An Outline of Integral Learning
Dr Julia Atkin
Education & Learning Consultant
“Bumgum”
Harden-Murrumburrah NSW 2587
Ph: 02 63863342
Fax: 02 63863317
bumgum@ava.com.au
© Julia Atkin, 2000
An Outline of Integral Learning
Julia Atkin
Teaching as an art and a science
Teaching is both an art and a science. We all know
what good teaching is when we experience it.
Since the early 1970’s I have been attempting to
understand and articulate what a good teacher does
so that we can all learn how to be better teachers.
My personal theory of learning and teaching has
been informed and clarified by my own research
and by the work of other learning theorists and
commentators on learning, thinking and
intelligence. Parallel to this research I have been
developing a theory of learning from the ‘chalkface’. The depth and
richness of my current understanding about learning and teaching has
developed from, and owes much to, my day to day work with many, many
thousands of learners and teachers.
What learning do I value?
The critical question in designing education for learning, is what is the
nature of learning that we value? Humans can learn in a variety of ways.
We can learn like parrots, playing back like a tape recorder what we have
heard. Humans can learn like robots - 'monkey see - monkey do' type
learning carrying out actions without thought, or we can assume attitudes
and beliefs without questioning them. Human learning has the capacity to
be far richer than this. We can learn in a way that transforms; in a way that
endows our experience with meaning; in a way that empowers us to adapt,
to perform and to create.
I value learning that:
• develops understanding and personal meaning
• develops competence through mastery of skills and processes
• develops the learner’s ability to articulate and share their knowledge
• enables the learner to transfer learning from one context to another in
authentic life situations
© Julia Atkin, 2000
1
What supports and enhances the learning?
This is an enormous field. For the purposes of this outline let me simply
summarise a few of my key beliefs about learning and the implications of
these beliefs in terms of learning design.
1.
Learning requires moving outside our ‘comfort zone’; it involves
taking risks. Learners will not take a risk unless they have a
secure base.
Although the Integral Learning design model focuses more on
engaging and stimulating appropriate ways of thinking and knowing,
it assumes that the learning environment is supportive and yet
challenging for the learners concerned.
2.
Humans move towards experiences from which they gain a sense
of self worth and achievement.
It is critical, in designing any learning that we think clearly about the
readiness of the learner(s) and set challenging but achievable tasks.
No design model can provide this information for a teacher. Any
learning design should be viewed with your particular learners in
mind.
3.
Learner driven learning is more likely to be effective and
meaningful.
In principle this means good learning design will maintain ownership
by the learner, nurture a sense of agency and tap intrinsic motivation.
In practice this means:
- surfacing and connecting with students’ experiential knowledge,
their personal story knowledge.
- finding out what students know, what they want to know, how they
want to learn and letting it influence your design.
- designing to include open ended aspects; aspects that require self
expression; giving choice
© Julia Atkin, 2000
2
4. Learning with meaning and understanding involves constructing
and reconstructing meaning from our experiences.
The term ‘constructivism’ has been thrown around with gay abandon in
educational circles. What does it really mean?
Constructivism
There is a belief shared by most psychologists who study human learning, that
from birth to senescence or death, each of us constructs and reconstructs the
meaning of events and objects we observe. It is an ongoing process, and a
distinctly human process. The genetic make up of every normal human being
confers upon all of us this extraordinary capacity to see regularities in the
events or objects we observe and, by age two or three, to use symbols to
represent these regularities.
Joseph D. Novak (Novak 1992)
Powerful human learning involves constructing and reconstructing our own
meaning in the world. However this does not mean that an individual’s
learning should be limited by the bounds of the world they experience
directly. Nor does it mean that the learner is left alone to construct
meaning entirely unaided.
The open discovery approaches of the seventies were misguided in the
sense that they did not recognise that the challenge for educators is to help
individuals construct, for themselves, the understandings that other minds
have discovered before them. Left to chance, or open discovery, my belief
is that you would have to be Einstein, or Einstein-like, to discover what he
discovered. In words written a long time ago. . .
The task of the teacher is not to put knowledge where it does not
exist, but rather to lead the mind’s eye so that it might see for
itself.
Plato
In some schools, the swing away from a heavy emphasis on ‘knowing
about’, and ‘knowing what others know about’, resulted in many students
going through school without knowing vital facts–eg maths tables facts.
