When you stuff your brain glutinously with ideas and paradoxes that push you into cognitive dissonance trying to come up with a story and there is no anti-acid—or granny’s really expensive gentian-schnapps—that can help the brain to break the thought-food down as it does with overeating during the holidays, then what do you do?
Do you push the boundaries?
Sit with contradictions?
Can you actually live with contradiction?
Like Kösel suggests in his Subjektive Didaktik, the only theory in education holding its own negation within.
Can you accept that what you think you know about learning is true and not, and something entirely different, all at the same time?
How about liminality?
Is your professional acculturation already so manifest that you rather live with an illusion of conformity instead of challenging the notions that lie beyond the performative system and question if your knowledge is actually just a junction in a landscape of cross-roads, and not a point of truth?
How much are we able to challenge our Selves? (intentional upper case)
Because our ability to measure the impact of learning can—for the time being—be but an uncertainty principle. We can only ever measure one (or some) variable(s), and the closer we look at it/them the less we see of others.
Take multiple-choice exams. How much learning do you actually observe there?
The brain-effecting-gentian-schnapps would come in handy right now.
Feeling a bit like that (wait for it … wait for it):
So I was asking all these questions and developed a rough sketch of a framework, which will be much more differentiated and tamed later down the line.
For now. What would your questions be?