The main purpose of a dig is to encourage students to dig beneath the surface of the readings and other learning materials such as audiobooks. Towards this end digs are formatted like a discussion.
For this particular dig you only need to submit one comment OR question based on the audiobook learning materials for the upcoming session 6 on flow. Of course, you can post more if you so desire.
You'll need to make sure to read the previously posted discussion points to see if your question needs to be changed. You’ll also need to keep checking the discussion even if you have already posted a comment and a question: I expect everyone to be up-to-date on the discussion issues when you come to class.
You can post anytime between October 11 through midnight of October 22.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
I often observe my students become very involved in easy word search puzzles. The students seem to lose track of time and lose self-consciousness because they get so involved and it's like they are in a zone. Even though they have far higher skills than challenges with the word search puzzles is it possible for them to be experiencing flow or would that be considered "microFlow?"
Based on Csik's findings, can we assume that those who return to microflow activities (i.e. lack interest and motivation, experience flow deprivation, and do not function at their fullest capacities) are the 13% of people who never experience flow and the 100% < n > 10% who do not report flow as a daily experience in addition to being young, male, and from low SES?
Csikszentmihalyi’s theory is so intuitive and easy to relate to as a learner and educator in academics and general life. Listening to the audio book I continually reflected on my academic, personal, and professional choices. In reflecting on my own teaching it occurs to me that in dealing with gifted students and students with special needs together in a mainstream classroom that I was attempting to steer them all toward flow. It was always a challenge for me, and yet one I always embraced because it seemed to be so important. We can use this theory for so much in education, if for nothing else, than to identify and clarify specific areas students lie. And, it offers hope – a place to head toward in times of boredom or anxiety.
Navdeep - I completely can relate to your "but the kids are so happy working on worksheets, therefore they must be in a flow state" situation. The students seem to really understand the skill set and want to apply the new contextual understanding into their existing ideas.
It kind of upset me to hear that 13% of the people in his study never achieved a flow state in daily life. I might not be "flowing" in the same subject or area every day, but there is some aspect of life that I can find flow in.
If we plan on creating life long learners, then we need to adjust our challenges to fit the skill set to be able to get flow out of our students. Otherwise, there will be nothing but bored and apathetic students unwilling to engage in any type of activity that challenges them at all.
I can't help but to think about our California Content Standards and Flow either. Even with all of our knowledge of motivation theory, we still have not gone back and revised them to help align the skill set to suitable challenges.
I really enjoyed listening about the theory of flow. The Flow Chart was my favorite. I can see and understand how it works, and the water image along with 'flow' was great. I think as a teacher it is very important to remember this ideal area because so often students get bored or frustrated. Sharing this with students would also allow them to realize where they lie on an activity and where they should be. I'm sure this would tie in as a self-regulating activity :)
Based on the information in the audio book and the handout, learning environments are very important for flow theory. It is also suggested that high-stake activities are more conducive to create those specific conditions that are necessary to experience flow.
To the teachers out there, my question is: can you envision a high-stake group game that could be played out at various lengths (depending on the age of the students) that would allow the embedding of instructional materials?
I have seen videogames with similar features that had math features embedded and allowed users to learn how to calculate the amount of ammo needed to take hill#2 if at the rate of …. per minutes/ person.
Having read 1/3 of Csikszentmihalyi’s book "Flow", I am disappointed to hear that research in this area has dwindled down to a trickle. Perhaps as Matthew points out in the audio book the subject is too new age for some researchers to take seriously.
When I started reading the book I was excited to learn that someone had given a name to and created a theory around an experience that I have been tiring to convey to my students, children and family members for several years.
Matthew when you talk about the focus in education being on fixing the dysfunctional rather then looking at the parts that are flowing well, I can't help but wonder. How can we as educators put the flow back into the dysfunctional? I believe that lack of flow is what leads to dysfunction. (I suppose that could be a dissertation topic)
I feel that encouraging students to find their personal flow zone helps them to overcome difficulties. I see connections between Flow theory to Benner's Novice to Expert theory.
My questions:
Can we teach those who do not experience flow how to access or create the experience? Or is being able to experience flow something that is hardwired into the neurobiology of some individuals and not others?
Hi Debrayh,
I think activities producing micro-flow experience is a promising start.
