Hazel asked me to share this here.

My daughter is seven years old. We have been reading the Gospel Principles manual for a while now. Today, after reading the first part of Chapter 16: The Church of Jesus Christ in Former Times, there was a question to answer. Why does the Church of Jesus Christ need these six features? (Those features are, Revelation, Authority from God, the Church Organization, First Principles and Ordinances, Ordinances Performed for the Dead, and Spiritual Gifts.)

This was her answer:

Without spiritual gifts you would’t be able to have visions, prophesy, or perform miracles. Everything gets out of order without the Holy Ghost.

Without the Holy Ghost we wouldn’t know what to do. The Holy Ghost is the Spirit and you can’t have Spiritual gifts wihout the Holy Ghost.

If we never taught the spirits of the dead they’d never hear the Gospel and never get to accept the Gospel. How can you accept something you don’t know about? That’d be a little silly. It wouldn’t make sense.

If we didn’t have authority from God we wouldn’t have revelation or the church organization. It would be like we had nothing, no church.

(edit: here’s the link to the lesson we read: LDS.org – Sunday School Chapter Detail – The Church of Jesus Christ in Former Times)

Posted with permission. (I only helped clarify her thoughts.)

My name is Hazel Davidson and I was asked to give a talk about Jesus Christ always obeying Heavenly Father.

Jesus Christ always obeyed Heavenly Father, by following the “My Gospel Standards.”

Jesus remembered his baptismal covenants and listened to the Holy Ghost.

Jesus was honest with Heavenly Father, others, and himself.

He sought good friends and treated others kindly.

He dressed modestly to show respect for Heavenly Father and himself.

He only read things that were pleasing to Heavenly Father.

Jesus also only watched things that were pleasing to Heavenly Father. For example, even though there was
no TV, he did NOT stand by and watch a woman get stoned for her mistakes.

Jesus listened to music that was pleasing to Heavenly Father.

He used the name of Heavenly Father reverently and did not swear or use crude words.

He kept his mind and body sacred and pure, and did not eat or drink things that were harmful to him.

Jesus did those things on the Sabbath that helped him feel close to Heavenly Father.

He chose the right.

Jesus was worthy to go to the temple and served a mission the last few years of his life. He followed Heavenly Father’s plan for him, by becoming our Savior.

He was a child of God, just like us.

He knew Heavenly Father loved him, and Jesus loved Heavenly Father.

He prayed to Heavenly Father anytime, anywhere.

I had a personal experience, that I feel bad when I don’t follow Heavenly Father, but I know I can work hard and repent when I make a mistake. I am trying to follow Jesus.

I say these things in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

Note: The “My Gospel Standards” used was the 1997 version found here (scroll down a bit. We didn’t notice there was a change. The current one can be found here.

My daughter played “Batman: Strength In Numbers”. She outgrew it, and needed something more challenging. After receiving “Batman: Multiply Divide and Conquer”, she told me that the maze is exactly the same, and the villains she fights are also the same. This is lazy game construction. Leap Frog simply took the previous game and changed the challenge questions, changed the floating stones to float vertically instead of horizontally, and made the villains a little harder to kill. That’s pretty much it. Different villains in a different maze would have made the game more unique.

Also, the hints need help. One question was, what’s 900 times 70. My daughter used the hint button which simply told her the shortcut way of how to do the problem. Ignore the zeros and then add them at the end of whatever 9 times 7 is. Not cool. My daughter had no idea why this short cut worked. I did a math exercise with her to help her see the pattern in order for her to understand why it worked. Other Leapster mathematical games gave visual representations along with the hints, and did not do short cuts. For a company that advertises learning games, they need to step up and follow current studies which show that students need to understand the fundamentals, and the long way of doing math, before they can understand the short cuts of math, with the use of as many visual aids and hands on activities as possible.

Hence I am rather disappointed with this game.
The only reason why it did not get a lower than a three out of five is that my daughter is still having fun with the game.

Should Schools Adopt a Constructivist Approach to Education?