You are limited and constrained in mathematical thinking and problem
solving if you have to work it out, look it up, or use a calculator every time
you want to process something like seven times four. The challenge for
educators is to discern what facts, what procedures, what skills need be
automated to ensure that further learning and thinking is not impeded. The
learning secret is to ensure that those facts are only automated after deep
understanding is in place.
There are many names and labels given to the constructivist notion of
learning. They all have as key components - action or experience,
© Julia Atkin, 2000
3
reflection, intention to improve or enhance action, action, reflection,
refined understanding, honed skills. The learning process is described as
an ongoing spiralling process.
The essence of a constructivist approach is the construction of meaning by
the learner. This does not mean that the learner is left alone to learn, nor
does it mean that whatever meaning the learner makes is accepted. The
role of the teacher is to decipher what meaning, what ‘mental models’ the
learner is already thinking with and then to design experiences and ‘nudge’
processing so that the learner’s ‘mental models’ are challenged, enriched,
expanded and elaborated.
Learning as making meaning from experience. . .
Action learning, experiential learning, reflective practice, etc.
‘world processing system’
influence
MAPS
FINDING OUT
culture
&
responses to previous
experiences
WINDOW ON THE
WORLD
EVENTS
AND
THINGS
TAKING ACTION
EXPERIENCE
BAG OF TRICKS
Experiential Model of Learning -Richard Bawden's representation of Kolb'’s model (Kolb
1984)
Essentially this model means that we experience the world of events and
things, we process that experience to build our own understandings, our
own mental models or maps and to develop our skills (‘bag of tricks’) for
acting & responding in our world. If we are left alone to process our
experience (no talking to anyone else, no teacher intervention) the way we
would process our world would be largely determined by our thinking or
processing style.
© Julia Atkin, 2000
4
I believe it is the teacher’s task to:
1.
Find out what students know and can do– what are their
current ‘mental maps’ or understandings? What can they do and
how well? What do they want to know; what do they want to be able
to do?
2.
Design learning experiences that:
- challenge their current mental maps
- enlarge and expand on their experiences
3.
Nudge their processing so that their personal meaning making goes
beyond simply their own processing style.
5. The human brain-mind-body system is capable of multiple
ways of knowing. ’Knowing’ is deepened and amplified
when there is an integration of our ways of knowing.
What does this mean? How does it inform learning design? And what does
it mean to “nudge processing” so that personal meaning making goes
beyond simple their own processing style?
How the brain processes information
The brain is an incredibly complex organ and our understanding about the
brain continues to develop at a rapid rate. If you think, for a moment, about
how we understand the functioning of the human body you can see that we
have both a macro and micro view. The macro view thinks of the body as
an interrelated set of systems with identifiable organs eg respiratory
system, cardiovascular system, reproductive system etc. At the micro level
we can also study and know the functioning of each system and each organ.
And we could even focus on ever more minute aspects until we knew the
functioning of the body at many different levels from a broad systems
approach to a detailed cellular approach. What I’m about to outline is a
broad systems view of some aspects of the brain and brain processing.
Think of it as a simple but powerful model.
© Julia Atkin, 2000
5
Physically it is clear that the brain has two hemispheres and that it has
three evolutionary levels – the hind brain or reptilian brain (instinctive
behaviour, autonomic body control); the limbic system ( our regulatory
centre, vital role in long term memory, fine sensory processor); the
cerebral cortex( intellectual activity, consciousness).
Triune Brain – three evolutionary levels
One broad aspect of the brain’s function that emerged from research on
split brain patients in the 1950’s-1970’s is that the brain has two quite
different ways of processing information and these different modes of
processing are attributed to the two different hemispheres. The diagram
below illustrates those two methods of processing.
Right mode versus left mode processing
© Julia Atkin, 2000
6
Left Mode
CAT
5 - five
Right Mode
Words
Images
Symbols
Numbers
"Counts"
Patterns
"Fiveness"
"Estimates"
Parts
Wholes
Sequential
Linear
"Cause & effect"
Simultaneous
Patterns
Connections
Integrated
Source: Adapted from Williams 1983, p.5.