While listening to the audiobook on Flow, I was struck by the concepts shown on Csikszentmihalyi's chart of Anxiety/Flow/Boredom and how a person moves upward in the 'flow channel' and how that increasing skills and challenges might be reconciled with Vygotsky's zone of proximal development. Although my understanding of Vygotsky is very limited, it appears that the two theories have some overlap. The zone of proximal development is "the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance, or in collaboration with more capable peers (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 86)" This concept meshes with Csikszentmihalyi's ideas of maintaining a balance between challenge and skill, but always increasing the level of both, in order to move upward within the flow channel. The key for educators, perhaps, is to know where the 'flow zone' is and to create learning environments and challenges that take advantage of a student's intrinsic motivation.
Jozsef-It has always fascinated me that kids can be immersed in a video game for hours (truly a 'flow' experience!) yet it has been so difficult for educational game software to recreate that flow experience. Very few video games have been able to incorporate academic learning with the fun associated with games that induce flow. Notable exceptions would be the Sims series (especially the Sims social games of today as opposed to city planning of yesteryear) and Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego? The gaming industry and academics are still trying to find the magical combination to make the virtual world fun as well as academically challenging. Simulations are a step in the right direction, but incorporating math problems in a game to reach a goal is not as much 'fun' as getting gold coins by blasting your opponent, and somehow the flow just doesn't seem to happen in academic video environments.
In answer to your question "can you envision a high-stake group game that could be played out at various lengths (depending on the age of the students) that would allow the embedding of instructional materials?" I would answer YES. I have my students engage in a simulation with teams of students competing to make the most money from decisions they make. It is highly challenging (over 40 graduate programs in the country use it - I am the ONLY one who uses it at the undergraduate level). Some students never look at the simulation, others become obsessed with it (it is a 24/7 week-long game) and will literally watch the team standings and their supply chains night and day. Some have even set their alarm clocks for 4am in the morning so that they can make critical changes at the 'right' time. Is it as engaging as a video game? Certainly not. But I believe the online learning experience is going in the right direction.
I really think that the future of flow research is in the video game and electronic learning arena. Two experiences of mine come to mind respecting this idea.
First is the online instructional environment (Aleks.com) that I am using with my students this year. I keep hearing from parents whose sons love to study using this program. I think this is because the program assesses students continually to make sure that they are working on problems that are appropriate for their skill level(but not too easy, after all we don't want an apathy response). Some students get frustrated because the steps between problems levels are too large for them to smoothly increase challenge as they increase skill--so they slip outside of the flow channel from time to time. Improving the problem sequencing and shrinking the differences in challenge between problem levels could help to make sure that students stay in the flow channel.
Second is my own experience of playing videogames. I love certain kinds of videogames--namely ones that require strategy and that have multi-player cooperative modes (where I can play with my friend to achieve a common goal instead of multi-player modes where you play against each other). I also like the games like Rockband and Guitar Hero that incorporate music and challenge my limited fine motor skills, but help me out by letting me draw upon my old guitar and piano lessons. On the other hand, I don't like "twitch" games that require ultra-fine movements using game controllers and other games like that. I think I need some sort of beginner (read designed for little kids) games to play to become good at those. Maybe this summer I can find some to play when I have actual leisure time.
Meanwhile, I think there's lots to be learned from good video games about keeping kids in flow (aka the "zone") while working on learning chemistry and math. While there may never be a game for math facts that really connects with as many kids as first-person shooters do, there's plenty of room for a well-sequenced math curriculum that puts kids into a different kind of zone where they progress through learning how to do tougher and tougher math problems. My students seem to show that if this kind of curriculum/experience is done well, the kids may value it more than videogames since it will give them payoff in the real world of parents, school, college, etc.
Well, I WAS in the groove of typing in a response to this great conversation, and it felt like flow. Happy, relaxed, self-explaining, concentrated, no clue how late it is, great jazz in the headphones, writing a paragraph about flow, self-determination, and attachment, and
DING
the email beep shatters my attention, I click the email icon out of mere habit, and
WHAM
no more flow ...
and no post to the flow knowledge dig!
Grrr ....
OK, take two:
I don't play video games; I play clarinet and I play with toddlers, and am in flow very often with both!
Did Csiks ever look at play as a form of flow? Seems to me that effective and pleasurable music and child play happens when skill is utilized to meet the challenge at hand, and self-determination supports persistence toward the goal of mastering a musical articulation pattern or playroom block structure.
