I think that USI does a decent job with teaching to remember, but I don't think that is the endgame plan for USI. The difference between remembering and truly learning is the difference between books and people. People who are taught to remember facts and ideas are no different than the books from which they read the material. It is only when somebody actively participates in the "celebration of knowledge" that can apply the facts and ideas and further them through application and meaningful thought. The pinnacle of education is being able instill in student the ability and drive to apply their knowledge and use it in the world around them. How can USI do this better?
Well, obviously one way to minimize "teaching to remember" and promote "involving to learn" is to stop allowing/having teachers lecture at students. Critical thinking is a huge part of learning. This is something that is becoming standard is the sciences but for the most part is lost in liberal arts classes. My psychology class was one of my easiest classes this year. This isn't due to the teacher's lenience or my psychological prowess: it is due to the fact that the teacher, and the book from which she was teaching, was more focused on fact diffusion than learning about the how and why of it. Another way to change the paradigm has less to do with the subject and more to do with the teacher-student relationship. Throughout my time in school, it is always the teachers with whom I connect on a slightly more personal level that I learn from the best. An easy way for a teacher to promote this is for them to have a bit more fun in class, or teach about cutting edge/interesting things every once in a while. Obviously, this student-teacher relationship is also greatly dependent on the students and their willingness to put in the extra work. Even though I've only been at USI for a year, I can honestly say I have more teachers involve me in one way or another than not.
No comments:
Post a Comment