Mike Goves
@bruceleeedu.bsky.social
Cybernetics, homeostasis, affect. These are interesting.
PE approach is valid (script/frame/schema theories), but the error is affective not semantic. Cognitive architecture is grounded in what we react to (big homeostatic advantage). Our affect states are highly sophisticated, serving as a prediction (including hypothetical / imagined state) machine.
June 28, 2025 at 8:21 AM
PE approach is valid (script/frame/schema theories), but the error is affective not semantic. Cognitive architecture is grounded in what we react to (big homeostatic advantage). Our affect states are highly sophisticated, serving as a prediction (including hypothetical / imagined state) machine.
Or as Stafford Beer would call it, “the science of holism”. I don’t think we do interdisciplinary thinking very well in education, so it’s amazing to see this @olicav.bsky.social
September 18, 2024 at 9:41 PM
Or as Stafford Beer would call it, “the science of holism”. I don’t think we do interdisciplinary thinking very well in education, so it’s amazing to see this @olicav.bsky.social
Great idea! Really great. Best idea I’ve ever seen. This is PRECISELY how attention should be measured. Perfect for neurodiverse & students with SEN too. Luckily facial expressions are all we need to determine attention, arousal and understanding. What’s the point of the default mode network anyway.
February 27, 2024 at 5:58 PM
Great idea! Really great. Best idea I’ve ever seen. This is PRECISELY how attention should be measured. Perfect for neurodiverse & students with SEN too. Luckily facial expressions are all we need to determine attention, arousal and understanding. What’s the point of the default mode network anyway.
Long live Requisite Variety (literally).
February 3, 2024 at 4:28 PM
Long live Requisite Variety (literally).
100%. Is there anything from Lakoff & Johnson to help? I haven’t found a decent way of expressing thinking & feeling being subsumed.
Learning discourse website is great at placing brains as computers but I couldn’t see as useful metaphors for holism/integrated/systems.
Learning discourse website is great at placing brains as computers but I couldn’t see as useful metaphors for holism/integrated/systems.
January 28, 2024 at 10:22 AM
100%. Is there anything from Lakoff & Johnson to help? I haven’t found a decent way of expressing thinking & feeling being subsumed.
Learning discourse website is great at placing brains as computers but I couldn’t see as useful metaphors for holism/integrated/systems.
Learning discourse website is great at placing brains as computers but I couldn’t see as useful metaphors for holism/integrated/systems.
Agree with all the above. I’m also a biologist / biochemist / neuroscience researcher. So not too sympathetic. But computational thinking does feature in teachers of those subjects. I’m not convinced many teachers/leaders spend much time thinking about epistemology.
January 28, 2024 at 9:15 AM
Agree with all the above. I’m also a biologist / biochemist / neuroscience researcher. So not too sympathetic. But computational thinking does feature in teachers of those subjects. I’m not convinced many teachers/leaders spend much time thinking about epistemology.
Tbh I watch them jabber on from afar despondently as I read advice on where to look in a classroom and how to say a response out loud in case a student whispers a reply - because apparently that’s ’applying theory to practice’.
January 27, 2024 at 8:22 PM
Tbh I watch them jabber on from afar despondently as I read advice on where to look in a classroom and how to say a response out loud in case a student whispers a reply - because apparently that’s ’applying theory to practice’.
Yes, agreed. He + Boxer et al all misunderstand learning owing to an obsession with levels of processing / brains as computers.
Problem 1: that’s a product of the system as is; problem 2: for most, it does produce results (arguably unethically & given curriculum / assessment constraints).
Problem 1: that’s a product of the system as is; problem 2: for most, it does produce results (arguably unethically & given curriculum / assessment constraints).
January 27, 2024 at 8:03 PM
Yes, agreed. He + Boxer et al all misunderstand learning owing to an obsession with levels of processing / brains as computers.
Problem 1: that’s a product of the system as is; problem 2: for most, it does produce results (arguably unethically & given curriculum / assessment constraints).
Problem 1: that’s a product of the system as is; problem 2: for most, it does produce results (arguably unethically & given curriculum / assessment constraints).
This is a huge issue. I’m constantly suggesting that subject knowledge & understanding needs more attention - falls on deaf ears all too much.
January 27, 2024 at 4:56 PM
This is a huge issue. I’m constantly suggesting that subject knowledge & understanding needs more attention - falls on deaf ears all too much.
Quite - relating to systems, it’s far easier to reduce variation by limiting definitions of ‘right’.
Unintended consequence is it also limits teacher subject knowledge and understanding (imo).
Unintended consequence is it also limits teacher subject knowledge and understanding (imo).
January 27, 2024 at 3:54 PM
Quite - relating to systems, it’s far easier to reduce variation by limiting definitions of ‘right’.
Unintended consequence is it also limits teacher subject knowledge and understanding (imo).
Unintended consequence is it also limits teacher subject knowledge and understanding (imo).
Which can lead to ‘we’ve done this!’ (student) or ‘forget what you were taught before!’ (teacher) scenarios. Shocker.
