Teaching Learning.

[de_budding]

'Do you see that point?' I did, eventually. thank you.

[Arjen]

Originally Posted by de_budding

'Do you see that point?' I did, eventually. thank you.

I didn't mean that school is necessarily a bad thing, but looking at it from that perspective itcontributes nothing. I think comparing things can be valuable, but it is often used as a means of creating a certain frame of reference (the "rulebase" I spoke of earlier) and that has a detrimental effect on the reasonings of man I think. Do know what sophism means?

[de_budding]

Sophism, another new word .
What part of my thinking premoted it to being sophist? I understand the fallacy of the argument now, and following the train of thought again with more logic I saw that my goal was, more or less, to teach wihout teaching. But still if it is a sophist argument it has to be plausible or have some logic right? What made my thinking plausible?

Dan.

[Arjen]

First off:
I think your thought is an idealistic one. It suggests that there is at least some truth in what we observe and what others have thought up and that we can learn bits and pieces of that truth for ourselves. You question the things being taught in stead of the teaching itself. In part I agree with you.

I did not mean to say that your thoughts were sophist. I ment to say that people who are teaching for their livelyhood (get paid for it) are, in Socrates definition, sophists. Sophism is the usage of wise remarks (or thoughts) to get something done. According to Socrates sophists were often paid large sums of money to teach the children of rich people what their fathers wanted them to learn; what was of use, in stead of what is true.

What sophists have in common is the usage of generally accepted "truths" with a certain "goal" in mind. This "goal" has the effect of twisting that "truth" so that it is only "true-ish" (and therefore not true). A lawyer who gets a guilty person off would be a sophist for instance; a statesman who gives a certain deal to the company that gave him a nice holiday on Hawaii would be a sophist and last, but not least a teacher being paid by a government to teach what that government deems "right" or "true" is a sophist (all in that definition, for there are less radical theories as well).

Perhaps you, like I, have read in the papers lately that teachers are now being paid by large companies to teach their pupils what is needed for said companies in the near future in stead of the normal things. That is a very serious thing indeed (in my eyes).

Anyway, I was not necessarily criticising you there Dan..

Note:
The articles I am referring to (in which teachers are said to be paid by companies) are Dutch ( I'm a Dutchie ). They will do you little good. I have looked around for a second, but I have found no english articles on that. Perhaps that only happens in Holland; but I doubt it.

--[edit]--
I think your idea of the possibility of learning lies in the intentions of the recipient and that sophism in the sense that there is a goal with what is being taught lies in the intentions of the teachers/institutions.
--[/edit]--

[de_budding]

I don't think it is the thought that is idealistic, it is me.
I was disappointed to learn that tomorrow (the 24th) UK teachers will be on strike for more money. I think the fact I'm disappointed shows my idealism and the abandonment of pupils for money demonstrates your point about sophism

I did smile eventually though, after I got back from uni my girlfriend, whom was concerned about her a-level exams (four weeks away) in relation to the strike that was going to close her school, was very proud to announce that a few choice dedicated teachers would be opening the school tomorrow to keep the a-level revision classes going. Mr. X the head of their 6th form (year 13) is sadly not one of the choice few, he has chosen to leave that day because, as he defended to the worried students, his union are who he would turn to if his job was in jeopardy due to student accusations (sexual harassment and the like, and yes he did use that as an example .)

My minor outrage with regards to the teachers union’s perfectly rationale actions shows that I am being idealistic. There demands were reasonable as well, they want there wages to simple rise with inflation, but still I will maintain that education is far too delicate and important of an area to be dealt with in such material driven ways. Although 15,884 (25%) voted against the strike, isn’t that nice.

“Perhaps you, like I, have read in the papers lately that teachers are now being paid by large companies to teach their pupils what is needed for said companies in the near future in stead of the normal things. That is a very serious thing indeed (in my eyes).”

Another sad story; in England we have McDonalds and Tesco’s degrees to look forward to, god knows how they are going to turn out, I heard the local radio comment yesterday ‘Tesco degrees, by one get one free’. The amount of focus on vocational qualifications in Britain at the moment worries me, I think we’re going communist or something.

“Anyway, I was not necessarily criticising you there Dan.. ”

Well if you were not I was.

