CE research

A konduktiv pedagogia tudomanyos vizsgalatara keszulve, osszeszedve gondolataimat, el kellett dontenem, hogy mibe is kezdjek. Nehany dolog a kezdetektol fogva vilagosan, komoly teret nyerve elmemben, eloretolakodva arra "kenyszeritett", hogy ne hagyjam ki oket, vagy bele se fogjak "holmi" kutatasba. Megis, szamtalan dolog befolyasolja ilyen helyzetekben dontesunket. A tajekozottsag, olvasottsag jol jon(ne) ilyenkor, de azzal kerulunk legkevesbe kozelsegbe, amit nem ismerunk:), tehat sokszor tenyleg a tanulasban es kutatasban is a szerencse legalabb akkora szerepet jatszik - meglatasom szerint- mint barmely biologiai jellegu kiserleti kutatasban. Azzal tobbe, kevesbe tisztaban vagyok, hogy amiota a konduktiv pedagogia rendszerevel talalkoztam (1991), egyre tagulo holisztikus felfogasban elek. Azzal viszont kevesbe szembesultem, hogy masok egeszen tavol lehetnek ettol a nezoponttol. Egyszeru megfogalmazasban barki lehet holisztikus, ellentetben a professzionalis valosaggal: kevesen akadnak, akik tokelyre kepesek ezt a napi viszonylatra is munkassagukban 'redukalni'. Minden, mindennel osszefuggesben all. Igen. Ezt azonban nagyon nehez a dolgok melyere hatolva, a dolgok osszesegere alkalmazni a hetkoznapi valosagban. A komplexitast meg lehet ismerni, akademikusan tanulni, megis; semmi egyeb nem vezet a totalis megerteshez jobban, mint a tapasztalati praxison keresztuli megismeres. Ennek a nezetnek es eletfelfogasnak kialakulasahoz jelentosen jarult hozza a Peto Intezeti kepzesem, az akkori kepzesi modell ( elmelet es praxis egyensulya szamomra), valamint akkori eletformam: szaktanari tanitas a Mozgasserukltek Allami Intezeteben, sok es mindenfele onszorgalombol vegzett gyakorlat a Peto Intezet szamtalan csoportjaban + termeszetesen a kotelezo kepzesi gyaklorlatok es tanorak. Itt mindefelekeppen megjegyzendo nehany kollega emberfeletti, vagy inkabb abszolut sallangmentes, nyiltszivu emberi szolgalata; a tudas feltekenyseg nelkuli, emberbarati atszarmaztatasa. Ha neveket kezdenek el sorolni, akkor ez az oldal mara nem fejezodne be, s ha valakit veletlenul kihagynek a sorbol, akkor nagyon nehezen esedezhetnek bocsanatert. Tobben ugy lenditettek at valoszinutlen, nem aposztrofalt krizis, vagy tanulohelyzeteken, hogy eszre sem vettek (vehettek) dialogusuk nagyszeruseget. Megis engedtessek meg kulonos tekintettel arra nezve, hogy nelkuluk aligha valhattam volna konduktorra, hogy Makkai Erzsebet es Horvath Jantje nevet es faradhatatlan munkassagukat emlithessem az elsok kozott...

A holisztikus, komplex eletfelfogas, a kulonbozo elethelyzetek ismerete, iskolak, rehabilitacios intezetek mindennapi praxisa, nehany elottem es ismeretemben vegzett kutatas es azok eredmenyei, ugymond predesztinaltak arra, hogy valasszak. Ez szamomra fekete-feher uggye nott. Valasszak kutatas egy uj iranyban, vagy nem kuatas kozott... folyt. kov.

I met with this just recently

Sorry, I have never found who wrote this bit but I felt to share it because I feel it is so truth.

“…when Freire talked of love, he suggested it was an energy that extended to a love for all humanity, an energy that fuelled the determination to sustain action for social justice: ‘Love is an act of courage, not fear …a commitment to others …[and] to the cause of liberation’ (1972:78). His belief was that the process of dialogue, so central to the transformative project, could not exist ‘in the absence of a profound love for the world and for people’ (1993:70).”

We need our risks

They want us to avoid risks, however, WE NEED our risks at CE: because this is the only way to learn orthofunction...

Ethical Implications

I am dealing with an ethical application form recently and some thoughts have grown in my mind.

Although there is a strong tendency to focus on doing no harm to CE participants, the long term consequences are not always easy to calculate. Summer (2006) writes of the rights to privacy, informed consent and confidentiality in social research as being some of the most difficult assurances to give to any participant. Conductive Education is particularly one of those development ideas which might cause some (if not more) harm. Ethical dilemmas are endemic in all methods, and we must show as CE professionals some concerns, too. Of course, numerous guidelines have been published and are available for professionals. However, guidelines are just that: they are not obligatory and are difficult to police, bearing in mind that they are open to individual interpretation and application. CE is a complex development system and it meets complex possibilities of causing harms.

Though, it is luck that ethical values themselves are not absolutes, and one can understand the problems of translating abstract and disputable principles into a set of practical and relevant guidelines to suit a variety of settings. It could be argued if we should ethical implication at all. I am afraid, however, we must. In conjunction with participants, parents, colleagues, make some moral judgements about the balance between the benefits of CE and the rights of others.

SCIFI

My father is 71. He was a history, literature teacher before he retired. He loves and closer to the classical literature than the modern but he used to enjoy to read Istvan Nemere's ideas of scifi. He came up with the idea this morning to relax CE community that the missing Airbus probably was taken by aliens to make a great bridge between our and their civilization. Since there is no evidence of a crashed plain anywhere and there were a wide range of great different professionals on the plane it seems to be a good reason to think the above mentioned thought.
I know this is like a befuddled idea but it depicts how many ways of hope is available. If he was right than our missing colleague has a huge job.

A margora irva...

Ugyan tenyleg teljesen komolyan gondolom, hogy blog oldalam elsosorban, es csakis a kondukciorol szoljon es hogy szemelyes erzeseimet, velemenyemet, stb. felreteve tenyleg csak a szakmaval foglalkozzon, ma megis arra vetemedek, hogy eloszor is magyarul, masodszor, inkabb valojaban rolam, pontosabban erzeseimrol irjak - persze kondukltiv pedagogiat illetoen.

Hadd kezdjem azzal, hogy a blogom irasanak kezdete ota sokkal kevesebbet irok le barmelyik temaban, mint amit arrol gondolok az angol nyelvu megnyilatkozas miatt.

Hatalmas dilemma.

Azert kenyszerultem arra az elhatarozasra, hogy angol nyelven irjak, kifejtsem gondolataimat a konduktiv pedagogiat illetoen, mert ezt mas nem tette meg elottem, s ugy gondoltam, hogy legalabb egy magyar szarmazasu konduktor blogironak lennie kell. Ez persze egy ido utan jelentos konfliktusba torkollhat. Sajat konfliktusomba, mondhatnam frusztraciomba. No, azert nincs krizis, de megis mellyebben gondolkodtam el a dolgon Szatmary Judit visszalepese es kolleganonk tragikus repulobalesete utan bejegyzett irasok utan. Az angol nyelvtudas - mint tanult kepesseg, amelynek szitjet a szuletett nyelvi keszsegunk, a nyelvhasznalat szintere es egyaltalan lehetosege, es persze sok minden mas is befolyasol - erosen behatarolja megnyilatkozasaim melyseget es terjedelmet is egyben. Befolyasolja minden leirt szavam. Az angol nyelven valo megnyilatkozas nehezsegerol, irodalmiassagarol, visszasagarol tobb kivallo magyar anyanyelvu kolto, iro is megnyilatkozott mar, amit tehat nem kell reszletezzek, amely 'nehezsegek' ram eppugy vonatkoznak, mint barki masra.

Vegtelenul szuknek erzem nyelvi es az idobeli korlataimat. Gondolatban szamtalan bejegyzesre referalok, amelyre irasban alig- alig kerul sor.

Dilemmat legyozve ma inkabb magyarul - mert sokkal gyorsabb es a szavak tiszta utjan melyebb ertelmet kolcsonoz gondolataimnak.

Susie Mallett es Andrew Sutton is irtak a "konduktiv csalad"szervezetten kevesbe tettenerheto, de nagyon is jol kitapinthato letezeserol, Szarvas Rita szomoru es tragikus elvesztese okan. Mennyire vagyunk mi egy "csalad"? Leszamitva azt a tenyt, hogy a szamossagot illetoen valoban kis kozossegrol van szo, rendelkezunk-e a csaladokat jellemzo tulajdonsagokkal, vonasokkal? Mennyire respektaljuk valojaban egymast es a szakmat magat? Mennyire tudjuk humanumunkat megtartani egymas kozott? Tudjuk e tisztelni hallgatoinkat, diakjainkat, clienseinket? Es viszont ok kepesek e emberileg megbirkozni a mi altalunk teremtett helyzetekkel? Milyen a kapcsolatunk kollegainkkal a hetkoznapokban? Milyen a generaciok egymas mellett munkalkodasa? Nem folytatom. Attol tartok, onmagunkba kell neznunk nehany esetben.

