Reflections on difficulties with the theory

The two-dimensional representation of curiosity may be too limited. As I read the theory, I find I would like to see represented two topics not currently in the image—interest and personal/social contexts. These contexts may act as brakes, may act as accelerators, and probably always influence the expression of curiosity.

I don't really know how to depict these two characteristics. The closest I can come is to a color theory illustration such as the following (mmas.unca.edu) that uses three axes to explain the range of any particular color (or hue) from white to black. In terms of curiosity, as the interest became higher the person would move toward white, from which all colors can emerge, and as interest lowers, the person would move toward black where no activity occurs. Highest interest then would be the flat surface at the top and lowest would be the point at the bottom. But this illustration does not yet show a way that the brakes and accelerators work.

Returning to the classroom, a teacher of any topic will be confronted by a range of circles, arcs, and rates of rotation. The issue is to determine what to do. One question, one to ask to get this discussion going, is What strategies can a teacher (or a learner for that matter) use to expand the size of the arc?

Right now I don't know. I don't know how to make "curiosity expand" (if expand is the correct word). I don’t know why I am willing to be curious. I don't remember ever thinking "oh, that is how curiosity works, so now I can do this in that situation." But I have it, and I can turn it on or off. I can get myself interested to explore just about any topic or object. At this time in my life that seems to me to be one of the most interesting, satisfying, compelling actions I can engage in.

The only intellectual strategy that I can think of that appears to cause curiosity, or at least gives the impression of producing the results of curiosity, is the old journalism heuristic—Ask Who? What? Where? When? Why?

In another direction I am very aware that education is impeded by the lack of curiosity which can show up in ways that can seriously affect a group in a class. Consider this scenario. Years ago a colleague and I, both young relatively inexperienced teachers, were teaching literature to freshmen. A standard approach in such a course is the Socratic method of asking a question of a person, then following up with related questions. On this day my colleague had asked a student "What do you think of character X?" The student, demonstrating the stuck curiosity circle beautifully, said, "I would never think of that." End of discussion.

The emotional situation here is important. The student more or less "stuffed" the teacher. There is no place to go with that answer. Thus the student is off the hook. But in addition the student makes social points. She demonstrated that she was in control. The teacher could not force the student's circle to rotate. Furthermore the student illustrates a social pressure—thinking about literature is not a good thing to do, for who knows what reasons. Of course it could be that the student also acted in self-defense, not knowing the answer or wishing to give it, not willing to reveal herself in the situation. In terms of the curiosity wheel, this student's wheel is braked and the arc is a straight line. In short the teacher is now in the difficult position of getting out of the emotional bind and of getting this student's and all the other students' curiosity circles freed up.

Back then to the teaching/learning question. What do you do to free up the wheel and enlarge the arc?

Curiosity Theory--Circles, Arcs, and Interests

Curiosity -- Circles, Arcs, and Interests

This is my first entry for building a model of curiosity for teaching and learning. I have not populated it yet with examples, but I am amazed at how helpful it is in my teaching and learning situations.

Let me tell one story that will perhaps help with my concept. I recently with my wife toured The Maine Maritime Museum in Bath, Maine. This museum occupies the site of three former shipbuilding companies along the Kenebec river. Just upstream from this site is the Bath Iron Works, which builds ships for the US Navy. Since the mid-18th century people have been building ships in this space, rolling them out to the river, and sending them off to sea. The tour had a guide, very knowledgeable, who led about 20 of us around the grounds and explained what happened in the various buildings, and what happened in the yard as the ship took shape over a number of months.

In the group was a woman who asked a LOT of questions. The guide would talk for a bit, telling us about attaching the sides of the ship, creating pitch for sealing, identifying different types of sailing vessels. Whatever it was this woman had a question, often two or three, all of which the guide answered clearly, but briefly. After the tour I thought about the scenario for a long time.

Let's look at the woman. I can say that she was curious. She asked a lot of questions. Her questions indicated that she had some familiarity with the process. She asked those questions in among a large group of strangers. The questions she asked covered a range to topics, often from different angles, such as cause, effect, or an awareness of the system that created the ships. She was curious and fearless. She got a lot of information and I am sure she found the tour very satisfying.

Now let's look at me. My initial reaction was surprise, surprise that someone would ask so many questions in so public a space, especially this type of space, which, according to my way of thinking, has "rules" about not saying too much, and taking up special issues in private after the tour is over. Then my reaction turned to annoyance. Would you please just pipe down? Let the guide get on with it. Quit hogging the question time. I don't care about the answer to a question about the formation of square nails. In other words, not only did I resist her questioning, I resisted her right to ask the questions.

But, finally, thanks to this theory, which I had started to formulate in the car during one of the long drives on our road trip around Maine and the Maritime provinces, I finally realized that she was a model of curiosity, and I, shame on me, needed to get my practice in line with my new-found theory. As I said she was fearless. She asked a lot of questions, she increased her knowledge of the site and the history, she had fun doing it, and she did it in a group. This scenario then showed my the two sides of curiosity—one, it is a way to expand your knowedge and, two, it has a negative social side that has to be ignored if you wish to exercise your curiosity. For me, I realized that I let my curiosity (well, how DO they make square nails?) be impeded by self-imposed social constraints. She had an "arc of curiosity" that swung freely, and I was willing to let my arc by braked by other factors.

