A new look at how to teach and learn

Yet another article on Education that begins with the premise of how bad things were, and currently are. Well, I was educated with chalk-and-talk, and somehow thrived despite of it, and so have many of my peers. The world we have today is the result of extraordinary teachers who have gone before us, and I thank them from the bottom of my heart.

I have taken an interest in Education issues as my own children entered the school system. I have also kept in touch with my old school teachers. The teachers of today have it much harder than those of the past. There are several reasons for this. One of them is the micromanagement of teachers due to University Education Departments obsessing with assessment processes. My old school maths teacher said: “The best thing Universities can do for school teachers is to close down all of their Education Departments”. Perhaps this is too harsh, but I’ve never heard anyone else say something like this about any other University activity.

No one has ever attempted to tell me how to do my research. However, there is no shortage of Educationalists who are happy to tell me how I should teach. Yet the same skill set is required for success in both: intellectual, organisational and social. Research and Teaching are academic activities which cannot be micromanaged. The reason seasoned academics do not need artificial professional development in either is because they have experienced a great deal already, and can educate themselves whenever required. Not all are great teachers, and not all are great researchers, but none are made better by so-called professional development.

Education is not an academic discipline. It is one of the most fad-ridden pseudo-academic activities. So much so that websites get created to warn the unwary traveler, see for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_abandoned_education_methods . Yet Education is the most important activity that any of us ever undertake, on par with raising our own children. It should be left to discipline champions who know how to teach their discipline with a passion and a deep knowledge of its culture.

Igor writes: “I was educated with chalk-and-talk, and somehow thrived despite of it, and so have many of my peers.”

As one of your peers, thriving under “chalk-and-talk” is no proof that it is optimal. You thrived because of your desire to understand and the extra effort you put in. Instead of optimal teaching, most University courses act more as a filter; if students do not pick up a certain way of thinking (e.g. thinking like a physicist), we fail them. The questions are, then, “How can we better communicate ways of thinking?” and, “How do we motivate more students to put in the sustained effort required to fully understand concepts at a deeper level?”. Chalk-and-talk is not the answer to either of these questions.

Igor writes: The world we have today is the result of extraordinary teachers who have gone before us, and I thank them from the bottom of my heart.

I too had great teachers—and average teachers and very poor teachers.

Igor writes: No one has ever attempted to tell me how to do my research.

Actually, I’m sure that you were advised how to do research as an Honours student, and would have had considerable input and training from your Graduate advisor?

I agree that “It should be left to discipline champions who know how to teach their discipline with a passion and a deep knowledge of its culture” but would add “and who learn how to effectively communicate these ideas in a way that encourages the sustained effort from the student.”