January 27, 2024 at 3:52 PM
Which can lead to ‘we’ve done this!’ (student) or ‘forget what you were taught before!’ (teacher) scenarios. Shocker.
👍 precisely. And creating clarity can be limiting. I hate when students are conditioned to be ‘right’ just because the assessment says so. Asking ‘How do plants make food?’ (or something) across Y6-13 yields wildly different answers, naturally, depending on depth of understanding.
January 27, 2024 at 3:51 PM
👍 precisely. And creating clarity can be limiting. I hate when students are conditioned to be ‘right’ just because the assessment says so. Asking ‘How do plants make food?’ (or something) across Y6-13 yields wildly different answers, naturally, depending on depth of understanding.
There’s more TLAC and Walkthrus in ITT & ECT than ever…
January 27, 2024 at 3:31 PM
There’s more TLAC and Walkthrus in ITT & ECT than ever…
TLAC #12 ‘hold out for answers that are all the way right’. Which really means curriculum right. I prefer, ‘How right do you want to be?’
A ‘closed q’ of ‘Does far-red convert Pfr to Pr?’ or some such, could have a short answer or extended one (meaning it might as well have been an open q).
A ‘closed q’ of ‘Does far-red convert Pfr to Pr?’ or some such, could have a short answer or extended one (meaning it might as well have been an open q).
January 27, 2024 at 3:30 PM
TLAC #12 ‘hold out for answers that are all the way right’. Which really means curriculum right. I prefer, ‘How right do you want to be?’
A ‘closed q’ of ‘Does far-red convert Pfr to Pr?’ or some such, could have a short answer or extended one (meaning it might as well have been an open q).
A ‘closed q’ of ‘Does far-red convert Pfr to Pr?’ or some such, could have a short answer or extended one (meaning it might as well have been an open q).
😜 Hence my advice to trainees that ‘right is right’ and use of ‘open vs closed qs’ approaches offer a myopic view of teaching.
January 27, 2024 at 2:13 PM
😜 Hence my advice to trainees that ‘right is right’ and use of ‘open vs closed qs’ approaches offer a myopic view of teaching.
Might have been this: www.nature.com/articles/s41...
January 27, 2024 at 7:52 AM
Might have been this: www.nature.com/articles/s41...
It’s a great model - no problem showing bottom flow constant. Been a while, but to do so would combine breakdown over time, absorption of far red light and thermal reversion. Can’t quite recall the rate differences here between routes but have a distant memory about dimers.
January 27, 2024 at 7:51 AM
It’s a great model - no problem showing bottom flow constant. Been a while, but to do so would combine breakdown over time, absorption of far red light and thermal reversion. Can’t quite recall the rate differences here between routes but have a distant memory about dimers.
Nice. Depends on accuracy right? Far red light possibly more accurate than darkness (but harder to understand). Temperature also a factor (thermal reversion).
Also exist as dimers I think which complicates further.
Also exist as dimers I think which complicates further.
January 26, 2024 at 5:42 PM
Nice. Depends on accuracy right? Far red light possibly more accurate than darkness (but harder to understand). Temperature also a factor (thermal reversion).
Also exist as dimers I think which complicates further.
Also exist as dimers I think which complicates further.
Agreed. It’s a ritual like any other and hard to shake off. Thanks for sharing, I’ll have a read.
January 26, 2024 at 5:24 PM
Agreed. It’s a ritual like any other and hard to shake off. Thanks for sharing, I’ll have a read.
Somatic Marker Hypothesis mostly. Some here. But…this short piece highlights how he may not fully commit to the role of emotions in cognition as much as he could/should?: www.frontiersin.org/articles/10....
December 15, 2023 at 8:23 PM
Somatic Marker Hypothesis mostly. Some here. But…this short piece highlights how he may not fully commit to the role of emotions in cognition as much as he could/should?: www.frontiersin.org/articles/10....
This is true. I’ll def read it then. More Maturana too. Shame I hadn’t clocked all this when I had zero responsibilities 😂.
December 15, 2023 at 6:00 PM
This is true. I’ll def read it then. More Maturana too. Shame I hadn’t clocked all this when I had zero responsibilities 😂.
Only Runaway. Some real wisdom in there. Also realise I must be an absurdist.
December 15, 2023 at 4:17 PM
Only Runaway. Some real wisdom in there. Also realise I must be an absurdist.
He has a way with words - speaks of how the group met (inc Pask, Mead), talking ‘control’, kubernetes/steersman. Started w/Wiener then McCulloch (who I heard of first via my uni tutor; designing the early neural net). Beer really got the interdisciplinary nature of homeostatic feedback.
December 15, 2023 at 3:32 PM
He has a way with words - speaks of how the group met (inc Pask, Mead), talking ‘control’, kubernetes/steersman. Started w/Wiener then McCulloch (who I heard of first via my uni tutor; designing the early neural net). Beer really got the interdisciplinary nature of homeostatic feedback.
Yes. If the Chilean govt is a system I’m fairly confident it can apply to a group of schools 😉.
December 15, 2023 at 1:59 PM
Yes. If the Chilean govt is a system I’m fairly confident it can apply to a group of schools 😉.