Neither. Teach critical thinking skills and allow students to learn independently. They are susceptible to programming at that age but the temptation should be resisted (though few so called educators do so) and instead they should be taught how to learn..not what to learn.
i agree with grieg, cos the new grads know nothing about life or how to support themself, we call them Y.D. in any case do you think that knowing either, will help in their life? i do not think so!!!!
It is importantto seperate religion from reality, and thus I don't see why it should be taught at schools outside society class. Christian
I agree with Christian. Grieg, your theory that kids should be 'taught to learn' sounds really awesome, but do you know how many kids would actually take advantage of the skills they are taught, to learn as much as possible? I probably would have because I am a curious person, and because my parents told me not to play computer games or watch television without their permission. I do believe however that I am the excepton rather than the rule. Teaching kids how best to learn things and then not requiring them to know certain facts will probably end with the average kid knowing nothing in spite of its abilities.
On the sucject of self-learning. a school in the kommune (county) I live in has been re-made into a school where the childrens education depends on the childs own desire to learn. There are of course teachers, but no traditional classes, so the children do not have any forced learning. This has meant that many children has taken their children out of the school again, and are now fighting to get their children to the educational level of all other children in their age. Most teachers also quit quite fast, because they can't handle the type of laissez faire management. Still, many parents are signed their children up for the school, because they are told how wonderful and innovative the theory is. Most children needs to be dragged screaming through their first school years, and can only truly take responsibility for their own education from college and on. Christian
I agree that certain things need to be taught the old fashioned way. Math for instance..physics (applied not theoretical of course) engineering..and so on. Most everthing else..the "facts" that you learn are useless. I had 6 and 1/2 years post high school education and the amount of the memorized facts that I recall is miniscule. If one is taught to think independently..to educate oneself by reading..to evaluate critically what the so called experts teach and to think creatively..that is all one needs. I'm talking the basics here of course specialized information can be learned as needed depending upon what field you wish to enter. This may be slightly impractical I'l admit if adopted whole cloth. I would be happy if the educators would just assign reading on both sides of a subject and allow the students to analyze and interpret the information for themselves. IMO teaches should guide students towards the information..make sure that they are exposed to differing views, then step back and let then use their own minds. More independent thinkers in the world would not be a bad thing
i have to agree with daniel some of the topics in this section are becoming stale and boring..not to say repeatitive..........................................................................................................sorry i just dropped off for a second there.
Lighten up on CSP. I have logged on for days at a time while nobody posted hardly a single word. At least he is trying. Anyone who has no interest in a particular topic need only skip it..it's easy
In Dutch, people going through most "lower" types of school are called something roughly meaning "learners", whereas only those who are recieving higher professional education or university level education are referred to as "students". I think it would be wise to apply this meaning to the word "students" in the quote above since those going through educations of lower levels aren't known for their enthusiasm to use independent thought even if they are able to use it.
How to learn is a good idea, but they should also be taught how to think. I think Grieg said something about critical thinking... I've just come across a site called "world think tank" and the thinking level there is (depending on my mood) either laughably or suicidally bad. Example: Gravity waves are caused by centrifugal force and this force is so strong that a Formula 1 car passing close by can knock a person over. Any engineers/ physicists/ straight-thinking people care to comment on that? I can't, I'm too busy looking for a razor blade to open my wrists.... :roll:
oli wrote: That is precisely what I'm speaking of. The empasis was on how to learn. If one learns to think critically and independently and is then exposed to ideas and concepts learning will occur. Instead of having students memorize the thoughts and ideas of others and being told by their teachers what is correct they should be stimulated by being presented with problems and concepts and then challenged to think for themselves and come up with their own correct answers (if answers exist). I'm sure this way to "teach" students is too different and iconoclastic for some to ever accept yet I believe it will turn out more creative and independent thinking adults.[/b]
I sort of agree, but even if you teach people how to learn there are (in my experience) huge (vastly huge) numbers of people who are not interested in learning (even if they did know how). But if they had been taught to think as well at least they would be more critical about what they "accidentally" learnt. I doubt it is possible to teach people to want to learn, and that's a sad truth - too many people don't want to. "Every time I learn something new it pushes some of the old stuff out of my brain" - Homer Simpson :lol: