Hi
On Mon, 24 Apr 2000, Louis_Schmier wrote:
> Hey, Tipsters, thought you might find the statement made on the
> Professional Development discussion list where we talk about faculty
> development. I thought it an interesting assertion that to me implies
> your discipline is archaic. Wondering how you would respond--nicely.
> Sounds brain-baseish to me. Of course, what isn't. Need your help.
>
> Subject: Affective aspects of teaching
>
> .......The statement that learning is a psychological process is certainly
> not new, but it has never gotten us very far. What's coming to light in
> current research in cognition is that learning is really a biological
> process. [See J. Changeux, Neuronal Man, G. Edelman, The Remembered
> Present, A. Gopnik et al, The Scientist in the Crib, R. Restak, The
> Modular Brain, K Klivington, The Science of Mind.] Even the affective
> elements Raoul speaks of (and are absolutely and critically important) are
> the result of brain states, the limbic system, its connection to the
> frontal lobes and the "attention focusing/distraction avoiding" regulation
> of the frontal cortex.....
What is archaic is the simplistic view that psychology and
biology are somehow separate entitities. The first statement of
this quote is also incorrect factually (i.e., the assertion that
we have not gotten very far in understanding and promoting
learning from past [psychological] research). What is the source
of this quote?
Best wishes
Jim
============================================================================
James M. Clark (204) 786-9757
Department of Psychology (204) 774-4134 Fax
University of Winnipeg 4L05D
Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 2E9 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CANADA http://www.uwinnipeg.ca/~clark
============================================================================
