Academic Skill Learning and the Problem of Complexity I: Creational Purposeful Integrated Capability at Skill (CPICS)

M. Gardiner
{"title":"Academic Skill Learning and the Problem of Complexity I: Creational Purposeful Integrated Capability at Skill (CPICS)","authors":"M. Gardiner","doi":"10.22191/nejcs/vol1/iss1/7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Physical and mental skills are intended to achieve success at acting purposefully. As capability at any skill increases, the need to adjust details of application to complexity of context and goals will increase as well. It will become more and more important to prepare mentally for what I now term Creational Purposeful Integrated Capability at Skill (CPICS). This paper develops what I mean by CPICS. Theory concerning Complex Dynamical Systems (CDS) such as the brain and other evidence points to the likelihood that the mental operations by which our brain produces any kind of skillful behavior cannot remain constant, but rather must develop through stages for skill to progress most profitably. Using early stages of math learning as an example, I propose that what can hold back some students at development of a skill is that even if presented with all the information need for progress, some students have not yet discovered how to make the most useful mental restructuring that is also needed. This paper proposes and discusses as an example details of what may be especially useful restructuring for early stages of math skill learning. This example is then taken as helping to identify the more general type of restructuring that is especially useful for addressing complexity of application that produces CPICS at every stage of skill improvement. 1. The Role of Mental Restructuring in Skill Improvement The discussion that follows builds upon earlier work (Gardiner et al, 1996; Gardiner, 2000, 2003, 2008, 2019). By skillful “engagement” (Gardiner, 2008) I refer to the specific brain actions that produce skillful physical behavior (such as at walking) or skillful mental behavior (such as at solving a math problem). William James pointed out more than a century ago (James, 1890, 1896) that to live in a complex world we must simplify our interactions with it. But, to paraphrase Einstein’s famous saying, we must think as simply as possible, but not more simply than possible. 2. Insight from Bicycle Riding, Theory of Complex Dynamical Systems (CDS) and Related Evidence 1 Gardiner: Academic Skill Learning and the Problem of Complexity: I Published by The Open Repository @ Binghamton (The ORB), 2019 Physical skills such as at learning to ride a bicycle illustrate what this paper now discusses in relation to academic learning as well. Once learners understand the bicycle and what they must accomplish, further progress must depend on their somehow developing better ways to use their brains to produce bike riding skillfully. Suggestions and help at training by parents, and training wheels can help, but ultimately qualitative improvement in engagement must take place out of direct control by the learners and outside of their conscious awareness. Capability at riding suddenly jumps from not possible to possible. Once possible the capability may continue to develop. But not until this first step. Development of academic skills such as at math, I now argue, also depends on improvement in brain engagement particular to that skill, though not as visibly initially. Bicycle riders cannot ride at all until they make the qualitative engagement change. The math learner who has not made such change at math thinking can still at first manage to some degree with less adequate engagement, but must work harder mentally to compensate and increasingly all but the strongest can be expected to fall behind. And as with bicycle riding, further engagement changes that further improve capability cannot take place until the first step has been made. Why must the brain apparently change its operations as it builds skill at bicycle riding, or more generally as I now argue? Our brain’s enormous complexity appears to be at the heart of our most advanced capabilities (Chomsky, 1972), and its highly complex operations develop in time and in mental spaces created by the brain, and thus are dynamic. General properties of Complex Dynamical Systems (CDS) such as the brain have been under study since the middle of the 20 century. Current work is exploring implications of this theory to Education (Koopmans, 2014; Koopmans & Stamovlasis, 2016). Here we now examine how this theory and related evidence can help us understand why all skill development, including academic skill development, is likely to involve changes in how the brain engages at a kind of skill: 1) The portion of brain activity devoted to any kind of capability is likely to be isolated to a sufficient degree