Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban
what?
nothing has changed at all, the majority of the people still follow authority and believe whatever that authoritive figure recites from his big book.
whether it is a priest and his bible, or a scientist and his thesis, or the hipster with his edgy columns...
99% of the people who now claim that einstein and darwin have the truth of it would have burned witches at a the stake 500 years ago.
Last edited by The Stranger; 06-26-2013 at 23:08.
We do not sow.
Oh, I took as a student an active role in learning. I was reading encyclopedias at seven. Was a great primary student, and a very good high school student. I programmed my first computer to play craps (old mono coloured, pre 286 era) I did a degree in science not for money or marks or to become a scientist. I did it because it was interesting.
But I'm a geek in personality. I have two fantastic role models for parents. I had access to above average resources. Lived on a farm. All meaning I had a very good start. Something not everyone gets.
Now school to me is for my children to learn social skills. For a lot of kids though it is where they find their only learning role models and the people who can teach them to learn. Teachers need to bridge the gaps and it isn't all self discovery. Yes as an adult there is the Internet, but even as my seven yr old is learning most of google is blocked at school making it hard to create reports, puzzles and crosswords for his assignments.
Some kids need more attention then the baseline. They have learning problems and need someone to advocate for them, to recognise the issues and to do their best to resolve it. Not every parent nor every teacher has that ability. In general school is for the happy average. The bright kids either self teach or get bored and drop performance, the kids with disabilities get categorized, pigeon holed and of lucky attended to.
Even then a lot of teachers read straight out of text books. Poorly comprehend the source materials and poorly communicate the contents at an appropriate level for the students. A kid can do as well reading a source book for themselves and better if they cross reference and analyze.
So I don't expect much from my kids teachers. First provide a safe place, second inspire them to learn for themselves.
"Learning is life, life is learning". One school motto that I actually agree with.
Whow, interesting speech, Papewaio. Much truth in it, too.
I was lucky to have some inspiring teachers. And yes, I belive the most important thing for a teacher is to awaken an interest for the subject and an enthusiasm to learn - especially for Chemistry, which is a pretty abstract subject, considering that most of the things you deal with are way too small to allow you ever to see them.
All my three younger siblings had different learning disabilities. So I have first hand experience of how teachers can make a difference. I've taught English as a Foreign Language. My wife teaches Mandarin. My best friend is head of science for a school. One of my sister in laws is a music teacher the other a primary school teacher.
=][=
As for chemistry, cooking is an accessible way of learning edible chemistry. If someone explains what is happening to the food it is a way into a very fascinating part of science. It is a similar soft path as playing computer games to learn about computers.
Some chefs make a fortune in showing the magic of cooking in a scientific manner.
it is relevant because these people will not learn from someone else than a teacher (who is, or is supposed to be, an authoritive figure), in the broader sense, it doesnt neccesarily need to be a schoolteacher
learning has always been an active process, its just that data is more easily available now. However this does not mean it is more comprehensible, it may in fact even be more confusing since there is also alot of contradicting info available. I can look up any advanced chemistry theory, but most likely i would not understand unless i had someone explain it to me in a comprehensible manner. there often just is a limit to what you can do on your own, and i guess i would agree that schoolteachers are not the only source of this learning, but they never have been. in fact i think people nowadays rely more heavily on school/uni/institutionalised teachers then ever before.
Last edited by The Stranger; 06-27-2013 at 10:56.
We do not sow.
Ah, I realize I should take more care when flinging terms around... "Learning as an active/passive process" is not a choice or action done by the student, but rather an observation of how learning takes place. As such it is not something you can choose to do, but instead something professors will fight over.
If you see learning as an active process, you're a constructivist. If you see it as a passive process, you're a behaviourist.
Simply put, the behaviourist teacher will will show examples and ask the students to copy and use them. The constructivist teacher will give a problem for the kids to solve without showing them how to do it. For most of our history, we've been doing the former. Now, however, we're in the process of changing over to a constructivist approach(with some major and notable exceptions). This started with Dewey, and since he's only been around for a century we haven't managed to flush out all the elderly yet.
Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban
Anyone playing PC games in the '80s had to figure out how to play a game without a manual, or load the game by using config and batch files.
I think for a lot of people you would start with a bit of training with vicarious experience (book learning) mixed with hands on experience. Once someone has a toolset the next job is to put them into set problem solving scenarios. Ultimately the aim being for them to be independent within a sandbox and let them solve problems they choose.
So I don't see it as a constructionist vs behaviourist. I see it as choosing the right training resource based on the students needs. The problem is some students are self motivated to find information others need to be spoon fed.
And to answer it being on a farm and allowed to run free, climb trees, break sticks, make dams, go fishing my teachers were boredom if I didn't do things and pain if I overdid them. Kids in more free environments get to learn from around them and choose what things they want to pursue and learn more about.
So you're a behaviourist, pape
Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban
I laugh when social scientists try to so hard to make categories to describe the most blurred of gradients.
Days since the Apocalypse began
"We are living in space-age times but there's too many of us thinking with stone-age minds" | How to spot a Humanist
"Men of Quality do not fear Equality." | "Belief doesn't change facts. Facts, if you are reasonable, should change your beliefs."
Bookmarks