Uniwersyteckie Czasopisma NaukoweHolistic education – a model based on three pillars from cognitive science. An example from science education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26881/pwe.2020.49.04Słowa kluczowe:
holistic education, neural networks, dimensions of holistic education – sensibility, functionality, rationalityAbstrakt
In this conceptual article we present a modular model of holistic education. Within this approach, an educational activity (and a child’s learning that derives from it) can be characterized in three dimensions: 1) safety, inclusion and participation; 2) interaction, cognition and representation; and 3) affective action leading to imagination and creativity. A holistic approach nurturing the full cognitive development of a child requires going beyond what a conventional school offers, but still presumes designed but liberating processes. We provide a neurobiological argument for holistic education supported by evidence for the featured three dimensions of holistic education along with illustrative examples.
Downloads
Bibliografia
Aditomo A., Goodyear P., Bliuc A.M., Ellis R.A. (2013), Inquiry-based learning in higher education: principal forms, educational objectives, and disciplinary variations. “Studies in Higher Education”, 38(9).
Ainsworth S. (1999), The functions of multiple representations. “Computers & Education”, 33.
Ainsworth S. (2006), DEFT: A conceptual framework for learning with multiple representations. “Learning and Instruction”, 16(3).
Ainsworth S. (2008). The educational value of multiple representations when learning complex scientific concepts. In: J.K. Gilbert, M. Reiner, M. Nakhlel (eds.), Visualization: Theory and Practice in Science Education. New York, Springer.
Ariely D. (2013), The (Honest) Truth about Dishonesty. London, Harper Collins.
Bailin S. (2002), Critical thinking and science education. “Science & Education”, 11(4).
Błaszak M., Rybska E., Tsivitanidou O., Constantinou C.P. (2019), Botanical Gardens for Productive Interplay between Emotions and Cognition. “Sustainability”, 11(24).
Bressler S.L., Menon V. (2010), Large-scale brain networks in cognition: emerging methods and principles. “Trends in Cognitive Sciences”, 14(6).
Buckner R.L., Andrews-Hanna J.R., Schacter D.L. (2008), The brain’s default network: Anatomy, function, and relevance to disease. “Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences”, 1124.
Bunge S.A., Ochsner K.N., Desmond J.E., Glover G.H., Gabrieli J.D. (2001), Prefrontal regions involved in keeping information in and out of mind. “Brain”, 124(10).
Chen A.C., Oathes D.J., Chang C., Bradley T., Zhou Z.W., Williams L.M., Glover G.H., Deisseroth K., Etkin A. (2013), Causal interactions between fronto-parietal central executive and defaultmode networks in humans. “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences”, 110(49).
Constantinou C.P., Papadouris N. (2012), Teaching and learning about energy in middle school: an argument for an epistemic approach. “Studies in Science Education”, 48(2).
Craig A.D. (2009), How do you feel – now? The anterior insula and human awareness. “Nature Reviews Neuroscience”, 10(1).
Csikszentmihalyi M. (2014), Intrinsic motivation and effective teaching. In: M. Csikszentmihalyi, Applications of Flow in Human Development and Education. The Collected Works of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. Dordrecht, Springer.
Crottaz-Herbette S., Anagnoson R.T., Menon V. (2004), Modality effects in verbal working memory: differential prefrontal and parietal responses to auditory and visual stimuli. “Neuroimage”, 21(1).
Csikszentmihalyi M., Rathunde K. (2014), The development of the person: An experiential perspective on the ontogenesis of psychological complexity. In: M. Csikszentmihalyi, Applications of Flow in Human Development and Education. The Collected Works of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. Dordrecht, Springer.
DeHaan R.L. (2011), Teaching creative science thinking. “Science”, 334(6062).
Dewey J. (1963), Experience and education. New York, Collier.
Diakidoy I.A.N., Constantinou C.P. (2001), Creativity in physics: Response fluency and task specificity. “Creativity Research Journal”, 13.
Elkins J. (2011), Visual practices across the University: A Report. In: O. Grau (ed.), Imagery in the 21st Century. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.
Ellard C. (2015), Places of the Heart. New York, Bellevue Literary Press.
Evagorou M., Erduran S., Mäntylä T. (2015), The role of visual representations in scientific practices: from conceptual understanding and knowledge generation to ‘seeing’ how science works. “International Journal of STEM Education”, 2(1).
Fadel C., Lemke C. (2011), Multimodal Learning Through Media. In: N.M. Seel (ed.), Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning. Springer Science & Business Media.
Gogolla N., Takesian A.E., Feng G., Fagiolini M., Hensch T.K. (2014), Sensory integration in mouse insular cortex reflects GABA circuit maturation. “Neuron”, 83(4).