They have become known as ’right mode’ processing and ’left mode’
processing. Not everyone actually uses the left side of their brain for
analytical processing and the right side for intuitive processing. Left
handers especially may (or may not) have the location of the types of
processing reversed. However, it seems that all brains do use two distinctly
different forms of processing information. One mode of processing
involves a synthesising, pattern recognition processing which is described
as holistic and intuitive. This ’right mode’ processing, as it has become
known, focuses on ‘the forest’. The other main mode of processing is
linear and sequential processing and is described as analytical, logical
processing. This 'left mode' processing focuses on ‘the trees’.
Just as we have hand, eye and leg dominance, we have brain dominance in
which individuals may show a preference for either more right mode
processing or more left mode processing. Some people are ‘ambi-minded’,
like being ambidextrous and rely equally on both modes of processing. We
all use all both modes of processing but we may rely on or show a
preference for one mode of processing over the other. I describe myself as
right handed because my right hand is my dominant hand – I show a
preference for using my right hand over my left for most activities. This
right hand dominance does not mean I do not use my left hand – I use both
hands constantly but my right hand is my ‘lead hand’. Similarly with
© Julia Atkin, 2000
7
thinking – you may show a preference for left mode thinking but you use
both modes of processing.
It turns out that describing the way we process information is not as simple
as the two main ways of processing that were identified through the
research on split brain patients.
Ned Herrmann’s Whole Brain Model of Processing
Consider what we know about the brain physically and in terms of styles of
processing.
two hemispheres - characterised by different types of processing, one
type linear and sequential focusing on bits, the other intuitive,
recognises patterns, holistic focusing on the forest.
-
three evolutionary levels
* cerebral cortex - rational, conceptual
* limbic - emotional, ’doing’, key factor in long term memory
* reptilian - basic memory, instinctive behaviour, autonomic body
control.
Put the ideas above together and you have a model of brain processing
which involves sides [hemispheres] and levels. In an excellent book, The
Creative Brain, Ned Herrmann (Herrmann 1989) has put these ideas
together in what he calls the WHOLE BRAIN MODEL of learning,
thinking and doing. On the one hand we have styles of processing
attributed to different sides of the brain - the one more analytical, logical,
factual, sequential and controlled; the other more holistic, intuitive,
spontaneous and free flow. AND we have at least two different ways of
processing corresponding to two different levels of the brain - the one more
abstract, rational and conceptual [neocortex/cerebral], the other [limbic]
more to do with processing sensory and emotional information - doing and
feeling rather than reflecting. Our conscious thought can be stimulated by
what we are feeling and sensing (limbic) as well as by what we are thinking
(cerebral).
Each of us has a preference pattern for the way we rely on, or engage in
using each mode of processing. The important point is that you use all
modes of processing – you are not ‘right brained’, ‘left brained’ or ‘half
brained’. Everyone is ‘whole brained’ but we differ in the extent to which
we use or rely on each mode – we have different thinking styles.
© Julia Atkin, 2000
8
Ned Herrmann’s Whole Brain Model
LEFT CEREBRAL
HEMISPHERE
A
D
B
C
RIGHT CEREBRAL
HEMISPHERE
D
A
CORPUS CALLOSUM
THALAMUS
HIPPOCAMPAL COMMISSURE
HYPOTHALAMUS
CEREBELLUM
LEFT HALF OF
LIMBIC SYSTEM
C
B
RIGHT HALF OF
LIMBIC SYSTEM
neocortex
TRIUNE BRAIN
limbic system
reptilian
CEREBRAL
A
D
LOGICAL
HOLISTIC
ANALYTICAL
INTUITIVE
SYNTHESIZING
QUANTITATIVE
INTEGRATING
FACT BASED
RIGHT
LEFT
PLANNED
EMOTIONAL
INTERPERSONAL
ORGANIZED
FEELING BASED
DETAILED
KINESTHETIC
SEQUENTIAL
B
C
LIMBIC
Adapted from : Herrmann N., 1996 The Whole Brain Business Bok p.21, McGraw-Hill
© Julia Atkin, 2000
9
Our Four Thinking Selves
RATIONAL,
THEORETICAL SELF
A
Analyses
Clarifies
Quantifies
Is logical
Is critical
Is realistic
Is direct
Likes numbers
Knows about money
Knows how things work
Takes preventative action
Is task focussed
Likes to know the facts
Establishes procedures
Gets things done
Is reliable
ORDERED,
Organises
SAFEKEEPING SELF
Is punctual
Is neat
Plans
B
D
Infers
Speculates
Qualifies
Conceptualises
Is intuitive (ideas)
Imagines
Takes risks
Is impetuous
Bends the rules
Is curious/plays
IMAGINATIVE,
EXPERIMENTAL SELF
Is spontaneous
Is sensitive to others
Is intuitive (feelings)
Likes to teach
Is supportive
Is expressive
EMOTIONAL,
Is cooperative
INTERPERSONAL SELF
Is emotional
Talks a lot
Feels/flows
C
Adapted from : Herrmann N., 1996 The Whol Brain Business Bok p.21, McGraw-Hill
Communication & Learning
Likes & expectations
A
Expects:
An overview
A conceptual framework
Freedom to explore
Analogies/metaphors
Visuals
Enjoys:
Initiative and imagination
Connections to other approaches
Newness & ‘fun’
Expects:
Brief, clear concise info.