functionally so that special capability can develop. A complex system must often develop specialized functions (such as at bike riding or math) distinguished from the operations of the system as a whole, through use of subsystems (von Berthalanffy, 1969). The subsystem for a particular skill can be expected to depend on activity not only in one but rather in many parts of the brain. The ways in which different subsystems pull together and manage strategically the resources for different kinds of skill cannot be entirely identical, for the operational goals the subsystems address are not identical, but as discussed in a companion paper and Gardiner (2019), subsystem operations can 2 Northeast Journal of Complex Systems (NEJCS), Vol. 1, No. 1 [2019], Art. 7 https://orb.binghamton.edu/nejcs/vol1/iss1/7 DOI: 10.22191/nejcs/vol1/iss1/7 become strategically similar in ways that can have important implications for skill development. 2) A subsystem may itself involve further division into functionally interacting subsystems. Here we are especially interested in how a subsystem producing a kind of skillful behavior develops engagement capability for execution of skillful actions. 3) It is likely that for skillful behavior to continue to improve, a subsystem producing any kind of skill must change its operations in stages. In living creatures (Maturana, 1970; Maturana & Varela, 1973) operations of brain and other systems must be sufficiently stable at any time for the creature to be able to live (see also Wiener, 1948). On the other hand, the human brain continues to grow and develop its capacities significantly after birth. The need to retain stability but also to improve operations over development supports the value of evidence for staging found in overall mental development (e.g. Piaget, 1985; Dawson and Fischer, 1994). Watzlawick, Weakland and Fish (1974) have distinguished two ways for system performance to improve. By first order change they refer to improvements that take place without basic changes in system configuration. But greater improvement can require second order change, where a subsystem reconfigures itself in some way to achieve a new functional capability. Nicolis and Prigogine (1989) in fact propose that a measure of complexity of a system is its capacity to make reorganizing transformations. The importance of staged development in brain systems as a whole supports the likelihood of such staging also in subsystems devoted to kinds of skill. Chase and Simon (1973) provide evidence of such subsystem changes as skill at chess develops. Developmental changes specific to a kind skill can explain movement of capability for a particular kind from more general features of capability (Ackerman, 2011, Ericsson, 2013; Ericsson et al, 2006). 4) Jumps in Skillful Performance: Evidence that skillful performance can sometimes jump upwards as skill advances (Zeeman, 1976, Stamovlasis, 2016, Sideridis and Stamovlasis, 2016) implies that some change in functional operation has taken place. 5) Integration within Subsystem Development: Systems and subsystems profit from integrated operation, as the actions of a thermostat meant to help control house temperature illustrates. The thermostat affects the house temperature most efficiently through connections that integrate thermostat actions with production of other actions by machines that cool or heat the house. Integration of operation 3 Gardiner: Academic Skill Learning and the Problem of Complexity: I Published by The Open Repository @ Binghamton (The ORB), 2019 with application within a brain subsystem producing skillful behavior can be expected to profit from such integration as well. 6) Capacity for Bifurcation in System or Subsystem Development: As a complex system develops, it can reach positions where its further development can proceed in different ways. “Bifurcation” refers to a position in development where two different paths for further development become possible (Nicolis & Prigogine, 1989). 3. Mental Strategy Addressing Complexity in Purposeful Application of Skillful","PeriodicalId":184569,"journal":{"name":"Northeast Journal of Complex Systems","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Northeast Journal of Complex Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22191/nejcs/vol1/iss1/7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Physical and mental skills are intended to achieve success at acting purposefully. As capability at any skill increases, the need to adjust details of application to complexity of context and goals will increase as well. It will become more and more important to prepare mentally for what I now term Creational Purposeful Integrated Capability at Skill (CPICS). This paper develops what I mean by CPICS. Theory concerning Complex Dynamical Systems (CDS) such as the brain and other