Education as learning to interpret the events
The notorious gap between theory and practice as well as the creep of the practice, not with theory, the individual is described as “inability to apply their knowledge in practice”, which forces the learning theorists to discuss the problem of “cold” and “hot” knowledge, where the latter refers to those that are “ready to use”.
Life is filled with events and traditional system of education is characterized by event-free content and little substance events, or more precisely, it has only one type of events — exam, both in the macro and in microform (call to the Board, reference work, etc.).
The history of science is rich in events, often very dramatic, but her “fruit” is knowledge — not bear any traces of these vicissitudes. In some kind of event content can be presented with stories about these historic events. However, this does introduce an element of happening only in the context of presentation-memorization of knowledge that has very little to do with the context of remembering-usage.
Traditional learning is the answers to the questions that students are not set. In the best case — it’s brilliant answers to the questions of the teacher. At worst the answers to the questions that do not care about anyone. This is not surprising because questions are asked only about events.
Active forms (methods) of teaching is, among other things, an attempt to build event content of the learning process. External events (drawn or otherwise simulated the event) is a dummy recreating the context of remembering-usage, however, there can be found internal the events associated primarily with possible successes and failures, wins and losses. It is events of this kind create the spring razvarivaya process activity. Success, apparently, decides the success of the method of pairing of external and internal events. The so-called business games, as a rule, do not go. The analysis of the game is reduced to the invocation of the updated and advanced knowledge to inform a number of events during the game events. Here is there interpretation, but there is no identification.
In the word event there is one undercurrent values. The event is co-existence, we have a joint existence. The joint experience of what is happening is happening creates an opportunity to compare different identification and interpretation in a joint debate occurred. One thing that contributes to the expansion of the zone as perceived through the detection of an event (improvement of observation), and the explanation-understanding (the growth of resource interpretation). If you experience to understand memories of interpreted events, active forms of learning may be called a way of shaping experience. The event, of course, can be “closed” monologic interpretation (now she’s closedness to experience!). The variety of subject positions to the participants of the discussion, facilitates the clearance of interpersonal perspectives, creating an alternative ego-centric point of view, contributes to a more multilateral vision of the world. Apparently, this is what is called openness to experience.
There is another possibility of opening up the consciousness to experience the development of new languages for describing the events-taking place. A different structuring (which is guaranteed by the new language) allows to detect transitions, i.e. events, in the other, leading to increase resources for identification of events. There is something similar to that perceived when translating from one modality to another — the expansion of conscious. For example, mastering the ABC’s transactional analysis — ego States (Child-Adult-Parent), allows participants of the training group to detect a switch from one ego-state to another (identification), and then to find the causes of these transitions (interpretation of events).
The implementation of the principle of the event in socio-psychological technologies