Szatmary Judit blogjanak bezarasat ennek a csaladnak latszolagos erdektelensege okazta. Mennyire vagyunk erdektelenek? Ha arra gondolok, hogy szamtalan kollegamrol tudom, hogy hanyfele es szerteagazo iranyokban tanultak tovabb, vagy tanulnak most is tovabb, akkor ez a teny azt jelzi, hogy erdeklodoek vagyunk. Ha azt is vizsgalnank persze, hogy mennyire szakmai iranyu ez az aktivitas, akkor lehet, hogy meglepo eredmenyt kapnank. Arra gondolok, hogy sokan talan eppen kiutat keresik a tovabbtanulas jovoltabol, hogy aztan profilt valtva mas teruleteken dolgozhassanak. A konduktiv pedagogiaban aktivan letoltott 5-10-15 ev utan valoban tobben valasztanak uj, mas, vagy kapcsolodo szakmakat.

Az uj generacio es a maradok viszont szazalekaranyban latszolag nem aktivak a szakmai erdeklodes tekinteteben. Azert irom, hogy latszolag, mert bizonyos egyaltalan nem lehetek abban , hogy en megfeleloen latok bele innen Angliabol. Mindesetre itt a neten a kommenteket figyelemmel kiserve, szinte alig van hozzaszolo. Cafoljanak, cafoljatok ra!

Bloom's Taxonomy

The Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, often called Bloom's Taxonomy, is a classification of the different objectives that educators set for students. The taxonomy was proposed in 1956 by Benjamin Bloom, an educational psychologist at the University of Chicago. Bloom's Taxonomy divides educational objectives into three "domains:" Affective, Psychomotor, and Cognitive. Like other taxonomies, Bloom's is hierarchical; meaning that learning at higher level is dependent on having attained prerequisite knowledge and skills at lower levels (Orlich, et al. 2004). A goal of Bloom's Taxonomy is to motivate educators to focus on all three domains, creating a more holistic form of education. Most references to the Bloom's Taxonomy only notice the Cognitive domain. There is also a so far less referred, revised version of the Taxonomy, published in 2001 under the name of "A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing."

"Taxonomy” simply means “classification”, so the well-known taxonomy of learning objectives is an attempt (within the behavioural paradigm) to classify forms and levels of learning. It identifies three “domains” of learning (see below), each of which is organised as a series of levels or pre-requisites. It is suggested that one cannot effectively — or ought not try to — address higher levels until those below them have been covered (it is thus effectively serial in structure). As well as providing a basic sequential model for dealing with topics in the curriculum, it also suggests a way of categorising levels of learning, in terms of the expected ceiling for a given programme. Thus in the Cognitive domain, training for technicians may cover knowledge, comprehension and application, but not concern itself with analysis and above, whereas full professional training may be expected to include this and synthesis and evaluation as well.
Cognitive: the most-used of the domains, refers to knowledge structures (although sheer “knowing the facts” is its bottom level). It can be viewed as a sequence of progressive contextualisation of the material. (Based on Bloom, 1956)
The model above is included because it is still common currency, but Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) have made some apparently minor but actually significant modifications, to come up with:
Revised taxonomy of the cognitive domainfollowing Anderson and Krathwohl (2001)
Note the new top category, which is about being able to create new knowledge within the domain, and the move from nouns to verbs.
Affective: the Affective domain has received less attention, and is less intuitive than the Cognitive. It is concerned with values, or more precisely perhaps with perception of value issues, and ranges from mere awareness (Receiving), through to being able to distinguish implicit values through analysis. (Kratwohl, Bloom and Masia (1964))
Psycho-Motor: Bloom never completed work on this domain, and there have been several attempts to complete it. One of the simplest versions has been suggested by Dave (1975): it fits with the model of developing skill put forward by Reynolds (1965), and it also draws attention to the fundamental role of imitation in skill acquisition.

ATHERTON J S (2009) Learning and Teaching; Bloom's taxonomy [On-line] UK: Available: http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/bloomtax.htm Accessed: 2 June 2009