Well articulated ideas
Logical format
Accuracy
Certainty
Enjoys:
A good debate
Critical analysis
Readings
D
For communication & learning,
likes and expects
B
Expects:
Involvement with others
Personal anecdotes
Experiential approach
Feelings to be considered
Enjoys:
The personal touch
Group discussion
Harmony
Expects:
Step by step unfolding
Detailed program
Punctuality
Explanation of how
Enjoys:
Structured approach
Low risk
Concrete examples
© Ned Herrmann, adapted by Julia Atkin, 1997
© Julia Atkin, 2000
10
C
Although, as the last diagram shows, different thinking preferences may
result in different likes and expectations with regards to learning it is my
contention that effective learning involves applying the appropriate style of
processing to the task. If a learner is highly inclined towards one mode of
processing - one quadrant or one side of the whole brain model, or the limbic
versus the cerebral, he or she will tend to approach tasks in that mode even
when it’s not the most appropriate mode - even when it’s not likely to lead to
success. The art of being an effective learner and ’doer’ is having the ability
to draw on the appropriate mode for the task. The art of being an effective
teacher is to engage the learner in the appropriate thinking mode(s) for the
task.
Let’s take creative writing for example. A student who has a strong
preference for left mode processing and who is left alone to write a creative
piece of writing tends to write in a very literal descriptive way. Someone
with a strong right mode preference is automatically engaging processing that
will bring forth images and emotion. The question becomes what strategies
will be effective in engaging the person with a preference for left mode
thinking in right mode processing. The diagram on the next page illustrates
teaching strategies that stimulate various modes of processing.
The danger with this model is that you can walk away from it thinking “Oh
okay. If I use a variety of strategies from around each of the modes I’ll catch
all the learners eventually.” It’s not as simple as that. It’s not about
catching them in their style, nor leaving them in their style. How do we help
learners construct understandings that others have made before them? Unless
you have a thinking style like Einstein you will never come to understand
what he understood.
If the learning I value involves:
• developing understanding and personal meaning
• developing competence through mastery of skills and processes
• developing the learner’s ability to articulate and share their knowledge
• enabling the learner to transfer learning from one context to another in
authentic life situations
. . .then for each individual, all modes of processing need to be stimulated
and integrated regardless of personal thinking style.
Truly effective learning, learning which can be transferred to new situations
and communicated to others, will be known in the many languages of the
brain and these ways of knowing will be integrated and coherent. Knowing
will be an integration and internalisation of our experiences, our feelings, our
imagination and our analysing and it will find expression in many modes of
'doing' from procedural application to a variety of creative forms.
© Julia Atkin, 2000
11
Strategies to Promote Integral Learning
concept maps
association maps
mind mapping
reflection
developing rules/formulae/definitions
compare and contrast, categorising
mind journey - 'fly on the wall'/watching
graphic representation - graphs, pie charts,
structured overviews
analysis of theories, Gowin's Vee
questioning - What proof? What reasoning?
