Fostering Student Learning and Development Through Contemplative Education.

Socio-cultural Learning and Development

Learning by nature is innocuous, and involves a process that extends over a lifetime, but
when institutionalized, learning has a tendency to be abridged and fragmented. Take learning a
second language as an adult; in the right context when purposeful and focused can be routinely
accomplished, but designated to a classroom can become disjointed and out of place. For
evolutionary reasons, learning a language is designed to be accomplished in the confines of a
supportive atmosphere where a particular language is spoken by all, but in the context of learning
a second language, the atmosphere can be less supportive even in a classroom setting. There are
numerous reasons why an adult has difficulty learning a second language, and for each learner
the experience may be much different. Making sense of that experience is an individual affair
that can be transformative if certain principles are followed. The following literature review will
cover Interlanguage Education in ways that will help individual learners make sense of their
language learning experiences.
As the world becomes more globalized, the process of internationalization varies from
country to country. For instance, the issues facing English Language Learners (ELL) and
teachers at International Colleges throughout ASEAN (the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations), are not the same. For example, while Malaysia and Thailand may be neighbors, their
relationship to English are drastically different (Krachu, 2006). So, if we are to believe Vygotsky
(1978), that language mediates higher cognitive levels of learning, then students from Malaysia
and Thailand using English would have different levels of cognitive development, as well as
differentiations in English communication competencies. This should be a significant concern for
ASEAN members who are relying on International graduates to develop and sustain adequate
English communication levels in their home countries. It appears then, that along with having
scarce English communication skills, many international students are either learning in their
native language, or using English but having limited academic proficiency, so it’s imperative that
both teachers and students make a shift in their awareness, attentions, and intentions.
One way we can improve language learning and development is to explore the learning
and development dichotomy. One of the many dichotomies in western thought is between
learning and development; two distinct fields that none the less overlap each other but are
typically seen as separate. In traditional higher education student learning, as in learning what is
taught, gains the majority of attention at the expense of student development, or the stages a
person goes through. Educators typically consider knowledge first, followed by skills, then
attitudes lastly, with grades reflecting student learning, but this view is limiting (Goleman &
Senge). Some would notice that in actual teaching practice learning coincides with third-person
knowledge, while first-person student interpretations that lead towards development are
relegated to a limited role. None the less, we now know that learning and development are
intricately dependent on personalized inquiry that motivates student engagement (Bransford,
Brown, & Cocking, 2000: Illeris, 2007).

Lev Vygotsky, the Russian psychologist proposed that the problems with teaching cannot
be resolved “without addressing the relation between learning and development” which “remains
methodologically unclear because concrete research studies” have “postulates, premises, and
peculiar solutions” to the problematic relationships that are involved in education (Vygotsky,
1978). Vygotsky proposed a dialectical and dialogical approach to learning and development
which emphasized intersubjectivity with people and objects (Wells, 2000). But in many cases
 Fostering Student Learning and Development Through Contemplative Education.

students who have seldom experienced an intersubjective learning environment have difficulty
with personalized learning, and with engaging their teachers. The propositions is that learning in
Thai higher education become more holistic, a socio-cultural activity in which the individual
enters a sociocultural system within their environment (Thompson, 2007). A type of human
activity that
“is embodied, requiring perception and motor action, and embedded in a sociocultural
environment of symbolic cognition and technology. It is not bounded by the skull or skin
but extends in the environment.” (Ibid: 7).

For Vygotsky, learning everyday concepts is a straight forward process that takes place
without the need of mediation, but development takes place in school settings where cultural
tools lead humans to higher levels of development. More specifically, to Vygotsky there are
three orders of mediation: the first order deals with self-regulation, or everyday concepts; the
second order deals with culturally constructed tools; and the third order deals with educational
systems (Vygotsky, 1978: Lantolf & Poehner, 2014).