With that story in mind, I hope that the following comments and illustration provide an entrance into a topic that I find has thoroughly engrossed, well, my curiosity.

Each person has a curiosity circle. For any given object (which includes anything physical or conceptual) they implement a curiosity arc. If they are very interested in the object, the arc is large, 90, 180, even more degrees. If they are not at all interested in the object, the arc is a line or at best very small, perhaps 2-3 degrees. If they are "typical," the arc is probably about 20 degrees. The circle rotates, freely or impeded, and the arc is thereby moved from curiosity point (or focus) around the circle. Here is my first depiction of this concept.





In addition to the size of the arc, however, is the list of topics of "foci of curiosity" to which the arc can rotate. The list can be numerous or sparse, narrowly focused or very broad, and it probably changes based on the object of focus. More than likely the topics for most people are broad ones, such as cause, effect, implications, history, morality, finances, systems, and associations.

Moreover the arc is clearly associated with and affected by emotions relating to the object. For an object of high interest the arc is large, including a number of focuses, and the circle rotates freely from one focus to another. A person compiles a lot of information about the object. But for an object with low interest the arc is small, and the circle is stuck, won't rotate at all. The interest level depends on many factors, both personal and social. Objects that are approved by personal history or social context allow a larger arc and freer rotation; objects that are not approved or even scorned receive no arc and rotation is slow or non-existent. Often in such a situation efforts to increase the arc or the rotation cause resistance, sometimes acute.

One area of considerable interest, to me at least, is what happens to the arc when the circle is placed over a new object? To my way of thinking, as a curious person, the arc should be large, include many topics, and rotate freely, but my experience shows me that that is seldom the case. Part of that stems from the fact that I don't have time or energy to engage my curiosity circle for every object I encounter. But what should happen if a person is called to focus on an object that is often ignored, say, an automobile transmission, or a species of vegetable, or a philosophical concept?

If you have followed this abstract discussion you can leap, I hope (if I have been clear enough), to applying this model to teaching and learning. It is helpful to think in terms of the resistance that this model indicates, but it is also helpful to think in terms of expertise. In terms of interest, the circle "sticks," won't rotate, if there is a personal or social brake impeding it. In terms of skill, the focal points to place around the circle aren't numerous enough for beginners to investigate the correct aspects.

Experts have lots of expertise (duh). When they encounter an object or situation within the realm of their expertise, they have, you might say, a ready-made template to investigate it. They have learned how to formalize curiosity so that it serves them well. So to speak the circle sits over the object and spins from one focus to another until they find what they need. Because they have committed themselves personally their interest level is high and the circle spins freely. Even if they don't like the object, or the situation in which they study the object, they exercise their curiosity, the circle rotates.

A teacher's problem, and a learner's, is to free up the circle, populate the circumference with enough relevant points, and expand the size of the arc for this, and perhaps any, topic.

Laptop Discipline--Controlling Laptops in the Classroom

Laptop Discipline

I suggest three quite different strategies to use in controlling the way laptops are used on your classes. You can find other discussions of using the laptop as a learning facilitator and that is the way to think of laptops, but the discipline issue is constantly there, so here are some tips.

1. The small child. Think of the laptop as a small child. In a formal situation the child will fidget, fuss, and fool (the 3Fs) around—think of kids at churches, speeches, restaurants. This is the kid who will bother their neighbor and try to get them to fool around too. Then think of the same child engaged in an art project cutting out shapes, gluing them together, creating a final product, perhaps a card for a loved one.

The laptop is like a small child. It will fuss, fidget, and fool around unless you engage it. When I teach if I have my students use their laptops for a focused strategy, all the surfing and 3Fs stop. If I just let my students sit there with their laptops unfocused, pretty soon they and the laptops will be 3F. The key, then, is—focus the use of laptops on course activities. This focus may cause some shift in what you do in class, but it will minimize the 3Fs considerably.

2. The back row crowd. One instructor, Ilse Hartung of Speech Communication, Foreign Languages, Theater and Music, solves her laptop discipline issues by sending those that insist both on coming to class and surfing, etc, to the last two rows of the class. The goal is to move the distraction of the constant screen motion out of view of the people who want to pay attention to the instructor. She says that after a while a number of people leave the back rows and move up front.

This is a brilliant strategy. At first, I know, it sounds horrible, like you are simply "caving in" to laptop misbehavior and acknowledging that you can't do much about it. But actually that is not the way to look at it.
First, you have made a statement of support for the many students who do want to focus on the class.
Second, once you "give permission" to fool around and, at the same time, set up a place for it, you take away the traditional "sneaky not pay attention" scenario. In one way the fun goes out of it.
Third, people who are in the last rows can be down a way, or off, your let-me-give-you-special-help list.
Fourth, as one teacher's experience shows, the act of being sent to the back to fool around often causes students to rethink their presence in class, and the way they want to hang out with their "laptop buddy."

3. Turn off a few programs. Another thing you can do is ask students to turn off their IM program while they are in class. You could also ask them to close their Facebook/My Space tab. If they eliminate just those two sources, a lot of the 3 Fs will end.