Summary of Literary Review

There are two opposing viewpoints on how to properly instruct children in the classroom. There is the teacher-centered approach where the role of the teacher is to dispense facts and the role of the student is to listen and memorize said facts. In the child-centered, or constructivist, approach the children are more in control of their education. They do hands on activities to promote a higher order of thinking (analysis, critical thinking), and projects are usually branched off from the main topic of discussion. Critics of the child-centered approach say that children waste too much time with such activities and would be better served learning mathematics facts and physics. Advocates of the child-centered approach say that allowing children to make discoveries of their own is vital to obtaining a higher order of thinking which better serves children throughout their lives. Supporters also assert that in most classrooms there is simply only the occasional child-centered activity but that classrooms have largely remained teacher-centered (Abbeduto, 2006).

Summary of Yes Position

Teachers needs to rethink their role as teachers. Is a teacher simply the dispenser of information or is a teacher the facilitator of learning? Windschitl states that current teachers simply copy the teachers they had had as children which hinders the goal of going beyond the teacher-centered method of rote memorization to learning. He says that therein lies the problem of creating a truly constructivist classroom. Educators are married to the current norms of curriculum and standardization. A part of the issue may lie in the greater depth of knowledge teachers will need to have in the topics that they teach. Windschitl uses the concept of density as an example. In a constructivist classroom there would be different groups of students tackling the issue of density using a variety of methods. One group may take a purely mathematical approach while another may use the story of the Titanic. The teacher would need to have an understanding of the mathematical concepts with density as well as the complexity of the issue as illustrated in the sinking of the Titanic. Once a teacher reconciles this issue the hands on, child-centered, approach will lead children to be more engaged in the topic being studied and allows them to learn how to think critically and analytically, as well as learning problem solving skills. Windschitl believes that the constructivist approach can be reconciled with state standards. He also states that teachers needs to have a firm understanding of why they are using the constructivist approach instead of the widely accepted teacher-centered approach, since it is inevitable that someone would ask them why they run their classroom the way they do. Assessments will need to be made of each child’s progress using journals, reports, and other projects that demonstrate the student’s understanding of the topic being studied which will aid in determining whether or not the class is meeting the standards of education. To aid teachers in giving children the best education possible school administrators need to be supportive in the “less is more” concept, encourage teacher collaboration, and school wide changes such as block scheduling. (Windschitl, 1999).

Summary of No Position

Hirsch sets out to debunk the constructivist approach through research comparing ineffective American classrooms and effective Asian classrooms. He states that classrooms that are filled with projects where children are responsible for their own learning did not perform as well as children in teacher-centered approached classrooms, where there was more focus and time allotted to learn a subject. Hirsch asserts that there is importance in drill and practice which helps children retain the information being learned, following the adage of “use it or lose it”, and that the constructivist approach does not offer enough in the way of drill and practice thereby cheating the students out of retaining information. He also argues that breadth is more important than depth. Students need to learn as much as they can about various subjects because by the time a child is in college the focus of study narrows. Hirsch also asserts that the policy of “best practices” by organizations such as the National Association for the Education of Young Children, is not founded upon research but upon pedagogical romanticism. Children learn best by the teacher introducing new material in small increments and by having the teacher make connections to previously learned topics that relate to the new material. Whole class instruction should dominate in the classroom, and students should be given challenging work to keep their interest. Hirsch states that children in classrooms with whole class instruction and a focused schedule are more motivated and interested in the subjects being taught than children in classrooms that are filled with workshops and projects. Teachers that exude warmth as well as a businesslike air have more successful classrooms than teachers that exude warmth but are more concerned about a child’s self esteem. Over concern about a child’s self esteem causes them to give praises without giving instruction on how to improve their work. Hirsch addresses the idea of higher order thinking, and states that higher order thinking is the difference between a novice and an expert and is domain specific. Thus the idea that constructivist approach fosters higher order thinking in the various academic subjects is unfounded. The class period should be “formed into a little drama with a beginning, middle, and end, well directed but not rigidly scripted by the teacher” (Hirsch, 1996).