I read an excerpt recently on how different attachment types predict interactions in the work place. Basically, securely attached people take more risks as adults because they have more bases from which to explore and return. Seems to me flow requires risk-taking because at some point a person becomes willing to meet increased challenge with increased skill; more secure people typically take more risks than less secure people.
Many people are stymied by anxiety and boredom. Do less secure people find themselves in A2 and A3 situations more frequently because they take fewer risks toward learning skills and meeting challenges?
Is there any discussion in flow theory about inertia? A2 and A3 can lead to inertia, but during play people feel free; flow doesn't seem to leave much room for inertia.
Dionne,
In response to your question about play as a form of flow... Thomas Armstrong (1991) wrote a book titled Awakening Your Child's Natural Genius:Enhancing Curiosity, Creativity, and Learning Ability which speaks very much to the that notion. He speaks to both the "flow state" as well as a "genius state" young children experience while at play. He explains that during play is when most young children are developing and testing little hypotheses about how the world works. They then modify them as they receive feedback. He goes on to say that a miniature scientific revolutions take place inside children. The book has been on my shelf for years and I am so thankful for your question because I would not have thought to look at it otherwise.
Steve & Debrayh,
Steve: I too was thinking about the overlap between the two theories (flow & Zone of Proximal Development). An important aspect of working within your zone is to have the appropriate scaffolding (mentors, other students, a carefully planned/designed lesson...) to ensure success.
Debrayh: I think this is where teachers can help the 13% who do not experience flow. If we scaffold the learning activity to ensure success and then gradually decrease our support then students may begin feeling the characteristics of flow. I am not sure that lack of flow experiences comes solely from lack of motivation. I think it is also related lack of success in a learning environment.
I have question about the Rathunde & Csikszentmihalyi article. While I am very intrigued by the work of Csikszentmahayli, I wonder whether anyone else was "bothered" (for a lack of a better word) by the sample in the two studies? In both studies the schools were described as: modern, attractive school environments; small to moderate size; roughly 15:1 student/teacher ratio; suburban neighborhoods. Participants were described as >72% white; high SES; high parental involvement; >81% intact families; high parent education levels. How can we generalize from this very privileged population. It was stated and is well recognized that the rhetoric of school reform outpaces empirical research. The outcomes of the study suggest that the tenets of Montessori philosophy provide a learning environment that increase student experiences of the flow condition. But I question whether we replicate those conditions when the vast majority of our schools as well as the student and families do not enjoy the same privileged life. The conditions that create intrinsically motivating experiences for such an affluent, well-educated, and well-connected population may have vastly different manifestations for average middle school students in the average, underfunded, over crowded, middle school context. In this way, I do not think that SES was controlled. Is it just easier to be motivated and experience flow when you have everything at your fingertips??? Hmmm...
Mary,
I agree that with your thoughts that you cannot generalize this study to a different SES group. However, I don't know if you could do this study in a different SES group because the mostly private montessori schools could only be matched to an equally affluent public school system.
The study could be generalized to Southern Marin and I wish the local public middle school could employ more of the montessori concepts. MVMS does have a small class experiment that does use hands on learning that is project rather than time driven. However, the experiment only accepts motivated learners due to less supervision so it has limited use.
Mary,
I agree that with your thoughts that you cannot generalize this study to a different SES group. However, I don't know if you could do this study in a different SES group because the mostly private montessori schools could only be matched to an equally affluent public school system.
The study could be generalized to Southern Marin and I wish the local public middle school could employ more of the montessori concepts. MVMS does have a small class experiment that does use hands on learning that is project rather than time driven. However, the experiment only accepts motivated learners due to less supervision so it has limited use.
I liked the flow discussion. I, like Gina, found the flow chart most informative. I think of it not for myself but about the material I am covering in class. In fact, today for the first time I decided to move my two sections at a different pace. I didn't realize it but I was adjusting the challenge of the material (by adjusting the length of time to cover a topic) to the skill levels of the two sections.
Mary-
I'm really glad that you're highlighting the effect that specific environments can have on student's ability to experience flow. In the audiobook, reference is made to Flow Theory that suggests that providing an environment that motivates learners can contribute to increases in flow activity. Maybe this is an area where the research on flow could be expanded.
My question is:
In the discussion about Flow Deprivation the first thing that came to mind is our previous review of Motivation and Interest. Is there a connection between students' interest level in a chosen subject and their ability to engage in flow activites? Has further research explored Csik's theory that creating flow conditions of environments can feed interest? Is there any relation to this research and the theory of Constructivism?
Post a Comment