Goulden N., Khusnulina A., Davis N.J., Bracewell R.M., Bokde A.L., McNulty J.P., Mullins P.G. (2014), The salience network is responsible for switching between the default mode network and the central executive network: replication from DCM. “Neuroimage”, 99.
Hadzigeorgiou Y., Fokialis P., Kabouropoulou M. (2012), Thinking about creativity in science education. “Creative Education”, 3(5).
Haidt J. (2012), The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion. New York, Vintage Books a division of Random House, Inc.
Hubber P., Tytler R., Chittleborough G. (2018), Representation construction: A guided inquiry approach for science education. In: R. Jorgensen, K. Larkin (eds.), STEM Education in the Junior Secondary. Singapore, Springer.
Hutchins E. (2005), Material anchors for conceptual blends. “Journal of Pragmatics”, 37(10).
Jewitt C. (2008), Multimodality and literacy in school classrooms. “Review of Research in Education”, 32(1).
Kirsh D. (2010), Thinking with the Body. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX, Cognitive Science Society.
Kress G., van Leeuwen T. (2001), Multimodal Discourse: The Modes and Media of Contemporary Communication. London, Arnold.
Massaro D., Cohen M.M., Meyer H., Stribling T., Sterling C., Vanderhyden S. (2011), Integration of facial and newly learned visual cues in speech perception. “The American Journal of Psychology”, 124(3).
Menon V. (2015), Salience Network. Brain Mapping: An Encyclopedic Reference. Academic Press, Elsevier.
Menon V., Uddin L.Q. (2010), Saliency, switching, attention and control: a network model of insula function. “Brain Structure and Function”, 214.
Miller R. (2000), An Introduction to Holistic Education. http://www.pathsoflearning.com/library/holistic-educ-intro.cfm, 3.03.2016.
Muller N.G., Knight R.T. (2006), The functional neuroanatomy of working memory: Contributions of human brain lesion studies. “Neuroscience”, 139.
Neubert F.-X., Mars R.B., Thomas A.G., Sallet J., Rushworth M.F.S. (2014), Comparison of human ventral frontal cortex areas for cognitive control and language with areas in monkey frontal cortex. “Neuron”, 81(3).
Papadouris N., Constantinou C.P. (2010), Approaches employed by sixth-graders to compare rival solutions in socio-scientific decision-making tasks. “Learning and Instruction”, 20(3).
Pouw W.T., Van Gog T., Paas F. (2014), An embedded and embodied cognition review of instructional manipulatives. “Educational Psychology Review”, 26(1), 51–72.
Prain V., Tytler R. (2012), Learning through constructing representations in science: A framework of representational construction affordances. “International Journal of Science Education”, 34(17).
Prain V., Tytler R., Peterson S. (2009), Multiple Representation in Learning About Evaporation. “International Journal of Science Education”, 31(6).
Raichle M.E., Snyder A.Z. (2007), A default mode of brain function: a brief history of an evolving idea. “Neuroimage”, 37(4).
Scaife M., Rogers Y. (1996), External cognition: How do graphical representations work? “International Journal of Human-Computer Studies”, 45(2).
Schank R.C., Berman T.R., Macpherson K.A. (1999), Learning by doing. In: C.M. Reigeluth (ed.), Instructional-design Theories and Models. Volume II: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory. Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schmidt J.A., Shernoff D.J., Csikszentmihalyi M. (2014), Individual and situational factors related to the experience of flow in adolescence. In: M. Csikszentmihalyi, Applications of Flow in Human Development and Education. The Collected Works of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. Dordrecht, Springer.
Skocaj D., Leonardis A., Kruijff G.-J.M. (2011), Cross-Modal Learning. In: N.M. Seel (ed.) (2011), Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning. Springer Science & Business Media.
Sridharan D., Levitin D.J., Menon V. (2008), A critical role for the right fronto-insular cortex in switching between central-executive and default-mode networks. “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences”, 105(34).
Sterelny K. (2010), Minds: extended or scaffolded? “Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences”, 9(4).
Tversky B. (2011), Visualizing Thought. “Topics in Cognitive Science”, 3(3).
Tytler R., Prain V. (2013), Representation construction to support conceptual change. In: S. Vosniadou (ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change. New York, Routledge.
Tytler R., Prain V., Hubber P., Waldrip B. (eds.) (2013), Constructing representations to learn in science. Springer Science & Business Media.
Wilson M. (2002), Six views of embodied cognition. “Psychonomic Bulletin & Review”, 9(4).
Zacharia Z.C., Constantinou C.P. (2008), Comparing the influence of physical and virtual manipulatives in the context of the Physics by Inquiry curriculum: The case of undergraduate students’ conceptual understanding of heat and temperature. “American Journal of Physics”, 76(4).