My Position

Windschitl and Hirsch are both shortsighted. A blend of the two methods is best. Windschitl makes his argument by discussing how to solve some of the challenges of the child-centered approach, completely ignoring the fact that it is impossible to have students responsible for their own learning all the time. Hirsch claims that traditional methods of teaching are best as is indicated in current research. What the research he used actually says is that time, focus, and knowing what to expect for the day, or class period, are essential for academic success, as well as having teachers with high warmth, giving constructive feedback, and are businesslike in manner; which, in my experience, can also be interpreted as firm but fair. All of those qualities are necessary in a teacher whether it be in a child-centered classroom or in a teacher-centered classroom.

Hirsch’s attack on the less-more admonitions of various national education organizations that promote best practices is foolish. Less does not mean eliminate. More does not mean replace. Best practices promotes that which is developmentally appropriate, and takes into account the diversity in the classroom. As Dr. Clifford Hansen, a music teacher at San Jose City College, once said, if I have 30 students in a classroom then I need to have 30 different ways to explain the concept I am teaching (Glasgow, 1969, paraphrased). Dr. Hansen understood that while for some learning the circle of fifths in the lecture is sufficient, other students will need to see a diagram, to hear it, to see it played, to play it themselves, or see it demonstrated in a real piece of music, or any combination of these. Does providing sufficient time and attention to the individual needs of his students in understanding the concept of the circle of fifths take away precious time from instruction? I think not.

On the other hand there are times when the teacher does act primarily as the dispenser of knowledge. In Kindergarten there is much in the way of teacher directed activities because the children are too young to take charge of their own academic learning. A child is not going to discover phonics without a teacher telling them about the relationship between sounds and letters and words. This does not mean that there can not be some activities that give children creative freedom, such as painting a holiday themed picture. When the opportunity occurs you can give them the time they need to create a good piece of work, the tools they need to do so, and the techniques on how to use the tools effectively and how to create a particular effect a child might be looking for (Knight, 2007). Time, tools and techniques also apply to other subject areas, such as math. Students need time to master a new mathematical concept, they need the tools to work with the new math problem, and they need the techniques to effectively use their time and tools. The concept is true in every classroom.

An artist can not be rushed when creating a piece of art without compromising the intended finished work. A child learning how to read can not be rushed without compromising their ability to become fluent readers. A child learning number sense can not be rushed into learning addition and subtraction without compromising their future understanding of multiplication and division. Breadth is important. People need to be well rounded. In fact, breadth is so important that there are general education requirements in college. However, depth is also needed, otherwise the information will have no lasting value to the student and will not be retained.

The old adage of, “practice makes perfect”, is true and correct. We know that the more you read the better you get at it. The more you work at playing the piano the easier it gets to sight read and to play more complex pieces. Practice is important. No one with their head on straight will say otherwise, and I dare say that most advocates for a child-centered approach have their heads on straight. Practice, however, does not denote understanding. If a six year old can read at a 5th grade level that does not mean they understand what they are reading. If a preschool aged child knows their ABCs it does not mean that they connect it to reading. This is where we need reflective inquiry and innovative classroom activities to gauge the actual understanding of students, and help facilitate understanding. Reflective inquiry is often out of the picture in a teacher-centered classroom where the teacher does most of the thinking (Brown, 2003). The teacher-centered approach does work, but it does not mean that we can not do better. Mimeographs and type writers have been replaced with the more efficient computer. Should we still widely use those today? Granted, the teacher-centered approach is not nearly so outdated, and still has its place, but the argument that it’s worked for all these years, as is (Hirsch, 1996), is a bit fallacious and closed minded. Modern thought and technology have simply made old ideas better.

Both the teacher-centered approach and the child-centered approach have value. When this is understood by teachers they pedagogically improve. Over generalizations of the two approaches lead to a dichotomy that should not exist and can be harmful (Schuh, 2004). Either approach “is not appropriate in all situations and cannot cover all of the complexities and idiosyncrasies of subjects and teaching situations” (Ahara, 1995). Polarizing the issue can cause an unbalanced approach to teaching, which would be a great disservice to students.

