Csíkszentmihályi

I'm having problems with my blog; it doesn`t work properly so the only thing I can do is to write. I don't know how to use links or how to insert a picture or a video. Everything has changed completely and I'm very bad at this kind of things. So please accept my apologies. Anyway, if you want to know more about
Csíkszentmihályi here you have more information.

Creativity—his own, others', and that of life itself—has been the entry point into evolution for Dr. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (pronounced "chick-sent-me-high-ee"). Truly an international renaissance man, born in Hungary, a graduate of the classical gymnasium "Torquato Tasso" in Rome, and an artist, Csikszentmihalyi earned his Ph.D. in psychology in 1965 from the University of Chicago, where he would eventually teach. Yet the bounds of psychology could contain neither his creativity nor his desire to find a greater order: "Somehow I always gravitated to the people in various disciplines—whether it's psychology, sociology, anthropology—who saw a certain unity in their field, who were not what later became known as postmodern reductionists," he explained, speaking on the telephone from his office at the Claremont Graduate University. Influenced by Carl Jung and reading widely in religion, Csikszentmihalyi found himself intrigued by "people who kind of stepped back and tried to say, 'What is it that's going on in this messy and confusing pattern of human behavior over time?' And I was influenced greatly, for instance, by Teilhard de Chardin, the Jesuit who developed this notion of evolution." Even his current position as a professor at Claremont's Drucker School of Management is a new evolutionary turn in a life lived with passion and curiosity.

Csikszentmihalyi is most well known for his bestselling 1990 book, Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. He defined and explored the concept of "flow"—as in "in the flow"—as our experience of optimal fulfillment and engagement. Flow, whether in creative arts, athletic competition, engaging work, or spiritual practice, is a deep and uniquely human motivation to excel, exceed, and triumph over limitation. Csikszentmihalyi describes his life's work as the effort "to study what makes people truly happy." The emphasis here is on the word "truly"—because to him, happiness is not simply flow nor an emotional state nor even the experience of pleasure. The happiness he points to involves the continual challenge to go beyond oneself as part of something greater than one's own self-interest.

What compelled us to speak to Dr. Csikszentmihalyi was his constantly evolving understanding of individual human development in the context of evolution. Ever the empiricist, he has systematically explored what it means to bring the laws of material evolution into both human and cultural development. In his books The Evolving Self and Finding Flow, he develops a moral and ethical perspective on flow as a force of evolution. Integrating the concept of flow with a contemporary understanding of ancient wisdom teachings, he offers a new paradigm for human living rooted in his recognition that human beings now have the unique opportunity—and obligation—to become conscious participants in evolution. In the following interview, Dr. Csikszentmihalyi invites us to join in creating an evolutionary psychology founded in a deeper understanding of human motivation and an attention to our inescapable interconnectednes.

Flow with Soul

An interview with Dr. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi
by Elizabeth Debold

 interview

WIE: In your books The Evolving Self and Finding Flow, you speak about evolution, particularly about human evolution. Could you define what you mean by "evolution"?

MIHALY CSIKSZENTMIHALYI: At the most abstract level, what I mean by "evolution" is the increasing complexity of matter, which results in increasing possibility for consciousness. Here I'm differing from the view of [French Jesuit paleontologist] Teilhard de Chardin. He thought that rocks had a consciousness appropriate to their own material organization. I don't know whether they do or not, but his view was that whenever there is matter organized in some system, there is a commensurate level of consciousness, which reaches its apogee in the human nervous system being as it is the most intricate system, where you can code and store information of all different kinds. Smells, sights, inner feelings, and thoughts can all get stored because there is enough space, and the units are connected so that you can begin to draw parallels and see similarities and develop cause-and-effect relationships and so forth.

So you have this system that is very complexly organized, very intricately differentiated, and very integrated. Those are the two dimensions of complexity that you always see in evolution: differentiation and integration. Differentiation allows you to use different parts, for instance, different cells in your brain, different neurons to store information. And at the same time, these differentiated cells are connected to each other, or integrated, so that they can talk to each other, so to speak. Okay? They can exchange information. This is one way to talk about evolution: the process by which matter becomes more complex, allowing for more complex consciousness.

Then, of course, we see the results of humans becoming conscious begin to extend outside the body. And that's where we begin to see the evolution of culture, where we are able to store information not just in the brain but also in cave paintings and buildings, and then books and computers, etcetera. That begins to enlarge the amount of information about the universe that we can, in principle, deal with.

But I don't think the direction of evolution is laid down in any sense. We, having become aware of what is going on, have to decide for ourselves to what end this information should be directed and where it should be going. And I think that from the abstract level, the signposts for those decisions are again differentiation and integration. You want a future where people are free to develop whatever unique blueprints they carry in their genes, and you want that freedom to blossom as much as possible, but at the same time, you want each person to see that they are part of something much greater. That's where the integration comes in—it starts with feeling that you belong to a family, to an ethnic group, to a church and to a nation. But unless you realize that you're also part of all the living systems and the planet—that there is something beyond all of this that we can sense—unless you're part of that, then evolution would not be very successful, as far as I can tell. 

If you’re really interested in reading the whole interview go to this webpage.

http://www.enlightennext.org/magazine/j21/csiksz.asp?page=2

Flow

Main article: Flow (psychology)

Mental state in terms of challenge level and skill level, according to Csikszentmihaly.

In his seminal work, Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, Csíkszentmihályi outlines his theory that people are happiest when they are in a state of flow— a state of concentration or complete absorption with the activity at hand and the situation. It is a state in which people are so involved in an activity that nothing else seems to matter (Csikszentmihalyi,1990). The idea of flow is identical to the feeling of being in the zone or in the groove. The flow state is an optimal state of intrinsic motivation, where the person is fully immersed in what he or she is doing. This is a feeling everyone has at times, characterized by a feeling of great absorption, engagement, fulfillment, and skill—and during which temporal concerns (time, food, ego-self, etc.) are typically ignored.^[8]

In an interview with Wired magazine, Csíkszentmihályi described flow as "being completely involved in an activity for its own sake. The ego falls away. Time flies. Every action, movement, and thought follows inevitably from the previous one, like playing jazz. Your whole being is involved, and you're using your skills to the utmost."^[9]

To achieve a flow state, a balance must be struck between the challenge of the task and the skill of the performer. If the task is too easy or too difficult, flow cannot occur. Both skill level and challenge level must be matched and high; if skill and challenge are low and matched, then apathy results.^[7]

The flow state also implies a kind of focused attention, and indeed, it has been noted that mindfulness, meditation, yoga, the Alexander Technique, and martial arts seem to improve a person's capacity for flow. Among other benefits, all of these activities train and improve attention.^{[citation needed]}

In short, flow could be described as a state where attention, motivation, and the situation meet, resulting in a kind of productive harmony or feedback.^{[citation needed]}

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/mihaly-csikszentmihalyi

Teaching English as a Truly Foreign Language

This is a very interesting article I found in one of Emilio's links in his blog. It is about teaching English as a foreign language and I absolutely agree with some of the ideas in the article. What about you? Do you think the author is right or wrong?

The following question has been on my mind a lot recently: Why don't we teach English as a truly foreign language?

The background: Until recently I just took it for granted that in my teaching I should hold up the English of the native speaker as something my foreign students really ought to be aspiring to. It just seemed obvious to this British teacher that learners should become progressively more competent speakers of British English with all its idioms and odd ways of expressing things. There was no such thing as "English as a foreign language". There was just "teaching English as a foreign language", which meant a different method of teaching exactly the same language - pointing out things that would never need to be pointed out to native speakers, and putting a lot less emphasis on literature, for instance. And in this context it made sense to insist that students should be entered for EFL/ESL exams compiled back in the venerable city of Cambridge - and who better to set the standard than our colleagues on either side of the Cam? Of course there were also English exams organised by the Greek authorities (for students here in Greece), but one just smiled at them in a gently condescending way.

Increasingly I find that attitude (my own attitude) repugnant. Why hold up a Cambridge don or Robbie Williams or any other native speaker as a standard? Why not make it clear at the outset that this is English as a FOREIGN language - the language OF foreigners who, in all probablility, will never have the desire or the opportunity or the need to assimilate into some cosy English-speaking nook in Britain or elsewhere and, in a sense, disappear in some odd process of cultural and psychological self-abnegation?

This has become an issue for me particularly in connection with advanced classes of English language learners. At this level, I am becoming more and more doubtful about the value of teaching EXACTLY what the English natives say in a particular situation. Let me give an example. In a situation where someone needs to stay alert the native might use the expression: "Keep your eyes peeled." Now this is a colourful expression that I personally like and which it might be fun to present and discuss in class in one context or another. What I don't agree with any longer is the idea that if this expression cropped up in a course book, students should be expected to learn it by heart (perhaps for a quick vocab test the following day).

In my own vocab tests I would definitely include the more common use of the verb "peel" and the word's use as a noun, but I wouldn't expect students to learn the expression about peeling eyes, and I would certainly not include the latter in some test of whether they are proficient users of the language. If a foreign learner can talk about peeling onions and about your skin peeling when you get sunburnt, that for me is a mark of proficiency in English as a foreign language. With that know-how they will certainly be able to grasp the eye-peeling expression if they ever come across it.

But what will they say in a war zone where they need to tell someone to stay alert and be on the lookout for snipers if they don't know the expression "Keep your eyes peeled"? Well, I guess they could say: "Stay alert and be on the lookout for snipers." It does exactly the same job.

I would even be in favour of Greeks borrowing translated expressions from their own language to enrich the conversation. In Greek they say: "Keep your eyes 14." If you were in enemy territory with a Greek paratrooper and she turned to you and said: "As we say in Greek, 'Keep your eyes 14'." It would be obvious what the message was, and you might have learned an interesting detail about the Greek language. This, for me, is proficiency. Anyone who - between bursts of sniper fire - turned to the Greek woman and said: "If you don't already know the expression: 'Keep your eyes peeled' you can't really be proficient in English" would be a fool.

Of course, I am not in a position to say exactly what constitutes English as a foreign language. It seems to me that it really must be up to foreign organisations to define their own standards. This has led me to reverse my estimation of the local (Greek, in this case) examination authorities. There really needs to be a sea change - a massive upswelling of self-confidence in these local authorities to promote themselves and assert themselves and insist that they have the right to set the standards and answer the question: what should constitute proficiency for Greeks (in this case) who need to communicate in English with foreigners?

In the process there will hopefully be more freedom for Greeks (and all foreigners) to make the language their own. Another example springs to mind. Back in England a Greek colleague with excellent English quietly insisted on also using the word "sympathetic" in a Greek way (e.g. "It was a sympathetic film" meaning it was quite nice but not brilliant). It was obvious what she meant and I found this new (to the English) use of the word interesting. As long as there is no obstacle to communication, why shouldn't there be this freedom to use the language in ways that are foreign to the natives (heck, this is English as a Foreign Language, isn't it?).

Some will say that this is an unacceptable lowering of standards. I would reply that this objection fails to grasp the difference between teaching English as a native language, where there is a specific group of cultural and intellectual imperatives, and teaching English as a foreign language. For the native speaker the language is, to a certain extent, constitutive of their very being, their very identity (in a sense, you are what you say) whereas for the foreigner the language is likely to remain merely a tool of communication. As EFL teachers, we need to accept that and make sure that the tool is moulded adequately to the grip of the foreign learner.

http://www.fullspate.net/efl-bliss-blog/english-as-a-foreign-language.html

Ken Robinson: Changing education paradigms

Creativity expert Sir Ken Robinson challenges the way we're educating our children. He champions a radical rethink of our school systems, to cultivate creativity and acknowledge multiple types of intelligence.

In this talk from RSA Animate, Sir Ken Robinson lays out the link between 3 troubling trends: rising drop-out rates, schools' dwindling stake in the arts, and ADHD. An important, timely talk for parents and teachers. If you're interested in this talk go to http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_changing_education_paradigms.html

Creativity: Its place in Education By Wayne Morris

Creativity: Its place in Education By Wayne Morris

This is the beginning of a very interesting article about creativity at schools. I haven't read it all yet.

“The roots of a creative society are in basic education. The sheer volume of facts to be digested by the students

of today leaves little time for a deeper interrogation of their moral worth. The result has been a generation of

technicians rather than visionaries, each one taking a career rather than an idea seriously. The answer must

be reform in our educational methods so that students are encouraged to ask about “know-why” as well as

“know-how”. Once the arts are restored to a more central role in educational institutions, there could be a

tremendous unleashing of creative energy in other disciplines too.”

Source: OnArts: Creative New Zealand. Michael D. Higgins, the former Irish Minister for

Arts, Culture and Gaeltacht

But is it enough to focus on the arts as the source of creativity in education?

Is there a much broader role for creativity in education?

“All our futures: Creativity, culture and education”, the UK National Advisory Committees

report [DfEE, 1999] defines creativity as:

“First, they [the characteristics of creativity] always involve thinking or behaving

Second, overall this imaginative activity is

objective. Third, these processes must generate something

of

From the US - the Creative Classroom Project was a collaboration between Project Zero and

the Disney Worldwide Outreach to produce materials that help teachers explore and

understand:

1. the role of creativity and innovation in teaching and learning

2. the importance of developing classroom and school environments that can bring out

the best in teachers and students, and

3. methods for making classrooms more engaging places

The following quote, from one of the teachers involved in the project, adds to the UK

definition.

imaginatively.purposeful: that is, it is directed to achieving anoriginal. Fourth, the outcome must bevalue in relation to the objective.” This from the UK.

“Although most people might look for signs of creativity in the appearance of the bulletin boards,

student made projects, centers and displays in the classroom, I feel the truly creative classroom goes way

beyond what can be seen with the eyes. It is a place where bodies and minds actively pursue new

knowledge. Having a creative classroom means that the teacher takes risks on a daily basis and

encourages his/her students to do the same.” Source: Pann Baltz quoted in Creativity in the

Classroom: An exploration.

 

About Education, Sir Ken Robinson

About Education, Sir Ken Robinson

Structure of the talk

INTRODUCTION:  Creativity in Education

-          There’s extraordinary evidence of human creativity.