To alter the negative affects of introspection and other individual approaches, Vygotsky,
was led to use Engels’s dialectic which focused on change, and saw the constant conflict
between the natural world and humans with each influencing the other. Vygotsky’s approach saw
a blending of nature on man, and man affecting nature which allows for new interpretations of
man’s higher psychological functions (Ibid, 2004). What Johnson saw was Vygotsky’s concern
that process be not overlooked by product, and eventually described four levels of human
development: (1) phylogenesis, (2) sociocultural history, (3) ontogenesis, and (4) microgenesis.
It is only through a thorough analyses of all four: Phylogenesis being development from an
evolutionary perspective which is able to reconstruct the divide between humans and nature;
sociocultural development pertaining to culture and artifacts; ontogenesis in terms of nature and
culture, and microgenesis or natural biological development that we can truly understand human
development (Johnson, 2004).

Lantolf & Poehner tell us that according to Vygotsky “human consciousness arises
through the dialectical unity of our biologically endowed brain and auxiliary stimuli appropriated
during participation in social practices” (2014: 8). This human capacity to self-regulate, and
regulate others is what Vygotsky calls mediation in which auxiliary stimuli such as symbols,
diagrams, and numbers, with language the most significant, being used to mediate our mental
and physical behavior (Ibid, 2014). Through social interaction, we not only mediate our own
thinking, but our con-specifics as well (Tomasello, 1999; Lantolf & Poehner, 2014). In other
words:

“Voluntary attention, perception, and memory, along with intentional will to act or not,
taken together, comprise the higher functional system of human consciousness (Lantolf &
Poehner, 2014: 9).

Here in lies a significant point concerning learning and development, that it takes place in social
practices in which individuals gain both “conceptual knowledge” against “procedural
 Fostering Student Learning and Development Through Contemplative Education.

knowledge”. When this takes place, education becomes more than learning, but developmental
and social.

Others have suggested the same; Dewey, Freire, and Mead. They suggest that the self is nothing
without others, and to conceive of the self without others is missing half the equation. Burber

mutuality… ‘Education worthy of the name’, Buber (1947: 104) wrote, ‘is essentially the
education of character’. He added, ‘Genuine education of character is genuine education
for community’ (1947: 116).

Louis Cozolino, PhD, a psychologist who explores neuroscience in education, explains

that using “brain-based” learning strategies from cognitive psychological research isn’t able to
clarify the gap between the current social and emotional classrooms climates and how humans’
social brains have evolved to learn (Cozolino, 2013). He suggests a refocus on relationships,
especially those between teachers and students based on attachments that will optimize learning
(Ibid, 2013).

While it is true that teachers hope their students will become independent thinkers who
engage the material, develop problem-solving skills, and gain their own agency, this isn’t the
typical intent in didactic education (Barbezat & Bush, 2014). Negotiating the divide between
teacher authority in which we talk at students, and developing students’ agency in which we
encourage dialogue and democracy is not easy but worthwhile (Ibid, 2014). It becomes standard
practice then to be focused on outcomes which have little to do with student development while
neglecting the process, and forgetting that “without opportunities to inquire deeply, all [students]
can do is proceed along paths already laid down for them (Barbezat & Bush, 2014: page 4). One
method to overcome this is through contemplative practices which enable students to integrate
their own experiences into their learning through reflection (Ibid, 2014). Others suggest a
hermeneutic or dialogical approach that heeds all voices intersubjectively (Ghiraldelli Jr., 2001).

Thompson, E. (2007). Mind in life: Biology, phenomenology, and the sciences of mind. Harvard University
Press.

In some respects, Thailand has such a culture in place. With 90% of the population claiming to
be Buddhists, it is conceivable that self-awareness and empathy can become a part of the
educational curriculum. Thailand’s National Framework for Quality Assurance (NQF) accepts
the need for ethical and moral development, along with developing interpersonal skills and
responsibility, and to accomplish this, Thailand is looking to its National Quality Framework to
guide the educational process: the Thai Quality Framework (TQF) uses five domains:

1. Ethical and Moral Development

2. Knowledge
3. Cognitive skills
4. Interpersonal skills and responsibility
5. Analytical and communication skills