A Neurophysiological Based Education System

[Black Rose]

http://www.benziger.org/articlesIng/?p=34

From the above overview we have learned that:

1. Jung’s four Functions are rooted in four distinct areas of the cortex. Thinking is housed in the Left Frontal Lobe. Intuition is housed in the Right Frontal Lobe. Sensation is housed in the Left Posterior Convexity. Feeling is housed in the Right Posterior Convexity.

2. Jung’s assertion that each of us has one Natural Lead Function is the result of a neuro-chemical – physiological fact that each person has one area which is 100 times more efficient than their remaining three areas.

3. Jung’s assertion that each person has two natural auxiliaries can be understood to be the natural result of the brain’s structure. Factually speaking, neuronal bridges hardwire a person’s Natural Lead to their auxiliaries, making communication between their lead and auxiliaries easy, even though each actual auxiliary is relatively speaking highly inefficient.

4. Jung’s assertion that once a person’s Natural Lead Function has been identified, one can confidently calculate the person’s greatest Natural Weakness, is the result of the simple fact that there are no diagonal bridges in the human brain.

5. The difference between the Feeling Function and Emotions can be understood more clearly. The Feeling Function is a cortical capacity to recognize the presence or absence of harmony – between colors, tones, or human beings. By contrast, emotions are a limbic capacity to experience delight, anger, fear, grief.

6. Jung’s belief that Falsification of Type was real problem is understood to be the natural result of anyone developing and using any of their three inefficient, non-preferred Functions more than their highly efficient Natural Lead Function. What’s more, Jung’s assertion that Falsification of Type can be a serious threat to a person’s physical and mental / emotional health has been validated by the work of Dr. Katherine Benziger and Dr. Arlene Taylor, resulting recently in the profound recognition that Falsification of Type leads dependably to serious results as defined by PASS.
Thus, quite simply, the elements of Jung’s Typology related to the existence and relative organization of four specialized functions or ways of “thinking” is explained.

http://www.benziger.org/the-btsa-The-four-modes.html

FEELING/BASAL RIGHT

Individuals who prefer the Basal Right/Feeling mode are adept at reading non-verbal communications. Sensitive to rhythms and subtle shifts in mood, shade or tone, they are highly attuned to what is “going on” with others and they put a premium on facilitating harmonious interactions. Not surprisingly, they are unsurpassed at monitoring the emotional climate of an individual or group.
Their thinking is visceral, rather than conceptual, at times almost to the point of being “earthy”. Invariably, their interests are in the “human” rather than the technical aspects of any problem. The fundamental goal of the Basal Right/Feeling Type is to create harmony, connectedness and good will in the community. For this reason, the Basal Right is said to contribute, or be responsible for the peaceful foundations in life.

From my limited knowledge of the MBTI system I believe myself to be the personality type INFP. If I am correct in my presumptions then it is apparent that I lack key logical thinking processes that would prevent me from being proficient at specific subjects/tasks. This however does not indicate a inability to learn them but that I could not do it by myself do to frustration/inability to study properly.

From the nuance of interaction I observe in other individuals I have come to many conclusions in terms of general differences I see from person to person. I see many disagreements about normal everyday events between people that all stem from profound misunderstandings being projected on to the "other" person. When I want to explain a concept to those that will listen I am aware that my worlds are taken out of context on a regular basses. The difficulty I have with this can be seen in looking at the way I communicate.

My method of communication is to start with two subjects with no observed correlation as if I was going off on a tangent. Then once I have completed explaining each on its own, tie them together to show why one is relevant to the other. That is the obstacle I face when dealing with people that expect me to get strait to the point. My mind fabricates elaborate stories for how I must show my thought processes. I must show my line of reasoning on how I came to my conclusions.

My way of learning is so highly influenced by my oversensitivity that sometimes I was embarrassed to ask for help in the areas I found hard to cope with. If there are 30 students then obviously I cannot be baby sat well the others are left untended. School books from my personal experience can make you feel stupid because they don't explain the subject in a form of communication that is well understood by some.

School today is difficult in America for those without the intellectual giftedness to learn what is presented by themselves. I only past because my talents were above average in that regard. Up to point it should be understood what will lead someone to success or utter failure academically. Some kids need to be babied when learning specific school subject, others don't.

In the past the school system has tried different teaching methods but they were not based on scientific/psychological research adequate enough for a targeted approach. They were designed for factory workers as I have been lead to believe. From my point of view I see the world ether through my handicaps or my strengths. Sometimes its very depressing not to know what I should do with myself for lack of knowing what applications my skill sets are good for or even what they are.