References

Abbeduto, L. (2006). Should Schools Adopt a Constructivist Approach to Education? Taking Sides: Clashing Views in Educational Psychology, 4th Ed., 148(2). McGraw-Hill

Ahara, K. (1995). Teacher-centered and child-centered pedagogical approaches in teaching children’s literature. Education, 115(3), 332.

Brown, K. L. (2003). From teacher-centered to learner-centered curriculum: Improving learning in diverse classrooms. Education, 124(1), 49-54.

Hirsch, Jr., E. D. (1996). Reality’s Revenge: Research and Ideology. American Educator.

Glasgow, J. (1969). Personal Journal.

Knight, R. (2007). The Three T’s. Creative Arts Lecture. Yuba College.

Schuh, K. L. (2004). Learner-centered principles in teacher-centered practices? Teaching & Teacher Education, 20(8), 833-846. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2004.09.008

Windschitl, M. (1999). The Challenges of Sustaining a Constructivist Classroom Culture. Phi Delta Kappan.

On April 29, 2005, my husband told me that he didn’t love me anymore and wanted a divorce. I was blind sided by this, which was a symptom of a relationship gone wrong. There were a few things that kept me from falling into an abyss of despair, such as, our daughter – who was only two years old at the time; my personal religious observances – prayer where I poured out my sorrows and hopes and fears and sought guidance, scripture study where I found some of the answers I needed to keep going and do all that I could do, kept myself open to instruction from the Holy Ghost, aka the Spirit, the Comforter, etc; and last, but in no way the least, the fact that my husband did not want to hate me and still wanted to be my friend. However, I was still prone to random breakdowns. It was a. . . very difficult time.

Sometime in the following month of May, my husband showed me an Anime Music Video (AMV – an unofficial, fan made video of a Japanese animated series or movie set to music that the fan felt fit the anime, or theme). The anime was one I had never seen or heard of before (my husband gave me a single sentence synopsis). The video was set to music I had never heard before.

When the music began, with the image of a blond boy bandaged up with a bleak expression, I felt . . . anticipation. Something was coming. The lyrics spoke to me as I watched the images of the characters in the act of moving forward or struggling or being in a pensive state. Yeah, I was downcast, lost in my own tragedy, bubble wrapping myself against the pain, stagnant in my sorrows. Inert. I could relate. Then, the chorus came in. “So, let go, let go. Jump in. Oh, well, whatchya waitin’ for? It’s all right. ‘Cause there’s beauty in the breakdown. So, let go, let go. Just get in. Oh, it’s so amazing here. It’s all right, ’cause there’s beauty in the breakdown.” I was hit with a flash of a gale-storm but instead of being ripped to shreds and scattered in pieces I was buoyed up. A life giving flame coursed through my body, starting at the navel, simultaneously moving to the top of my head and down to my toes, back to my navel, the two forces colliding, moving upward, and enveloping my body. My heart pounded in syncopation to the music. It was as though the voice of God was speaking to me, sending me a message. The world changed, it was just me, and the message – the music and the images on the screen. Oh, something good was going to come out of all this sorrow. I needed to let go, and plunge myself into life despite all the uncertainty and fear. What was I waiting for? For things to magically get better? Fool girl, were you letting fear rule your life, again? There was still something amazing to be had in my life, even now. But I would never find it if I stood still. I needed to move; not in any direction, but forward, giving it my all.