A
Cerebral Mode
Thinking Processes
LOGICAL
HOLISTIC
ANALYTICAL
INTUITIVE
QUANTITATIVE
FACT BASED
12
© Julia Atkin, 2000
application formulae’
following models, ‘scaffolds
D
SYNTHESISING
INTEGRATING
Left Mode
Thinking Processes
Right Mode
Thinking Processes
PLANNED
methods, procedures, blueprints
step by step working
mind journey - sequence, process
graphic representation - flowcharts, timelines
structured worksheets, practice, consolidation
programming, planners, goal setting, lists
questioning - How? How can I use this? What are the facts?
ORGANISED
DETAILED
SEQUENTIAL
simulation
role play
EMOTIONAL
INTERPERSONAL
FEELING BASED
KINESTHETIC
B
C
Limbic Mode
Thinking Processes
hands on/concrete materials
experiencing
excursions
“immersion''
application
© Julia Atkin, 1990-2000
models - physical and conceptual, mnemonics
analogy, metaphor, imagery
mind journey - images
graphic representation - images, posters, video
random association strategies
brainstorm
questioning - Why? What if?
drama
story, anecdote, myth, parable
mind journey - experience, feel
graphic representation - analogue drawings
talking/discussing/group work
rhythm, music, song
questioning - What has this got to do with me?
Thinking ’nudged’ & stimulated by:
• collaboration, cooperative learning
• questioning
• posing problems, challenges
• design process
• games
• predict -observe-explain
• teaching, re-presenting eg multimedia
Integral Learning
Appropriate mental processing for learning - integration of experiential
knowledge, imagination, understanding, information, clarification and action
Accuracy
Efficiency
Meaning
Understanding
Cerebral
CONCEPTUAL
KNOWLEDGE
PROPOSITIONAL
GRASP IN
THEMIND’S EYE
KNOWLEDGE
Image, analogy,
Language,
pattern, insight,
definitions,rules,
sense of. . .
symbols
represent
THINK
REFLECT
Right
Left
apply, practise
EXPERIENCE
SENSE
PROCEDURAL
& FACTUAL
KNOWLEDGE
express
PERSONAL
EXPERIENTIAL
KNOWLEDGE
Information,
routines
Feel, relate to
self, engagement
of self
Limbic
Personal
relevance
Human learning is deepened and amplified by integrating our
multiple ways of knowing.
Teach to ENGAGE and INTEGRATE all modes of processing
regardless of personal thinking style.
In designing for learning it is essential that you clarify what outcomes are
important in each of the ways of knowing. What are the understandings or
big ideas you want students to develop? How does this learning relate to
what they know now (personal story knowledge) or want to know? What
definitions, rules, theories statements do you want them to know and be
able to articulate? What procedural factual knowledge do you want them to
develop? What processes or skills do you want them to master?
You may find the templates on the following pages helpful in designing for
learning.
© Julia Atkin, 2000
13
LEARNING EXPERIENCE & STRATEGIES
Strategies that involve clarifying, analysing, defining, debating, formulating, and
establishing procedures.
Strategies that involve exploring, designing, developing models, finding patterns,
representing in image and metaphor.
LEARNING OUTCOMES IN DIFFERENT WAYS OF KNOWING
What do they need to be able to state
or articulate? - rules, definitions theories?
What understandings, ideas, models?
A D
14
© Julia Atkin, 2000
Focus
Topic, theme
How does this relate to
their personal lives, what
do I want them to value?
What facts, procedures,
examples, skills do they
need to master?
B C
LEARNING OUTCOMES IN DIFFERENT WAYS OF KNOWING
Strategies that involve gathering information, followiing rules, following
procedures - consolidating facts, developing mastery of skills and
procedures
© Gene Myers - adapted by Julia Atkin, 1994-2000
Strategies that evoke feelings, develop attitudes, and connect with students’
personal story knowledge. -sharing, discussing, experiencing, sensing, intuiting,
expressing.
LEARNING EXPERIENCE & STRATEGIES
References:
Atkin, J.A. (1992)
Teaching for Effective Learning Inservice Course Notes, Second
Edition, Harden.
