| |
A revolution in science
is quietly underway, one that began a
half-century ago on the far edge of
quantum physics and is gradually
making its presence felt in every area
of human inquiry.
Why begin an essay on teaching and
learning alternatives with this bit of
seemingly unrelated news? Because
scientific paradigms become the lens
through which we view reality. They
shape the structure and function of
all of our social institutions,
including our educational
institutions. This isn’t to say that a
host of political and economic factors
don’t equally influence how schools go
about their business, but allow me for
argument’s sake to sketch an equation
linking the paradigm that has
dominated Western thinking for over
300 years and the educational model
that is so thoroughly entrenched in
the West today. Afterwards, I will
sketch a similar equation linking the
aforementioned revolution and the kind
of education that it implies.
When Isaac Newton demonstrated that he
could quite accurately analyze the
motion of physical objects both on
earth and in the heavens, the idea was
born that the universe is wound up
like a giant watch and that science,
given time, will be able to deduce its
basic operating principles by breaking
everything down into its component
parts. In a Newtonian world, Nature is
predictable, orderly, and docile—and
the objective is to place her under
Man’s dominion.
As is the way of scientific
revolutions, Newton’s model spread
beyond math and physics to become the
template for all of science. Two
hundred years later, the biologist
Charles Darwin applied Newton’s model
to the animate realm and claimed that
the principles of random mutation and
natural selection are a sufficient
explanation for the incredible
diversification of life on earth.
Strongly influenced by Darwin, the
psychologist Edward Thorndike
experimented on caged monkeys and
concluded that learning, both animal
and human, is caused by the “selection
of impulses,” later to be called
“positive and negative reinforcement”
by his successor B.F. Skinner. Today,
Thorndike is recognized as the father
of educational psychology.
Therein lies the scientific basis for
our contemporary carrot and stick
approach to education. Entirely
rational, this approach is steeped in
ideas about order and control. Every
outcome is measured. Nothing is left
to chance. Children are regarded as
machines in need of programming, an
idea epitomized in the May 1998
Newsweek cover story entitled “How to
Build a Better Boy.”
While the Newtonian paradigm has
successfully fueled unfathomable
technological progress, along the way
cutting edge scientists have begun
exploring a new paradigm based on the
inability of Newton’s laws to account
for complex living phenomena such as
human beings. In these “open systems,”
so called because they are constantly
exchanging energy and information with
their environment, growth and
development tend not to occur in a
logical, predictable fashion. Rather,
says Nobel Prize-winning chemist Ilya
Prigogine, here change takes place “on
the edge of chaos.” Adaptation is not
the result of external forces, but
rather is brought about by an internal
process of self-organization.
According to this as yet unnamed
paradigm, life is too complex for
cause and effect explanations.
Newton’s basic building blocks are of
little use because, writes physicist
Fritjof Capra in The Web of Life,
there are no components. What we call
parts are actually patterns in an
inseparable web of relationships.
In a Capran universe, mind and body
are recognized as a single,
co-evolving whole, and children as
self-organizing, self-regulating
beings capable of generating their own
learning and their own order.
Education is therefore contextual, not
analytical. Spontaneity and
open-endedness are valued over
externally imposed structure and
routine. And there is still a place
for myth and mystery.
May we live to see the day when our
dominant educational model sheds its
scaly dragon skin and is reborn as a
dolphin swimming in an ocean of
possibilities.
[click here to
contact Chris] |