-          We don’t know what’s going to happen in the future. (Intrinsic education)

-          Children have an extraordinary capacity for innovation.

BODY

-          Creativity should be treated with the same status as Literacy: if you’re not prepared to be wrong, you’ve never come up with anything.

-          Hierarchy of subjects in Education:

The most useful subjects for work are at the top

The important thing is to develop academic abilities

-          The importance of Intelligence:

Diverse

Dynamic

Distinct

CONCLUSION

            - Human Ecology

            - Adaptation of a new conception

            - Help children to think, to be imaginative

alan pease: body language

This is a very interesting video about body language. It's fun and educational. I strongly recommend it to you if you're into the topic of nonverbal communication.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aw36-ByXuMw&feature=related

BODY LANGUAGE

This is the topic I'm going to talk about for the GESE exam (TRINITY ORAL EXAMINATION) next Friday. It's a very interesting topic, but I'm so nervous about the oral presentation, ... There are lots of interesting videos in Internet  and very good web pages. Here you have two of them:
http://helpguide.org/mental/eq6_nonverbal_communication.htm  
a very good resource

http://www.psychologydegree.net/resources/the-psychology-of-linguistics-and-body-language/

Excellent!

Nonverbal communication: body language

1. Introduction. Has it ever occurred to you how much you are saying to people even when you are not speaking? Unless you are a master of disguise, you are constantly sending messages about your true thoughts and feelings whether you are using words or not. An image is worth 1,000 words. So, first, I'll define what body language is. Then, I'll explain some of the characteristics of this nonverbal language. And finally, I'll talk about the importance of body language in our present society.
2. What is nonverbal communication and body language?
* Body language is a language without spoken words and is therefore called non verbal communication. It is a vital form of communication—a natural, unconscious language that broadcasts our true feelings and intentions in any given moment, and clues us in to the feelings and intentions of those around us.
- Several investigators estimate that at least 70% of the communication between people takes place through body language and the tone of voice. (The best known theory is that of the American psychologist Mehrabian. He states that when it comes to expressing feelings: 55% of the communication consists of body language, 38% is expressed through tone of voice and only 7% is communicated through words. If this is the case we express 93% of our feelings in a non-verbal way!)
* Characteristics of body language.
- Body language, unlike spoken language, is inexact; so you have to be careful about how you interpret it. A certain movement or facial expression may be quite meaningful, or it may mean nothing at all.
- A lot of non-verbal behaviour is hereditary or is taught to everyone in the same way at a very young age. It is ingrained so to speak.
This obviously means that we have to learn to recognise many gestures, which can mean one thing in one society and something else in another. Many body signals are not universal. (In most European countries and America for example, people shake their head when they mean no and nod when they mean yes, but there are cultures, for example in India or in Greece, where they mean the opposite - up and down means no and shaking means yes. The latter could be the evidence that this body language is taught rather than innate. )
- Usually body language occurs unconsciously. It follows that therefore it would be good to become conscious of our own and others' body language. As I mention before, it is important to note that body language has different meanings in different cultures.

3. Why is body language so important?

* When we interact with others, we continuously give and receive wordless signals. All of our nonverbal behaviors — the gestures we make, the way we sit, how fast or how loud we talk, how close we stand, how much eye contact we make—send strong messages. Even when you’re silent, you’re still communicating non verbally. Looking at someone for example means something completely different than not looking at someone. In our contact with other people it is impossible not to communicate.

* You have probably heard many times that people remember more of what they see than what they hear. Long after a meeting, we are likely to have forgotten the exact words someone used, but we may retain a vivid image of the same person's facial expression. The way you listen, look, move, and react tells the other person whether or not you care, if you’re being truthful, and how well you’re listening.

* Through life experience we have learned, perhaps unconsciously, that people often lie with words. But facial expressions and other body language tend to be more honest. When a person's words and body language are consistent, we believe that person. When their words and body language say different things, we tend to believe the body language and doubt the words. When your nonverbal signals match up with the words you’re saying, they increase trust, clarity and rapport. When they don't, they generate tension, mistrust and confusion.

4. To sum up, body language has a larger reliability value When someone says something, information is conveyed through body language at the same time. This extra non-verbal information can support the content of the message or may contradict it. When someone contradict his words like this through his body language, his non-verbal message is almost always regarded as the most true because it is very difficult to lie through body language. However, most people are not very aware of their body language.

How we can interpret body language depends on the situation, the culture, the relationship we have with the person as well as the gender of the other. This means that there is not one signal that has the same meaning all over the world. If you do not take this into account, you may get yourself in some serious trouble!

Body language is one of the most powerful forms of human expression or human communication. You may not be aware of what you are saying with your body, but others will get the message. Make sure it's the one you want to send.