Atkin, J.A. (1994)
Thinking: Critical for Learning. Paper presented at the Fifth
International Conference on Thinking, July, 1992 in Edwards, J. (Ed)
(1994) Thinking: International Interdisciplinary Perspectives
Melbourne, Hawker Brownlow Education, 201-215
Atkin, J.A. (1994)
How Students Learn: A Framework. for Effective Teaching: Part 2
Conditions which Enhance and Maximise Learning Seminar Series
No. 34, Melbourne: IARTV
Atkin, J.A. (1996)
From Values and Beliefs about Learning to Principles and Practice
Seminar Series No 54, Melbourne: IARTV
Atkin, J.A. (1997)
Enhancing Learning with Information Technology: Promises,
pitfalls and practicalities Seminar Series No. 70, Melbourne:
IARTV
Atkin, J.A. (1999)
Reconceptualising the Curriculum for the Knowledge Era. Part 1:
The Challenge Seminar Series No. 86, Melbourne: IARTV
Bagley, M.T. & Hess, K.K. (1982) 200 Ways of Using Imagery in the Classroom. Hawker
Brownlow Education, Melbourne.
Barlex, D. and Carre, C. (1985) Visual Communication in Science, Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press.
Bawden, R. (1989)
’Problem Based Learning: A Focus for the Quiet Revolution’,
Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Conference of the Society for the
provision of Education in Rural Australia, Launceston Tasmania,
July, 1989.
Bell, N. (1986)
Visualizing and Verbalizing Paso Robles CA, Academy of Reading
Publications [Available through SPELD, 129 Greenwich Rd, Greenwich NSW
Ph02-99062977 Fax 02 99065657]
Boomer, G. (Ed) (1982) Negotiating the Curriculum, Gosford, Ashton Scholastic
Brandt, R. (Ed) (1990)
’Learning Styles & the Brain’, Educational Leadership, 48, 2.
Carter, Rita. (1998)
Mapping the Mind London: Weidenfeld and Nicolcon
Caine, G. & Caine, R. (1991) Making Connections: Teaching and the human brain,
Alexandria, Virginia, Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
de Bono, E. (1970)
Lateral Thinking, New York, Harper Collins.
de Bono, E. (1985)
Six Thinking Hats, London, Penquin.
© Julia Atkin, 2000
15
de Bono, E. (1992)
Six Thinking Hats for Schools, Melbourne, Hawker Brownlow.
Edwards, B (1979)
Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain, Los Angeles, J.P. Tarcher.
Edwards, B. (1986)
Drawing on the Artist Within, Los Angeles, J.P. Tarcher.
Egan., K. (1986)
Teaching as Story Telling: An alternative approach to teaching and
curriculum in the elementary school.Chicago, The University of
Chicago Press.
Egan., K. (1992)
Imagination in Teaching and Learning: The middle school years.
Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.
Fanning, P.(1988)
Visualization for Change. Oakland, New Harbinger.
Gardner, H. (1983)
Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York:
Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1991)
The Unschooled Mind: How children think and how schools should
teach New York: Basic Books.
Herrmann, N. (1988)
The Creative Brain , North Carolina, Brain Books.
[Available from The Ned Herrmann Group, P.O. Box 383, Pymble NSW 2073 Ph 02 98802333
Fax 02 98802343]
MacLean, P.D. (1978)
"A Mind of Three Minds: Educating the Triune Brain." In The 77th
Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
McCarthy, M. (1991)
Mastering the Information Age, Los Angeles, J.P.Tarcher.
Moir, A. & Jessel, D. (1989) Brain Sex: The real difference between men and women, London,
Penquin.
Morris, A. and Stewart-Dore, N. (1984) Learning to Learn from Text:Effective reading in the
content areas Sydney, Addison-Wesley
Neville, B. (1989)
Educating Psyche Emotion, Imagination and the Unconscious in
Learning, Melbourne, Collins Dove
Novak, J.D. & Gowin, D.B. (1984) Learning How to Learn, New York, Cambridge University
Press.
Ornstein, R. (1986)
Multimind: A new way of looking at human behaviour London,
Macmillan
Ornstein, R. (1991)
The Evolution of Consciousness New York, Prentice Hall
Shone, R. (1984)
Creative Visualization, London, Thorsons
Springer, S.P. and Deutsch, G. (1989) Left Brain, Right Brain, New York, W.H. Freeman.
Stoessiger, R and Edmunds, J. (1993) The Natural Learning of Mathematics, Heineman
Williams, L.V. (1983)
Teaching for the Two-Sided Mind, New York, Simon and Schuster.
© Julia Atkin, 2000
16