evidence points to the likelihood that the mental operations by which our brain produces any kind of skillful behavior cannot remain constant, but rather must develop through stages for skill to progress most profitably. Using early stages of math learning as an example, I propose that what can hold back some students at development of a skill is that even if presented with all the information need for progress, some students have not yet discovered how to make the most useful mental restructuring that is also needed. This paper proposes and discusses as an example details of what may be especially useful restructuring for early stages of math skill learning. This example is then taken as helping to identify the more general type of restructuring that is especially useful for addressing complexity of application that produces CPICS at every stage of skill improvement. 1. The Role of Mental Restructuring in Skill Improvement The discussion that follows builds upon earlier work (Gardiner et al, 1996; Gardiner, 2000, 2003, 2008, 2019). By skillful “engagement” (Gardiner, 2008) I refer to the specific brain actions that produce skillful physical behavior (such as at walking) or skillful mental behavior (such as at solving a math problem). William James pointed out more than a century ago (James, 1890, 1896) that to live in a complex world we must simplify our interactions with it. But, to paraphrase Einstein’s famous saying, we must think as simply as possible, but not more simply than possible. 2. Insight from Bicycle Riding, Theory of Complex Dynamical Systems (CDS) and Related Evidence 1 Gardiner: Academic Skill Learning and the Problem of Complexity: I Published by The Open Repository @ Binghamton (The ORB), 2019 Physical skills such as at learning to ride a bicycle illustrate what this paper now discusses in relation to academic learning as well. Once learners understand the bicycle and what they must accomplish, further progress must depend on their somehow developing better ways to use their brains to produce bike riding skillfully. Suggestions and help at training by parents, and training wheels can help, but ultimately qualitative improvement in engagement must take place out of direct control by the learners and outside of their conscious awareness. Capability at riding suddenly jumps from not possible to possible. Once possible the capability may continue to develop. But not until this first step. Development of academic skills such as at math, I now argue, also depends on improvement in brain engagement particular to that skill, though not as visibly initially. Bicycle riders cannot ride at all until they make the qualitative engagement change. The math learner who has not made such change at math thinking can still at first manage to some degree with less adequate engagement, but must work harder mentally to compensate and increasingly all but the strongest can be expected to fall behind. And as with bicycle riding, further engagement changes that further improve capability cannot take place until the first step has been made. Why must the brain apparently change its operations as it builds skill at bicycle riding, or more generally as I now argue? Our brain’s enormous complexity appears to be at the heart of our most advanced capabilities (Chomsky, 1972), and its highly complex operations develop in time and in mental spaces created by the brain, and thus are dynamic. General properties of Complex Dynamical Systems (CDS) such as the brain have been under study since the middle of the 20 century. Current work is exploring implications of this theory to Education (Koopmans, 2014; Koopmans & Stamovlasis, 2016). Here we now examine how this theory and related evidence can help us understand why all skill development, including academic skill development, is likely to involve changes in how the brain engages at a kind of skill: 1) The portion of brain activity devoted to any kind of capability is likely to be isolated to a sufficient degree functionally so that special capability can develop. A complex system must often develop specialized functions (such as at bike riding or math) distinguished from the operations of the system as a whole, through use of subsystems (von Berthalanffy, 1969). The subsystem for a particular skill can be expected to depend on activity not only in one but rather in many parts of the brain. The ways in which different subsystems pull together and manage strategically the resources for different kinds of skill cannot be entirely identical, for the operational goals the subsystems address are not identical, but as discussed in a companion paper and Gardiner (2019), subsystem operations can 2 Northeast Journal of Complex Systems (NEJCS), Vol. 1, No. 1 [2019], Art. 7 https://orb.binghamton.edu/nejcs/vol1/iss1/7 DOI: 10.22191/nejcs/vol1/iss1/7 become strategically similar in ways that can have important implications for skill development. 