The question back then is not different from the question today with respect to the important factor, that being the establishment and refinement of neural architecture associated with natural existential imperatives extending beyond Maslov's hierarchy of needs (many of which have their flaws) which are not determined by the past but the future. Without that imperative to which all others are existentially subservient in nature (but alas not in practice) then the human saga will be significantly shorter than most would desire.
You spoke about Helen Brock her experiment she completed in 1975 making Piaget's experiment more child friendly, I cant seem to find her study. (I might be spelling her name wrong) Could you help me please?
The fundamental problem with formal and traditional education is in its very, regimented structure which is by definition counter to natural development and therefore acts as a critical impediment to it. Yet, parents pack off "their" children to such environments every day without question and this passes for responsible guardianship. So, studied objectively, what constitutes natural development and what product or manifestation can be objectively expected, now two decades into the twenty-first century? I have a somewhat rare appreciation for the extensive body of work undertaken by Paiget but no meaningful refinement of the study has emerged and judging by the decaying language use throughout academia, refinement through and by this institution is unlikely, to say the least. I demonstrated the ability to conceptualize from the age of 6 and I regard myself as perfectly natural as indeed I was and continue to be. But the same cannot be said of neither the environment back then nor the current environment. The interim period has experienced exponential decay in many significant ways not least, as previously stated, in language use at every level of the social strata.
Classrooms have no place in a child's natural development. The clue is in the name itself (Class) room. The room in which social status is determined. It's truly unfortunate if this is a fact you (the reader) is unable to process but it is nonetheless a glaring fact. Therefore, the function and context of "class" needs to be understood. Can anyone profer any insight into the aforementioned? If not, then any attempt to understand the subject of natural development will consistently prove futile. I would add that anyone reading this and dismissing it is negligent of every moral and civic duty one would care to mention, let alone, professing to care about your own children or those of others. Granted, these are harsh words and indeed condemnatory but if you, as guardians of the rights of those who will inherit your failures would you not be better served by judging yourselves on such matters in the event of an external judge emerging over the horizon. It is noteworthy that my experience of education is exclusively the product of autodidactism as, leaving school I could scarcely read. As like every other child, I had more important things with which to concern myself as do all children in the absence of adult direction and influence, let alone, value-system. By the way, I do expect this post to be removed or rejected, such as the nature of guilt and concealment. To be proven wrong on this specific point could not give me greater joy. But nonetheless, I have recorded for posterity and a reference for my own body of work which is perfectly legitimate as I am sure you (ie the host) would agree.
god came from the heaven to teach me this thank you very much for this as it will help me get more interest towards childhood and development.
Thanks for creating another valuable podcast.
More podcasts much appreciated
thank you we are discussing all of this in my educational psychology class.
very good presentation a lot of things are clear now thank you
Thank you very much for clear explanations. I had a hard time to understand it from textbook and you really saved me from failing
very good and informative ,both parts1 & 2. Thank you
The question back then is not different from the question today with respect to the important factor, that being the establishment and refinement of neural architecture associated with natural existential imperatives extending beyond Maslov's hierarchy of needs (many of which have their flaws) which are not determined by the past but the future. Without that imperative to which all others are existentially subservient in nature (but alas not in practice) then the human saga will be significantly shorter than most would desire.
Thank you
This helped me a lot. Thanks!
A good presentation in it"s depth and breadth for our understanding. thank you Dr.
thank you a good explanations
Awesome
You spoke about Helen Brock her experiment she completed in 1975 making Piaget's experiment more child friendly, I cant seem to find her study. (I might be spelling her name wrong) Could you help me please?
Found it :) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_mountain_problem Look down near the bottom for Helen Borke :)
Hi Estelle :) I'm wondering did you ever find this Helen Brock? i'm also finding myself in the same situation 3 years later !!
@@jessicaenglish4996 Here it is the paper ;) psycnet.apa.org/record/1975-20825-001
The fundamental problem with formal and traditional education is in its very, regimented structure which is by definition counter to natural development and therefore acts as a critical impediment to it. Yet, parents pack off "their" children to such environments every day without question and this passes for responsible guardianship.
So, studied objectively, what constitutes natural development and what product or manifestation can be objectively expected, now two decades into the twenty-first century?
I have a somewhat rare appreciation for the extensive body of work undertaken by Paiget but no meaningful refinement of the study has emerged and judging by the decaying language use throughout academia, refinement through and by this institution is unlikely, to say the least.
I demonstrated the ability to conceptualize from the age of 6 and I regard myself as perfectly natural as indeed I was and continue to be. But the same cannot be said of neither the environment back then nor the current environment. The interim period has experienced exponential decay in many significant ways not least, as previously stated, in language use at every level of the social strata.
Classrooms have no place in a child's natural development. The clue is in the name itself (Class) room. The room in which social status is determined. It's truly unfortunate if this is a fact you (the reader) is unable to process but it is nonetheless a glaring fact.
Therefore, the function and context of "class" needs to be understood. Can anyone profer any insight into the aforementioned? If not, then any attempt to understand the subject of natural development will consistently prove futile.
I would add that anyone reading this and dismissing it is negligent of every moral and civic duty one would care to mention, let alone, professing to care about your own children or those of others. Granted, these are harsh words and indeed condemnatory but if you, as guardians of the rights of those who will inherit your failures would you not be better served by judging yourselves on such matters in the event of an external judge emerging over the horizon.
It is noteworthy that my experience of education is exclusively the product of autodidactism as, leaving school I could scarcely read. As like every other child, I had more important things with which to concern myself as do all children in the absence of adult direction and influence, let alone, value-system.
By the way, I do expect this post to be removed or rejected, such as the nature of guilt and concealment. To be proven wrong on this specific point could not give me greater joy. But nonetheless, I have recorded for posterity and a reference for my own body of work which is perfectly legitimate as I am sure you (ie the host) would agree.
*are
Too quickly