Does a student...

[Larry Gude]

...get taught or do they learn?

I heard a point made, by the president of Hillsdale College, that they do not teach, the students learn and that it is the job of the school to tell the student "this is what we want you to learn" and that students, being 18-22 and in a biological state of changing, are in need of being told that, clearly, and then it's in their hands.

So...

 

[Beta84]

...get taught or do they learn?

I heard a point made, by the president of Hillsdale College, that they do not teach, the students learn and that it is the job of the school to tell the student "this is what we want you to learn" and that students, being 18-22 and in a biological state of changing, are in need of being told that, clearly, and then it's in their hands.

So...

I think the student has always been responsible for learning, but it's far more important at the university level. You can get by with "being taught" at the lower levels, but the more the student teaches themselves, the more they will learn and the more knowledge they will have.

In high school and lower, it is very easy to listen to the teachers, complete some homework, and ace the exams. Snoozer if you pay attention in class and have the mind to understand it, but you still won't learn as much as if you're taking what you learned in class and adding more knowledge on your own time. College is a different animal though. Just paying attention in class and completing homework will only get you part of the way there. To get that A, you need to teach yourself things that you probably won't be learning in class or in your assigned homework.

 

[clevalley]

...get taught or do they learn?

I heard a point made, by the president of Hillsdale College, that they do not teach, the students learn and that it is the job of the school to tell the student "this is what we want you to learn" and that students, being 18-22 and in a biological state of changing, are in need of being told that, clearly, and then it's in their hands.

So...

50/50 - It takes someone who can teach in order for the student to learn...

I have always been good in math, but in HS I barely squeaked by in math (Algebra).

In tech school and college I rocketed through Algebra -> Trig because the teachers I had in tech school knew how to teach the subject. Once I understood what the teacher was teaching it opened a door in my mind and I was able to learn the mathmatical concepts.

 

[Beta84]

50/50 - It takes someone who can teach in order for the student to learn...

I have always been good in math, but in HS I barely squeaked by in math (Algebra).

In tech school and college I rocketed through Algebra -> Trig because the teachers I had in tech school knew how to teach the subject. Once I understood what the teacher was teaching it opened a door in my mind and I was able to learn the mathmatical concepts.

that's true. bad teachers = you better learn it yourself or you're screwed. having a combination of the two is always the best.

 

[kris31280]

I think it's 50/50. The student needs to be willing and able to learn, but the teacher needs to be willing and able to teach. For example, in High School I never thought I'd need to use algebra, and as a result chose to not pay much attention to it at all, never understood it, never asked for help, and failed twice and barely squeaked by with a D the third time. This time around, I've taken two algebra courses and gotten an A in both, because the teachers took the time to help me understand what I just didn't get... the very thing which always made me give up before.

 

[Chasey_Lane]

In grades 1-12 you are taught to learn. In college you are taught to think.

 

[SamSpade]

I know that in college, I definitely came across ideas and subjects that, if it wasn't explained to me, I would probably not have figured it out on my own. That was certainly true in my engineering classes and some of the more advanced math and physics classes.

Three of my math classes were all theory, and every quiz and every test was writing proofs. I absolutely guarantee I could never have learned it without having had it explained to me. Freshman and sophomore physics were made considerably easier with the many demonstrations held in class (it was nicknamed "The Magic Show").

The other classes, most of it I did teach myself. I taught myself Russian, for example, and it's amazing how useful THAT turned out to be. I taught myself International Relations, Nazi Germany and History of Religion in Colonial America, and of the Roman Republic. How? Because it was all reading. All of it. The tests were all essays, all of them.

Some of it was ALL taught. I was in Navy ROTC, and almost everything Navy is NOT intuitive - someone tells you what it is and you assimilate it.

I had a discussion with a roommate about this, once, in college - aargh! - 30 years ago. We agreed that an enormous amount you teach yourself, through assignments and homework and reading. So we asked ouselves - why in God's name did we pay some institution 8k a year to do what we could do ourselves for free? Besides getting credit for it?

We decided that it was the cost of humiliation. You paid the money to force yourself to learn - the higher the cost, the more was expected, the higher the level of humiliation if you didn't follow through.

Well, we were 19 at the time. To us, the most humiliating thing in life was flunking.

 

[Larry Gude]

I . So we asked ouselves - why in God's name did we pay some institution 8k a year to do what we could do ourselves for free? Besides getting credit for it?

We decided that it was the cost of humiliation. You paid the money to force yourself to learn - the higher the cost, the more was expected, the higher the level of humiliation if you didn't follow through.

Well, we were 19 at the time. To us, the most humiliating thing in life was flunking.

Not the humiliation per se, but the discipline to see it through, to overcome the hurdles, to accomplish the goals, complete the class. Those are marketable skills.

That's the point.

 

[clevalley]

In grades 1-12 you are taught to learn. In college you are taught to think.

Not the humiliation per se, but the discipline to see it through, to overcome the hurdles, to accomplish the goals, complete the class. Those are marketable skills.

That's the point.

I think Chasey hit the nail on the head and that rolls into your discipline theory... at a certain age you are taught to think inside of the box, grades 1-12 you are there to learn; whereas in post-high school certain concepts are presented to you and you as a student are left the draw the conclusion (to think) and formulate the correct answer.

