True Story 10.03
Differing assumptions about the meaning of “1”
The setting for this story
Shirley, an anthropologist, devoted nine years to studying communication in homes and schools of the Piedmont region of North and South Carolina, focusing particularly on two small working-class neighborhoods, one Black, one white. Below Shirley relates one of her more curious findings.
A story of misaligned minds4
Three first grade teachers were using an arithmetic workbook that introduced addition. On one page of the workbook, three side-by-side drawings were shown: The drawing on the left pictured a hatrack holding three hats; the drawing in the center pictured one hat; the drawing on the right pictured the same hatrack, now with the center hat added. Apparently, the assumption underlying those drawings was that a pupil would learn to add the number of hats in the left and middle drawings to total the number of hats in the right-hand drawing. In other words, pupils would learn (with their teacher’s guidance) to say, “Three hats plus one hat equals four hats.”
On a separate page of the workbook, a different three-drawing exercise pictured one fish on the left, two fish in a fishbowl in the center, and three fish in the same fishbowl on the right; under each of these drawings were three numbers: “1 2 3.” The assumption apparently was that pupils would learn to circle “1” under the first drawing, “2” under the second, and “3” under the third.
Unlike most pupils from the white community, upon first encountering each of the six drawings (three of hats, three of fish), pupils from the Black community all said or circled “1.”
Shirley’s question
How can we account for the Black pupils’ initial response of “1” for every drawing?
Critique of story 10.03
It’s likely that the Black first graders responded “1” for each of the drawings because, prior to entering school, they had had relatively few opportunities to become accustomed to perceiving and consciously noticing the separate parts out of which common items are constructed. So it’s likely that these first graders perceived and noticed, on each of the two workbook pages, three side-by-side drawings but not, within each drawing, a varying number of either hats or fish.
Think of it this way: We all can talk about “a stove” or a “floral arrangement” because each is one thing. But a stove isn’t only a stove; it’s a collection of metal and plastic parts. A floral arrangement isn’t just that; it’s an artful combination of flowers and greens. Children in some societies have opportunities to learn, beginning at early ages, to attend to the separate parts out of which stoves, floral arrangements, and many other things are made and simultaneously to attend to each thing’s intact wholeness. Children in other societies have relatively few such opportunities, yet they are able to live fulfilling lives so long as they rarely encounter a situation in which parts-awareness is crucially important.
It seems as though the upbringing of these Black first graders – described in Appendix C – had routinely exposed them neither to adults who thought in this way, nor placed them in situations in which they could manipulate whole things that readily separated into parts, as some children’s toys are designed to do (doll houses, Lego sets, model trains, etc.). With few occasions to either experience adults noticing separate parts, or to manipulate the separate parts of tangible items, the children brought with them to school mindsets that were accustomed to perceive almost any unfamiliar item as one undifferentiated whole, e.g., one drawing.
A foundational reason why modern schools exist is to ensure that youngsters learn to perceive, notice, and understand that many whole things are simultaneously intricate assemblages of parts.5 (Note that, in this usage, “things” comprises objects, images, events, concepts, and more.).
The cognitive pattern that perceives and focuses on wholes is termed holistic (or relational). The cognitive pattern that focuses on the parts out of which many whole things are made, while simultaneously remaining aware of the intact wholes, is termed analytic.
For thought
Holistic (or relational) patterns of perception and thought enable people to live fully satisfactory lives in certain types of social and material environments. The Black community in the Carolina Piedmont seems to have been such an environment. Minds began to misalign when that community’s children entered a school where analytic thinking was actively encouraged and taught. Might this story record the moment when these Black youngsters first were deliberately encouraged to begin adopting analytic patterns of perception and thought?
Related stories
See Figure 2 in Chapter 9, which was conceived with this story in mind. Stories 10.13 and 10.16 discuss similar patterns of thinking revealed by two researchers in Liberia. Story 10.09 concerns children from the same community, which is described in Appendix C.
Go to Chapter 1 Quick-Links | Go to Chapter 4 Quick-Links | Go to Chapter 7 Quick-Links | Return to Chapter 10 Quick-Links
Endnotes:
4 Heath, 290–91.
5 For more thinking along these lines, see “Learning, Education, and Technology in Deep Historical Perspective” at misalignedminds.info/Essaysmisalignedminds.info/Essays.
Full citations are available at misalignedminds.info/References.