Creativity and Humorous Texts
Jeni
Mawter
Creative Writer, Lane Cove, New South Wales, Australia
It is essential
that students learn to think in critical and creative ways using imagination,
confidence, emotional and intellectual engagement as an underpinning
for learning across all areas of the curriculum as well as to actively
participate in society. Thinking involves inquiry, posing problems,
acquiring and questioning information, thinking about possibilities,
making decisions and forming judgments, justifying conclusions, reflecting
on and refining ideas, seeing and valuing other perspectives, ethical
reasoning, becoming aware of human existence, imagination and creativity,
innovation and risk-taking. Being able to show and value enterprise
and innovation, and being able to engage and respond to the world is
crucial for human existence.
In order to do this, students must develop
an ability to use language effectively and to critically reflect on
how language works. They must learn that language is used for a range
of social purposes and varies from situation to situation. To become
competent language users and learners, students must develop knowledge
and understanding of different texts and how these are influenced by
context (purpose, audience, channel of communication and content).
Critically thinking about a broad range of spoken, written, graphic,
and performance texts students will learn how language functions and
how texts reflect and shape social attitudes and functions. They will
also learn to perceive how texts position their audience.
Humour requires
us to be flexible in our thinking so that our minds are open to change.
We must think about lots of different opinions and points of view.
We must compare facts with other alternatives, observe and interpret,
use logic and reason to imply, value and judge (or not judge). As well
we have to cope with contradictions, predict what may happen and develop
options. The critical thinking seen in humour means that minds have
to be open to change (based on extra information, opinions, facts or
reasoning) even when faced with conflicting information.
Humorous texts
have various levels of complexity so that as students move through
the curriculum they can explore texts of increasing complexity and
variety (from picture books to novels, plays, film, television programs,
comics, graphics, to conversation). Costa and Kallick (2000, 2001)
recognize that an appreciation of humour is a vital component to finding
solutions using the ‘Habits of
Mind’ approach.
“But that doesn’t follow!”: The
Elusive Inference in the Classroom
Alan
Tapper
Independent scholar, Perth, Australia
Truth is a wonderful thing, but it is only half of
a good argument. Even if the premises are true, the inference must
be a good one. But ordinary linguistic usage lacks a ready set of terms
for talking about inferences. This point is especially relevant in
schools. Both teachers and students, though for different reasons,
are, I suggest, handicapped by lack of a ready and recognised vocabulary
that will help us see and say “But that doesn’t follow!” Teachers
that I have discussed this with have no shared name for the inference
process, nor a shared language for the evaluation of inferences. Yet
often in marking an essay, we need to say that the conclusion doesn’t
follow from the evidence presented. And in ordinary classroom conversation,
such as in communities of inquiry, it is vital to be able to make that
sort of point and to have it recognised.
As teachers, we need ways of
making inferences come alive. This aim can be enhanced by practising
some simple exercises. Choose a premise at random (“Rain has
been forecast for today”). Invent
a conclusion (“The freeway will be clogged”). Now evaluate
the inference, assuming the premise to be true. Is the premise relevant
to the conclusion? If so, is the inference a good one? How good? Strong,
weak or moderate? If we disagree in our evaluations, why do we? What
assumptions are we making? Examples of this sort of exercise can be
invented by teachers ad hoc. Examples can arise in class discussion.
Essay writing workshops can highlight the importance of inference evaluation.
This
is mental muscle-building, but it works only if we have a shared vocabulary
and a shared practice of argument. My purpose in this paper is therefore
to highlight my claim that we lack such a practice, and to think out
loud about a way forward.
The Personalisation of Creative Learning:
A Case Study
Ruth
Hewston
The National Academy for Gifted and Talented Youth, University of Warwick, United
Kingdom
The broad purpose of this research paper is to illustrate
effective pedagogy for creative learning within a whole school context,
and to draw appropriate lessons for policy and practice.
This entirely
case study based paper aims to gain a greater understanding of effective
secondary school performing and visual arts teaching. Previous case
study material demonstrated evidence to support the assumption that
effective pedagogy for talented students is subject-differentiated.
Existing case studies in the field of arts education have shown little
focus on learning. Drawing from models of school effectiveness research,
the research design developed a multi-layer approach to investigating
in depth the interaction of a range of school-wide factors (such as
leadership, school climate, and school policies), with classroom factors
(such as teaching methods, teacher expectations, and classroom organisation),
with individual pupil factors (including self-concept, engagement,
and achievement).
As a basis for the case study, factual information,
most of which was available in the public domain was gathered, including
school location, catchment area, social-origins of pupils, number on
roll, funding, staffing profile, and inspection reports. A further
three data strands, or ‘layers’ were then identified as
the main focus of the study visits: (1) a whole school approach: policy,
ethos and learning environment, (2) meeting the needs of talented creative
arts students: programmes, pedagogy and practice, and (3) pupil perceptions,
performance and progress. Rich, detailed and contextualised case material
was produced, to help theorise about pedagogy and to enable lessons
to be drawn for policy and practice.
