# data[].attributes.body
Derek, What you write here makes sense to me. And the work of guiding students to self-motivation could also be labeled as part of our shepherding.

# data[].attributes.body
Ralph - It was interesting seeing you type as well.

I'm trying to put my thoughts into words, but the basic idea would address the whole "natural" idea. We're both created in God's image (all the good things) and sinful (the good things are twisted). So when the CMU says "naturally," I thought of it like it was a part of our sinful nature - if we teach redemptively, we can help our students grow in self-motivation, which would connect to several of the characteristics of God (and his image-bearers) described by Graham in chapters 8-9.

# data[].attributes.body
The more I think about it, I'd say the same, "without prompting." Sometimes I can read too much into it.

# data[].attributes.body
Derek, There's an interesting component to this venue as I can see you revising your statement at the same time as I am posing mine! What happened to your sentence about redeeming?

# data[].attributes.body
Interesting - I guess you could approach the "naturally" as the actual processes themselves, or the doing without prompting. I took it as doing self-directed learning "without prompting"

# data[].attributes.body
Derek, It's interesting that you write that at the end about image bearers. I was kind of stuck on the word "naturally" in CMU's list. Do you think naturally here just means "without prompting"?

# data[].attributes.body
Ralph, I would say that the word "tend" is key for CMU #7.  In the context of the rest of their point, I read it more as a developmental note - that most students aren't ready to self-assess. I think that this is covered under Graham's blanket statement in his first point (talking about "All dimensions" of image bearers being considered)
- I'd make a connection then to the section on estrangement from self, page 120 in my book

# data[].attributes.body
Thank you for clarifying, Martin. I understand your argument for the difference in perspectives better now - even if Graham states that the heart is the source of motivation, different approaches might not include that connection.

# data[].attributes.body
I don't know that Graham talked much about CMU's #5 . But if he did , I'd think this would be one of the strongest similarities. I can't find much here at face value  that I wouldn't think is important. This could be connected to Martin's point above (top  of page) about learning being progressive.

# data[].attributes.body
Looking at the sentence in CMU #7. "Unfortunately, students tend not to engage in these processes naturally." Do we consider this a similarity or a difference? Do we (from a Biblical framework) think of the metacognitive processes the same way as a behaviorist, as simply a mental process?

# data[].attributes.body
Thanks for explaining your thoughts more, Martin. Especially regarding the  different emphases on process and outcome. I agree that the CMU approach looks like a behaviorist framework. I was thinking more in terms of whether a behaviorist sees himself using intrinsic motivation or only extrinsic motivation if he does not include the heart. Point #3 of their list seems very extrinsic.

# data[].attributes.body
Good additions, Derek. Learning being more than a transfer of facts is definitely an important aspect of the learning process, and one that wasn't listed explicitly in either list, but which I feel they would both agree on.

# data[].attributes.body
Thanks for your thoughts, Ralph and Derek. In response, it is true that the heart motivates all behavior, but I don't think that every time teachers try to improve or affect a student's motivation, that they are always addressing the heart, and that's where the distinction was for me.  Graham's list seem to be more focused on addressing the heart, whereas CMU's list seems to be more focused on achieving the desired outcome (behaviour) than on addressing a true change in the heart. I guess I just got the overall impression from the CMU list that it reflected a behaviorist framework, and so would be more concerned with an end result as opposed to a process.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that I agree with Ralph's point -
On page 146 (in my 1st edition book) Graham says "Jesus said that the heart is the motivating center for all behavior." If the heart is the connection of the body, mind, and soul, we address the heart as the "essence of our being," (147) while we are addressing students' motivations.

# data[].attributes.body
We've got a good set of similarities so far - I like what we've come up with so far!
I think that I might add the thought that Learning is not a transfer of facts.  Both sets of principles follow the idea that student engagement with content material is vital to the learning process.

# data[].attributes.body
Martin, can't we say that good behavior that comes from the heart is a form of intrinsic motivation? For example, our motivation to learn or grow is simply because we love God and want to know Him, His works, and His ways more?

# data[].attributes.body
The CMU list also indicates that behavior stems from motivation, whereas Graham states that it comes from the heart. I think how we deal with behavior is determined by which stance we take - if it stems from motivation, then we do whatever we can to motivate positively (even using persuasive measures), but if it stems from the heart, we address the heart first and help the student see that their desires and actions are sinful and need to be fought against.

# data[].attributes.body
I think another aspect of similarity is that learning is progressive, and it depends where the learner is in terms of development as to how well they will be able to apply skills/knowledge (I see Graham's last point re: heredity and environment as reflecting this)

Furthermore, both indicate a connection between what a student believes and how they demonstrate this in their actions, which in turn impacts how we approach their learning.

# data[].attributes.body
I think so John. See also Ch. 20 under Knowing and Doing, and in the summary."responding to what we know in loving service to God and humankind" for one

# data[].attributes.body
Building on Ralph's point #4, leading up to this list, Graham points out that learning is a function of behavior, and that the source of behavior is not fundamentally environment, chemicals, or intellect, but rather the heart. Am I reading it right to say ultimately he is saying true learning results in action to God's glory?

# data[].attributes.body
I'll get this started with 4 very basic ideas.
1. It’s important to make connections, organize knowledge
2. Motivation plays a critical role
3. Creating a healthy environment/climate is important.
4. Students must learn when to apply skills/knowledge.

Would you agree these are in common? What else goes in this basic list?

# data[].attributes.body
1. Researchers emphasis seems to be experience prior to knowledge, whereas our emphasis (& Graham's) is knowledge prior to experience.
2. Researchers:; learning is about filing and organizing. Graham: "“Learning must be more than intellectual storage or assent.”
3. Environment is under teacher's & students' control / under God's control
4. Missing from researchers is student as a spiritual being, so that learning is a matter of the heart, truth.