 

[twinoaks207]

I think Chasey hit the nail on the head and that rolls into your discipline theory... at a certain age you are taught to think inside of the box, grades 1-12 you are there to learn; whereas in post-high school certain concepts are presented to you and you as a student are left the draw the conclusion (to think) and formulate the correct answer.

I"m going to try desperately hard not to get on the soapbox here...

There are elements of truth in both of these assertions. IMHO, elementary school is where the teachers begin to teach and students learn, basic concepts in the major academic areas. Middle school builds upon what is learned in elementary, and high school builds upon what is learned in middle school, all under compulsory attendance which may impact upon motivation. The college experience depends upon the student's motivation to learn, to seek help when needed, and to think.

A good teacher will not only teach the content (at whatever level) to the student, but also teach the student how to think (analyze the question, determine what is needed, and figure out how to solve it) as a process that is not dependent upon the content but on the type of problem-solving required.

A good student will go to class ready to learn, if not content, then process, and be able to take what is learned and APPLY it to other problems in other circumstances.

It is a two-way street.

(Now, if only the powers that be would get rid of this plethora of "testing" and let us go back to teaching in the true sense of the word, my little world would be a much better place.

 

[Beta84]

(Now, if only the powers that be would get rid of this plethora of "testing" and let us go back to teaching in the true sense of the word, my little world would be a much better place.

While I agree with your other points, I wanted to comment on this "testing" stuff. In Florida, they started something called the "FCAT" which they do in various grades, but have a "final" one in either 10th or 11th grade that is basically needed to graduate. It is testing to verify you have at least a 6th or 9th grade level of comprehension...something incredibly base and substandard. Instead of just expecting students to learn the correct knowledge in school and be able to pass the test, they dedicate hours, days, weeks, and even months to teaching students the material that will be on the test and give them practice tests so they can make sure they pass the exams.

The best part about it? It's not taught in the appropriate classroom. For instance, they had math 1st period and reading 2nd period. It didn't really matter what my 1st and 2nd period classes were, I would be taking the FCAT math test in 1st period so my 1st period teacher, who was NOT a math teacher, would be teaching me the math that's going to be on the exam. I'd end up missing lessons from other subjects just so we could all learn how to pass a stupid exam that most of us SHOULD be able to pass if we weren't a bunch of effin retards or paid attention in school. So sure, there are a bunch of dumb kids who didn't learn and need help passing the test so they can barely graduate high school and go on to mostly be useless members of society, but for those of us who would have passed anyway because we gave a crap and put in effort, we were held back. It's complete BS.

I guess Maryland must have some dumb crap like this too since twinoaks is bringing up the topic, but I don't really know what the testing standards are here. My opinion? Teach kids as much as you can in classes. Try to have them learn as much as possible. If you need to increase the grading standards in order to make sure they don't graduate until they learn specific stuff, then go about it that way! But don't make useless tests to test their cumulative knowledge of things they were supposed to learn years ago. If they don't know the antonym of "big" then who cares? If they can legitimately pass their classes, then give them their degree. The tests don't even test useful knowledge that they "need to know" before graduating, especially if they're not going for a higher education. And anyone going for a higher education is going to pass the test anyway.

I'm noticing I'm very opinionated and not very nice tonight. I must be cranky

 

[PsyOps]

I know that in college, I definitely came across ideas and subjects that, if it wasn't explained to me, I would probably not have figured it out on my own.

I can always apply this to playing the guitar. There is stuff out there that you just aren't going to figure out without being taught. Then you have to have the desire to learn.

 

[D-35]

Hillsdale College

...get taught or do they learn?

I heard a point made, by the president of Hillsdale College, that they do not teach, the students learn and that it is the job of the school to tell the student "this is what we want you to learn" and that students, being 18-22 and in a biological state of changing, are in need of being told that, clearly, and then it's in their hands.

So...

???

Hillsdale is one of the top colleges in the U.S.

They have never accepted financial gifts and/or donations, and therefore, they don't espouse anyone's agenda (read: leftist indoctrination techniques meant to brainwash young, impressionable minds with lies and distortions).

They are beholden to no one.

They publish and will provide their free monthly newsletter, "IMPRIMIS" to all that request it. I mention this on the off-chance that there are any local-yokel libs that would actually be willing to investigate/assess ANYTHING prior to contempt. Hell, if you really have an inquiring mind; just google 'em.
(D-35)

 

[Beta84]

???

Hillsdale is one of the top colleges in the U.S.

Who??

 

[jazz lady]

My thoughts are they are being TAUGHT and in the process are LEARNING and already know how and have the desire to do so.

 

[Larry Gude]

???

Hillsdale is one of the top colleges in the U.S.

They have never accepted financial gifts and/or donations, and therefore, they don't espouse anyone's agenda (read: leftist indoctrination techniques meant to brainwash young, impressionable minds with lies and distortions).

They are beholden to no one.

They publish and will provide their free monthly newsletter, "IMPRIMIS" to all that request it. I mention this on the off-chance that there are any local-yokel libs that would actually be willing to investigate/assess ANYTHING prior to contempt. Hell, if you really have an inquiring mind; just google 'em.
(D-35)

Would you mind helping me with the point of your post in response to mine? I read it as though I asked if anyone had an opinion on teaching vs. learning and you said "Peanut butter and jelly sandwich!"

:shrug: