 |
 |
>> >> there are textualists/narrativists, which are looking for reference >> and story > I view these as separate modes one more anchored in experience than > the other. The textualist thinks in a Referential mode the > narrativist in a Reflective mode based on episodic memory. i don't really have any evidence that would divide these out though. the textualist category merely tends to refer to stories and textual references. So they will say something like. 'The buildings look like something out of the story of olgier' or... 'they remind me of what i've been told of rome' >> there are conceptualists/analysts which are trying to understand >> composition, relationships, and meaning, usually not using >> narratives, but using conceptual analysis, such as logic, math, >> philosophy > I separate relationships, composition, and conceptual analysis > which is structured articulation from synthesis, expression and > meaning which come in holistic expressions situated in a context of > phenomenal experience. I call the former Relational thinking and the > latter Formative thinking I think people can separate them. here i don't have much evidence from the descriptions, keep in mind these are only upper level undergraduates and graduate students in liberal arts and applied fields. i'm sure they could be decomposed, but from mine the key here is that they operate on a conceptual level, they might also be working on a symbolic level, but i don't follow these things up with interviews, it is merely an exercise to get them to be aware of their own minds. >> there are imagery people, who think in images and attempt to match >> the image, this is most interesting, because there are two sections >> here.... one again is compositionalist, but the other.... describes >> a process of matching or shuffling, which i'm fascinated by. one >> student described it as flipping through his families picture books >> and looking for matches, another one described it as watching >> movies in her mind. > for me your imagery people are those that rely on holistic > expressions recognized and interpreted based on prior perceptual > experience. (Formative mode) I would also accept your process > thinkers as employing a distinct mode of thought (The Procedural > mode) - Terry's functional point of view. These I think are the most interesting for me, because they definitely exist in the minority in my classes so far. It would be interesting to see if this was standardized if these changed in population across disciplines. >> >> so... those are the modes of thinking that students have reported >> when they are presented with an image that they could probably >> recognize if they knew the right story. >> I am rather surprised that you didn't see judgmental bias in the >> thinking of some of your students - those who use some standard of >> evaluation and judgment other than fit or match. (I call it the >> Evaluative mode. ) I suspect the image that I use tends to not allow simple judgment or the descriptions of judgment are being collapsed by my simple analysis above. but in the end i'm not sure the modes you describe actually would be the modes my students describe either. I tend to think that the research generalizations tend not to map as well onto the real experience as we might want. I'm sure we can use your terms to categorize... i'm just not sure that the categories really fit what they experience. I am sure that for some researchers the experiences always have to fit, or a new category occurs... I' just use rough and ready analysis, usually that makes reference to the students training in their undergraduate degree. > >> the idea is to get them to think about the way that they think, as >> dewey suggests we do, to push their phenomenological awareness of >> their own minds. >> Great stuff! What was the course called? I use it in almost every f2f 4000 and graduate class that has an ethical/critical component. the set so far is comprised of communications and library school students. >> Chuck >> > PS: I have used modal analysis to help students explore their > preferences for roles in design teams, for structuring processes in > the studio, for critical analysis of various messages, and in > interactive group problem solving to see the contribution that > different modes make to resolution. I have found it very useful in > teaching and learning in a variety of contexts. > >> On Jul 28, 2009, at 9:58 AM, Charles Burnette wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jul 27, 2009, at 7:15 PM, jeremy hunsinger wrote: >>> >>>> One exercise that i have most of my students in upper levels and >>>> graduate school is to phenomonologically investigate the methods >>>> in which they resolve a heuristic problem, the modes of thought >>>> they use, and it is always surprising the variation in modes that >>>> people use, even after years and years of education that seems to >>>> promote one mode over others. >>> >>> Could you elaborate? What modes have you identified? Which have >>> been promoted by education over the others? >>> Thanks, >>> Chuck >>>> >>> >