Abstracting follows some of the same guidelines as patterning, in that it requires our ability to observe (with all our senses) to get to the core of our topic. I can also see patterning as an aid to identifying abstractions; it’s when we recognize the patterns that we can begin to abstract – or single out – features of importance.
For example, when I look at similes and metaphors, I recognize a common pattern of making comparisons. So, if I were to peel back the layers even more to abstract a simplified meaning of what similes and metaphors really are, I would be left with (at least) two different objects or ideas placed side by side because of some type of connection between the two. And if we abstract even more, we can see that one of the objects or ideas actually relies upon the other to bring it meaning or clarity. By breaking it down to this level, we can teach students that similes and metaphors are useful when students are trying to express an idea that by itself will not produce any kind of emotional response or connection in the listener, but when coupled with something comparable to it that the listener will understand better, similes and metaphors allow students to express their thoughts more clearly and accurately.
Abstracting can thus be defined as the ability to pull out hidden features, but even these hidden features can be new, unclear or completely foreign to students. Analogizing helps to make the unknown known; this is an important step in bringing clarity to students.
Personally, abstracting affects my creativity in similar ways that patterning and observing did. Each of these thinking skills has stretched me beyond seeing everything as a nice, little compact package. Instead, I find that the package actually contains pieces and parts that make up the whole – pieces and parts that are vital to understanding the whole. Presenting students with an assignment where they are required to use figurative language may be an overwhelming way to propose it to them (because the term itself can sound scary or foreign), but telling students they are going to create word pictures, or that they are going to describe a simple word like “flower” so that it connects to all five of their senses will help them explore and perfect their own creativity while at the same time, help them gain a better understanding of what figurative language is all about.
Short term, these thinking skills cause me to step back and take a deeper look at my topic, but they do something more than that as well; they give me multiple paths to approach any topic from (in my case, figurative language) in order to stimulate a connection for my students. More importantly, once students connect, they will begin to make abstractions and analogies on their own which will ultimately provide them with the greatest amount of understanding. For example, even I feel like I have a greater understanding of “irony” just by abstracting from it an image of an empty room. I now understand irony as not just being the opposite of what we expected; instead, I have a new depth of understanding for the incongruities of irony. Irony, based on the analogy of the empty room, can be interpreted as the feeling we get when all that we expected is suddenly stripped away and we are left with a dark, cold, barren, empty room. The goal is, of course, that students will connect more to this analogy than they will by just reading and memorizing a definition for “irony”. They, too, will begin to understand the “opposites” or “incongruities” of irony in a way that will capture and connect their senses; and this is where learning will ultimately take place.
No comments:
Post a Comment