The main idea that I want to be discussed is: How would an education system that understands the Neurophysiological of each individual student be different than the system today. I suspect that since this is the 21st century computer programs would be used to evaluate and teach student individually to some degree. I know their are technical/political limitations but I see that as a lack of deserved effort/research put into examination of the "purpose" of education and the best ways to achieve it. I do not see why piratical applications of personalized neurological learning would not function better what is currently being used for the majority.

 

[Zero]

It would be called homeschooling.

However, if schools taught kids according to their MBTI, that would be amazing.

From a basic learning perspective, it seems well known that there are at least four ways people tend to learn, visually, audio-visually, physically and audio. I'm not sure how this is going in schools now, but I would assume with the technology more kids are finding a way to customize their learning, at least in that aspect.

People are often confused about F/T axis. Being F doesn't necessarily mean you don't think, it means you make decisions based on how you feel about something more often than how you think of it.

I had a horrible time in school. I was incredibly sensitive to my surrounding and had social anxiety that ended up with me being home schooled, but much later. The schools I went to were kind of stressful. The best school I've gone to is a community college.

I'm supposedly a purely visual learner. I can remember things from seeing them, however, learning a process is easier to lean by doing (this might be true for everyone). When I was misunderstood a lot and I couldn't ever remember the right words and such (I have issues that are beyond MBTI). Now I try to think of the simplest explanation when I'm talking to someone or something that would set off their own thinking process to see what I'm saying. With my family there are times I can say a single word and completely understand. With STs it's definitely easier to explain the present situation or what happened (if need be) than to try to explain in some abstract way. For different types different ways of explanation work.

To me everything is kind of like a machine that I want to work well and make better. That sort of metaphor wouldn't have much meaning to an S type. Even if they understand the metaphor not everything is a machine so I can't treat everything like it is. To me it isn't a "skin deep" metaphor. For not being literally true of everything, it is incredibly true. Everywhere there are systems and games, once they're understood they can be played with. The social realm is kind of a pain though, I don't get much out of it. The rules to the game are a lot more tedious, it's like hundreds of games and they've been played for hundreds of years. The results of these games are pretty serious. Not very fun IMO. Especially the more I learn about it, the less fun the game is.

I have very little patience for tedious studying and memorization. I always look for pictures, even when I'm ordering from a menu. I don't know when was the last time I actually ordered an item from a menu that there wasn't a picture of. I don't read instructions, I look for diagrams. If there aren't pictures I'm just going to jump in and try it. Considering that, it's amazing how much I like to read, but I suppose that's not being forced on me and it's stuff I want to know...

And like I kind of already hinted, I like learning about systems. After I learn something I want to find ways to change it, maybe make it better or redo it entirely. But I have to have a firm understanding of the basics first. I tend to find my own ways to get the same result- sometimes it's just necessary that I do.

*Add: Logical is a loaded word. It's like love, people use it and understand it in vague and exaggerated ways. Many people associate logic with smart, sensible or practical. Some people think it's linear and mathematical. And human logic is a man-made thing, there are studies and philosophies of it.

 

[Da Blob]

The main idea that I want to be discussed is: How would an education system that understands the Neurophysiological of each individual student be different than the system today. I suspect that since this is the 21st century computer programs would be used to evaluate and teach student individually to some degree. I know their are technical/political limitations but I see that as a lack of deserved effort/research put into examination of the "purpose" of education and the best ways to achieve it. I do not see why piratical applications of personalized neurological learning would not function better what is currently being used for the majority

I have posted a great deal on this topic. Any education that is not personalized to the needs and abilities of individual students, really should not be considered an education, but rather an indoctrination of propaganda...

A cynic could make the case that America's 'educational system' is actually designed by the upper class to keep students from the lower classes from ever becoming educated and being able to compete with their own offspring... School systems have yet to be built that are based upon the Science of the growing Human brain... The Educational Industry of America is a trillion dollar enterprise that is nothing more than an elaborate baby-sitting service.

From the beginning, The Harvard Curriculum Committee of the 1890s recommendations, have been inscribed as Holy Law by the educational industry - when in fact, there was never any reason to exalt this group of Harvard snobs to be the Founders of American Schools.

There has never been any input from real educators such as John Dewey or child psychologists such as Jean Piaget incorporated in the American public school system. Rather it was modeled after an assembly line process of a prison factory. Individuals are discounted. Products are categorized by physical age alone into grades. Mental age, Individual talents or any psychological factors whatsoever, have never factors affecting the structure of the baby-sitting service offered for free by the upper class to the lower classes. Every child learns from the same politically-correct textbooks.

