At a theoretical level, Conductive Education recognises the essential
human unity of teaching and learning, of the emotional (affective) and
the intellective, of the mental and the bodily. It therefore has much
in common with the developmental psychology of L. S. Vygotskii and the
developmental and pedagogic psychologies of his successors in the then
Soviet Union, though attempts to establish a direct link go beyond the
evidence. It also of course bears much in common with the neuro-psychology
of A. R. Luriya and lends itself readily to explanations in terms of
contemporary brain sciences, not least in respect to brain plasticity.
Conductive Education may also be regarded amongst the cognitive educations,
such as Brightstart (Heywood) and Mediated Learning (Feuerstein), in
that it holds that learning is not dependent upon existing abilities
but rather that new abilities are created out of teaching. Thus children
should not be left to ‘fulfil their potential’: rather it
is up to teachers (and other adults) to work with children and mediate
the world for them, to create new abilities and new potentials. To achieve
such transformation any cognitive education requires three essential
factors:
- the belief that such transformation is possible on the part of those
who teach;
- a repertoire of flexible and powerful pedagogic techniques;
- an organisation to maintain and nourish them.
Conductive Education therefore offers neither treatment nor cure. It
is a psycho- pedagogic intervention, operating upon learners at the
psychological level, upon their emotions, motivations, awareness, skills
etc, upon their minds and personalities. It is not a therapy, other
than in the sense of a ‘psychotherapy’. Conductors regard
themselves as pedagogues.
‘Conduction’ is the linked process of teaching and learning,
manifest as emotional and intellective, mental and physical, which characterises
conductive pedagogy. The conductor leads (‘conducts’) learners
into discovering that they can have new goals, which they themselves
can discover and which they themselves can solve in their own ways.
The word ‘conductive’ therefore refers to a particular teaching
style in which a prime goal is to bring learners to the realisation
that they can direct their own learning and moreover share in the joy
of their doing so. Satisfaction in learning, ‘learning how to
learn’ will be a vital factor in solving problems arising from
motor disorders.
The conductive pedagogue aims to avoid the learned (or taught) helplessness
that may come from inappropriately directed help for disabled children,
doing things for them rather than teaching them to do things for themselves,
increasing dependence rather that independence, confirming that they
can’t rather than leading them to discover that there may be a
way for them, if they can be helped to find it.
To that end Conductive Education uses minimalist aids, be these physical
or psychological, and is on constant alert to withdraw or lessen these
as soon as they are no longer needed, at any time being sure to provide
no more that the ‘least necessary help’. Success is rewarded
by appreciation – not necessarily success in the sense of achieving
a defined concrete goal but success in terms of trying to make a step
along the way. The appreciation is not just that of the conductors but
of fellow learners, for conductive pedagogy makes conscious use of the
group, the community of fellow learners plus conductors, as a means
to generate and confirm new intentions and motivations in the individuals
who make it up.
Specifics of conductive pedagogy vary considerably according to the
age and conditions of those being taught, the particular task in hand
and the circumstances in which it is being taught. The pedagogy has
also to be regulated from minute to minute according to both the emerging
progress, problems of individual learners and the shifting events and
relationships within the group as a whole. All this requires continuous
vigilance on the part of the conductors, exercised through an active
observation not just of what is happening amongst the learners but also
of how the group and its individual learners adapt and learn in response
to different pedagogic input and what new inputs prove successful in
meeting new challenges to learners (again both in individuals and in
the group as a whole). In cognitive education, this would be called
continuous dynamic assessment; in Conductive Education, it is ‘conductive
observation’.
|