2) A subsystem may itself involve further division into functionally interacting subsystems. Here we are especially interested in how a subsystem producing a kind of skillful behavior develops engagement capability for execution of skillful actions. 3) It is likely that for skillful behavior to continue to improve, a subsystem producing any kind of skill must change its operations in stages. In living creatures (Maturana, 1970; Maturana & Varela, 1973) operations of brain and other systems must be sufficiently stable at any time for the creature to be able to live (see also Wiener, 1948). On the other hand, the human brain continues to grow and develop its capacities significantly after birth. The need to retain stability but also to improve operations over development supports the value of evidence for staging found in overall mental development (e.g. Piaget, 1985; Dawson and Fischer, 1994). Watzlawick, Weakland and Fish (1974) have distinguished two ways for system performance to improve. By first order change they refer to improvements that take place without basic changes in system configuration. But greater improvement can require second order change, where a subsystem reconfigures itself in some way to achieve a new functional capability. Nicolis and Prigogine (1989) in fact propose that a measure of complexity of a system is its capacity to make reorganizing transformations. The importance of staged development in brain systems as a whole supports the likelihood of such staging also in subsystems devoted to kinds of skill. Chase and Simon (1973) provide evidence of such subsystem changes as skill at chess develops. Developmental changes specific to a kind skill can explain movement of capability for a particular kind from more general features of capability (Ackerman, 2011, Ericsson, 2013; Ericsson et al, 2006). 4) Jumps in Skillful Performance: Evidence that skillful performance can sometimes jump upwards as skill advances (Zeeman, 1976, Stamovlasis, 2016, Sideridis and Stamovlasis, 2016) implies that some change in functional operation has taken place. 5) Integration within Subsystem Development: Systems and subsystems profit from integrated operation, as the actions of a thermostat meant to help control house temperature illustrates. The thermostat affects the house temperature most efficiently through connections that integrate thermostat actions with production of other actions by machines that cool or heat the house. Integration of operation 3 Gardiner: Academic Skill Learning and the Problem of Complexity: I Published by The Open Repository @ Binghamton (The ORB), 2019 with application within a brain subsystem producing skillful behavior can be expected to profit from such integration as well. 6) Capacity for Bifurcation in System or Subsystem Development: As a complex system develops, it can reach positions where its further development can proceed in different ways. “Bifurcation” refers to a position in development where two different paths for further development become possible (Nicolis & Prigogine, 1989). 3. Mental Strategy Addressing Complexity in Purposeful Application of Skillful
学术技能学习与复杂性问题I:创造性目的技能综合能力(CPICS)
身体和心理技能是为了在有目的的行动中取得成功。随着任何技能能力的提高,根据上下文和目标的复杂性调整应用程序细节的需求也会增加。为我现在所说的创造性、目的性综合技能(CPICS)做好心理准备将变得越来越重要。本文阐述了我所说的CPICS的含义。关于复杂动力系统(CDS)的理论,如大脑和其他证据指出,我们的大脑产生任何一种熟练行为的心理操作不可能保持不变,而是必须经过几个阶段的发展,才能使技能取得最有利的进步。以数学学习的早期阶段为例,我认为阻碍一些学生发展一项技能的原因是,即使提供了进步所需的所有信息,一些学生还没有发现如何进行最有用的心理重组,而这也是必要的。本文提出并讨论了作为一个例子的细节,什么可能特别有用的重组早期阶段的数学技能学习。然后,这个例子可以帮助识别更一般的重构类型,这种类型对于处理在技能改进的每个阶段产生CPICS的应用程序的复杂性特别有用。1. 接下来的讨论建立在早期研究的基础上(Gardiner et al, 1996;加德纳,2000,2003,2008,2019)。通过熟练的“参与”(Gardiner, 2008),我指的是产生熟练的身体行为(如走路)或熟练的心理行为(如解决数学问题)的特定大脑活动。一个多世纪以前,威廉·詹姆斯(William James)就指出,要生活在一个复杂的世界中,我们必须简化与它的互动。但是,套用爱因斯坦的名言,我们必须尽可能简单地思考,但不能过于简单。2. 来自骑自行车的见解,复杂动力系统理论(CDS)和相关证据1加德纳:学术技能学习和复杂性问题:I由宾厄姆顿开放存储库(ORB)发布,2019年学习骑自行车等物理技能也说明了本文现在讨论的与学术学习有关的内容。一旦学习者了解了自行车和他们必须完成的任务,进一步的进步必须取决于他们以某种方式开发更好的方法来使用他们的大脑来熟练地骑自行车。父母的建议和帮助,以及训练轮的帮助,都是有帮助的,但最终在参与度上的质的提高,必须在学习者的直接控制之外,在他们的意识之外进行。骑马的能力突然从不可能变成了可能。一旦有可能,这种能力可能会继续发展。但在迈出第一步之前。我现在认为,数学等学术技能的发展也取决于大脑对该技能的参与程度的提高,尽管最初并不明显。骑自行车的人根本无法骑自行车,除非他们的参与度发生了质的变化。没有在数学思维上做出这种改变的数学学习者,一开始仍然可以在某种程度上做到不那么充分的投入,但必须在精神上更加努力地加以弥补,并且越来越多地,除了最强的人之外,所有人都可能落后。就像骑自行车一样,在迈出第一步之前,无法进行进一步的接触改变,从而进一步提高能力。为什么大脑在培养骑自行车的技能,或者像我现在所说的更普遍的技能时,显然必须改变其运作方式?我们大脑的巨大复杂性似乎是我们最先进能力的核心(乔姆斯基,1972),其高度复杂的操作是在大脑创造的时间和心理空间中发展起来的,因此是动态的。复杂动力系统(CDS)的一般性质,如大脑,自20世纪中期以来一直在研究中。目前的工作是探索这一理论对教育的影响(Koopmans, 2014;Koopmans & Stamovlasis, 2016)。现在,我们来看看这一理论和相关证据是如何帮助我们理解为什么所有的技能发展,包括学术技能的发展,都可能涉及到大脑如何参与一种技能的变化:1)大脑活动中致力于任何一种能力的部分可能在功能上被隔离到足够的程度,这样特殊能力就可以发展。一个复杂的系统必须经常开发专门的功能(比如骑自行车或数学),通过使用子系统来区分整个系统的操作(von Berthalanffy, 1969)。一项特定技能的子系统不仅取决于大脑某一部分的活动,而且取决于大脑多个部分的活动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信