And lastly I would like to recommend a TV show from the BBC, ‘Chinese School’, there system is so different that it makes my ideas feel trivial.

Thank you for your responses, I don’t want to exhaust you I just never know when to stop responding, I don’t seem to run out of things to type so I simply keep going.

Dan.

[Arjen]

I would like to nuance my earlier post a bit. I am of the firm conviction that teachers should also be able to live and unfortunately they need money to do so. Our earlier example Socrates may just serve us now again. He was put to death by a trial because he was (among other things) accused of corrupting the young.

Socrates defence was quite simple. He argued that it was not his fault that hordes of younglings followed him around through town asking him all sorts of questions. So how was he to blame? He never asked any money for his teachings and therefore there was no way to blame him for "faulty services rendered" or something. He did agree with the court that he should be punished for his actions (criticising the state) though. Seeing as the greatest punishment anyone could recieve was not being able to take care of himself he argued that as a punishment he should be paid by the state for his actions. That would be suitable seeing as he rendered the service of criticising the state and if ever he did not criticise the state correctly he could be held accountable because he was being paid for it.

Remembering that he was facing death charges that plea angered the jury who were inclided to let him off with a banishment to convict him to a death penalty regardless.

That story shows in my eyes clearly that also teachers can be quite idealistic. I'd say any one teacher such as Socrates is more valuable then a whole school full of the other. BUt it does go to show that even teachers should be paid for their job. Their job being criticising the state and other actions being undertaken in the country.

p.s. I bet you'll notice when you have outposted my interest...I'll stop posting

p.p.s. Socrates defence cracked me up several times. Where does an old geezer like him get that attitude??

--[edit]--
I am now at work, but I wanted to add this:
- Love for the sake of love is love; otherwise it is golddigging for instance
- Science for the sake of science is science, otherwise it is pseudoscience for instance.
- Teaching for the sake of teaching is teaching; otherwise it is sophistry for instance.

See how things for their own sake are what they are and if done for a "goal" it becomes some corrupted (passing away) thereof.
--[/edit]--

[Aedes]

At all levels of education the best way to teach learning is to teach interactively and to foster independent study through projects and assignments. It works for the med students, residents, and (occasionally) undergrads that I teach, but it also works at the elementary school level (according to my mother, who is an elementary school principal).

In medical education we usually refer to our style of teaching as Socratic, though that's a sort of colloquial use of the word -- but we DO focus on questioning the learner to lead him/her to generate his/her own answers.

This, in contrast to pure didactic teaching, actually forces the learner to be actively involved in the learning process.

[de_budding]

Are you ever met with any resistance from the learners?
Dan.

[Aedes]

Originally Posted by de_budding

Are you ever met with any resistance from the learners?
Dan.

Not outright resistance. There are a few obstacles, though. First, if someone is completely disinterested in a subject, they're not going to be able to muster up much motivation. Second, people who have made it as far as medical school and graduate medical education (i.e. interns, residents) are very successful and usually self-critical students -- and therefore can really beat themselves up when they don't know something. So sometimes they are reluctant to put themselves out on a limb and really participate because of insecurity. The other extreme is they overcompensate by really trumpeting things they do know and can appear arrogant, whereas allowing themselves a little more humility would let them fill in gaps and supplement knowledge.

Some students like to work independently. Last year I taught a small group for the first year infectious diseases course at Harvard Med, and the med students there (who are exceptionally bright) have for most of their lives been studying independently. So sometimes they wouldn't even show up to class, because they just wanted to sit in a cubicle and study.

It's a problem when they become clinical medical students during their third year, because despite being amont the most elite students in the country, they have never really cultivated interactive learning or teamwork (which IS by virtue of participation and interaction an important learning experience).

The most important aspect of teaching, in my opinion, is empathy -- i.e. understanding how different students differ from one another and have different needs. But there's a point at which students need to be adaptable and self-motivated too, and some of this is character.

[de_budding]

Thank you for your response, it is much appreciated. It seems I have a lot to learn about the relationship forged between teacher and learner- whether the level be primary, higher or even medical education, before I can for such idealistic opinions about the learners.

I originally was quite upset at the efforts made and sometimes wasted by a teacher on a 'disinterested' pupil. But I feel that as soon as I get a glimpse at what teacher training has in store that my opinions will shift even more.

Dan.