“It gains the more it gives. And it rises with the fall.” Oh, right, where did my unselfishness go? I needed to find it again, and engage in selfless acts of service. And not just any selfless acts of service, but to the man I proclaimed to love, but had forgotten to show it. Right. Duh. Love is a verb. “So hand me that remote, can’t you see that all that stuff’s a sideshow.” Huh. Distractions. Too many distractions. I was overly involved in science fiction clubs and forums and other such things that took up most of my free time. It was all exacerbating the difficulties in my life, my marriage. Yes sir, Lord sir. Get rid of the distractions, get rid of the things that prevented me from attending to the things that matter most. “Such boundless pleasure, there’s no time for later, now, you can’t await, you’re own arrival, you’ve twenty seconds to comply.” The good things in life were again punctuated, but with admonishments to not stupidly procrastinate. Patience, procrastination and idleness are three very different things. I was stuck in the last two. I needed to gain the first, and to do so I needed to act, and soon. As in, now. Yet, I needed to be patient with the people around me. Calmness and serenity while moving forward.

These thoughts barreled into my mind at great speed, all at once, with the passing of each lyric and the oh so important images that accompanied the song. The blond boy, bloodied up, seemingly beaten, yet smiling in conviction. A gentle kiss, eyes reflecting determination, dire life situations, bloody battles with internal and external adversaries. The contrasting images of happy and content moments with those of great adversity and afflictions coupled with moments of simple human pain and rage; these all accentuated the lyrics. The music supported the message with its rhythms and percussion, driving the message deep into my heart, my spirit, my very soul, becoming an integral part of my entire being. The chorus kicked in again, and oh, I could let go, and jump in and remember that there was beauty in the breakdown. There’s beauty somewhere in this mess. I only had to change my vantage point to find it. And oh, it’s all right. Everything would be all right. Somehow. Images of seemingly impossible foes flew by, but there was a smile, and the foe was beaten back in dismay. The lyrics changed to simply repeating, “hey now” driven by the bass line in the music. It was as though I was being given a moment to digest what I had learned, and was flooded with contrasting images again, and a few darker ones, as though stating, that there was an unseen adversary in my midst and that I had to be aware of it. I needed to remember it, always. I could not let my guard down. I needed to constantly watch my thoughts, my words, my deeds.

The chorus sang again. The same blond boy only younger appeared, standing alone, gazing at the backs of those who ostracized him. An overlaid image of him angry and defiant, and yet, still determined, another of him sitting alone on a swing, of the swing being empty, of him standing and crying, alone. Oh, yes. I intimately knew those feelings, along with anguish and despair and fear and hopelessness. But the lyrics were telling me it was amazing here on earth, in this world, right now, and that there was still beauty, still something worthwhile in life beyond the practical, beyond just one more day. And then there was the boy again, working hard, overcoming such great obstacles. He, and others depicted, endured pain, physical and emotional. But they never gave up. They never relented. And I knew I could do that too. I knew then that there was beauty in all adversity. That blessings would come out of all dark times if I would let go and jump in, without reserve. Without fear. And that if I endured well, armed with trust and faith in the Lord, the fiery darts of hell, the great darkness, would not harm me or mine.

The music mellowed out, tapering off, yet giving a feeling as though life was still going on. The last image was of the blond boy happily running towards people who seemed to care for him. He was no longer alone, and he was all right. I was breathless in my astonishment at this revelation given through song and animation, inundated by the greatness of the message. My soul rejoiced. Grateful tears stung my eyes. I was in awe that I was given the blessing of this message. It was another testament of hope; and there was hope. I knew it. But I had to do my part to make that hope a reality, and I could. I would. . .

. . . I did. I took the lessons of the moment and vigilantly applied them. If I hadn’t permanently internalized the message of the moment, along with a few other epiphanies, the most significant successes in my life would not have come to pass. Life would be harder, fraught with more tears and heartache and stress. . .

. . . The moment was mine. Mine and mine alone. So when the world returned to what it was with me standing in my room, my husband sitting in front of me facing the computer screen, all I could say, albeit a bit breathlessly, was, “Wow, that was amazing. I have to see that anime now.” The message was for me so that I might salvage the most important thing in my life from the wreckage. My family.

Note: My husband and I got back together two years ago, much to our daughter’s delight. The anime was called “Naruto” and the song was called “Let Go” by Frou Frou.