As far as I know there never has been a public school designed based around the neurological structures, psychological needs and cognitive abilities of children. There never has been a public school system designed by a team of child psychologists. Such a team could use the MBTI, just as the Human Resources staff of many a corporation does with adult employees. It might well be that placing children into classes based upon their personality type and learning style could be much more effective that placing them in classes based upon chronological age...(?)

Again, not only have child psychologists never designed a school - neurologists have had no input either as to the basic structure of an educational system... Our school systems are not based on science whatsoever, yet the call goes out for the schools in America to teach more Science and discard Art...(?)

 

[snafupants]

Learning styles - auditory, visual, kinetic - should be incorporated into the curriculum. Schools try to use auditory and visual in lessons with, say, speech and chalkboard instruction, but that is far from balanced for all students.

We, as a nation, need to get over our sensitivity to IQ. Yes, folks have disparities in mental abilities: why not funnel these differences into tailored instruction? High fluid intelligence and visual processing skills, try this; high crystallized intelligence and reading and writing ability, try that on for size.

Currently school is geared towards the middling student, and the poles of the IQ bell curve and achievement tests are left behind, and expected to fend for themselves in some cases. The few US states which cater to gifted education (i.e. provide funding) are being rapidly phased out.

 

[Agent Intellect]

I made a post related to this a while back, where I made a proposal to how I would shape the educational system.

I think one of the biggest changes would be using the school as an experiment to test the best ways to teach children. I couldn't agree more about personalized education, but one thing that seems even more deleterious is the idea that education has to remain static, and that it can't vary from place to place. Every year new methods for teaching should be tested, and different methods could be tested in different districts. People are so concerned about political correctness and fairness that any deviation in the curriculum is seen as an affront to their children - everybody is so damn worried about the self esteem of kids that they end up being spoiled brats with an education that's mediocre at best.

 

[Zero]

Hm, I'm kind of surprised that many people encourage a "personalized education", but homeschooling is looked down upon. Most of the time it works almost like some kind of specialty or charter school. Despite what people might think, there are a lot of classes and events done in groups in "homeschooling." At least if the parents aren't weirdos.

I read that education isn't filling in the gap between upper and lower class, rather it's making better educated workers.

I also don't know why we would need to continually test different methods. If we're looking for better world scores, we ought to get a clue from Finland. The atmospheres at the schools there are noted as being more relaxed and teachers have students for several years (meaning they can keep an eye on their development). The US doesn't hold education as a cultural value.

AI it's true what you say about American kids. While the US scores poorly on world math, reading, and science rankings, the US' confidence level is the highest.

 

[Da Blob]

Actually I am rather dismayed that Bill Gates has not used some of his funds to create an internet-based educational system. It seems as though all the pieces are out there. There are a lot of 'distance learning' formats that have been tested and proven successful in the adult learning industry, these could easily be modified for all ages of students. It is possible to earn a very legitimate college degree solely over the internet - so why is it not possible for a high school diploma to be earned mainly over the internet? Crud, there are bright youngsters out there that could earn a high school diploma in the 7th or 8th grades, if given the opportunity to learn at their own pace and not be held back to learn at the pace set for the 'average' students.

I believe it comes back to my original premise, the educational industry is set up for baby sitting purposes and not for maximizing the potential of young minds...

 

[Zero]

I do think there are some independent learning systems for K-12. This last fall before school started there was a lot of advertising of an at-home curriculum on the radio and such. I couldn't figure out if it was net based or traditional. I think it would work if kids could have like rotating in class to outclass schedule and it was decided by how much time they want to spend in school. Obviously for adults the learning system is different for convenience. I think kids could start school later too. It might sound weird, but I don't see why we have to push little kids through the door so fast.

As far as Bill Gates, do you know he's definitely not funding something like that?

 

[LPolaright]

I have nothing smart and long to say - everything is presented in the way you said it perfectly.

All I know, is that if ever I will be a teacher I would first type all my students and only then start teaching them. Though the most efficient way for me to actually type them is using tests which are inaccurate, even though I'll let them answer they will most likely not treat it with much importance.

 

[Black Rose]

YouTube - RSA Animate - Changing Education Paradigms

 

[Required Username]

Exactly..thats why out education system is fucked up. You have the responsible good student kids getting good grades, and the smart quiet kids (me) getting ok grades because i never studied. Even now in college this happens to me. I got a B+ on all of
my psych and sociology classes based on my own knowledge. I didnt open the book once, when other people had to study. But i got a C in history because
1-the material was boring as fuck and 2- I got a C- fir participation because i didnt talk enough, anf only went to office hours once.

You can even expand your idea to all of society. Introverts arent accepted and are considered weird. People who have great ideas and talent arent recognized due to a shit education system, and social barriers.