Serendip is an independent site partnering with faculty at multiple colleges and universities around the world. Happy exploring!

Reply to comment

Paul Burgmayer's picture

Analytical thinking and story-telling, Tell story differently?

I appreciate Paul G.'s comments about storytelling vs. story telling. However I would argue that students do both in this exercise. As they write the storytelling stories that I read (and enjoy), they also are story telling to themselves (and maybe students around them). To me the essence of this was the conversations that pairs and trios around the room were having as they tried to incorporate concepts into their stories. The conversations I heard were ones where as Paul puts it "people were telling the story that they have heard differently." So both story telling and storytelling are occurring.

I don't have the same problem as Paul with anthropomorphizing. One of the central ideas I impress on students is that chemists always view the everyday world from a molecular perspective. Anything I can do to help students "see" that molecular world as a reality is good. For 10th graders, anthropomorphizing is a particularly effective way to engage their imaginations in this molecular world. It works for this age group. Perhaps there is a problem with studies of the brains but my students are very far from that class.

I also don't think that this exercise causes students to make a sharp distinction between science and imagination. One of the huge problems in high school is the silos that students (and teachers) construct between subject areas. Students "know" they use their artistic and creative talents in creative writing, art, and music and that those parts of the brain are turned off when they enter the science or math classrooms where they use the analytic parts of their brains. For most of the year, that is true in my class. This is one of the few times when I say "let loosen up a little bit, use that part of the brain that you don't normally use here and let's see what happens." This exercise is one that tries to blur the distinction, not sharpen it.

My distinction between analytic and stories during our session arises out of my own experience of learning. For whatever reason, I cannot grasp a concept from numbers and equations. I need to construct a metaphor of some sort (like the campfire story) I know there are people (including some students I teach) who can. They have an ability that I lack. So I am sensitive to those students who are like me. They often feel lost in the sciences (especially physics) where numbers and equations dominate the conversation. Later after I "get" concepts I can effectively enter into a numbers conversation. But is not a mode of learning that works for me.

Thanks for a great conversation today. I learned a lot.

Paul

Reply

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
15 + 3 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.