Posted on 01/05/2015 5:58:02 AM PST by C19fan
I settled on my New Year’s resolution while giving a lecture to 85 masters students.
It was one kid who unintentionally suggested the idea. He was sitting in the back row, silently pecking away at his laptop the entire class. At times, he smiled at his screen. But he rarely looked up at me.
I had a choice. I could disrupt the class to single him out. Or I could do what most teachers in higher education do: just ignore it. After all, these students are adults, and they have to take a final exam. Do I have to be the disciplinarian?
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
” The internet has changed learning. Students have moved beyond the egos of instructors.”
I’ve read quite a bit about teaching methods, and I am always puzzled as to why educators like to maintain that students need to “discover” or “evaluate” concepts on their own, as in math. If a student is totally ignorant about a subject, how can he understand and evaluate? Historically, teachers are supposed to be credentialed in their subject matter and able to guide the students’ understanding about something they know nothing about. If they want to extend their understanding by their own research, that is great. An anonymous presenter on a web site can be invaluable, but most students need someone in charge to get them started.
Whereas, in a classroom, the instructor has no idea of where the student is at, among a number of students from 22 to 600.
The colleges are trying to get away with a 600 student seminar as a "class". Yes a major respected University, I have a relative sitting in regular class with 600 other students.
I think that method you cited is good, but what I was referring to is what is being utilized in public schools.
/bingo
Common Core can’t succeed without stuff like this.
Our private school is into this. Now they are giving iPads to the middle school.
Fool’s errand, if you ask me.
Since ours is a few years out from middle, they may learn the error of their ways before I need to openly object.
Expensive, distractive, potential damage disruptive, etc. Not worth it.
Maybe if there was a specific system just for the class at hand, it could be OK. Anything that lets one access the world is begging for trouble.
It’s not a classroom unless you have a stick in the sand.
So...punish every student who uses modern information technology, just because a few won’t pay attention? I’d not want such an instructor.
As a sometime professor: they’re adults, they’re paying, so long as they’re not disruptive they can do as they see fit - and I’ll pass or fail them according to their work, which they won’t do if they’re not paying attention.
It’s 2015. Paper is passe. Taking notes with a notebook or tablet computer is the new and future norm; banning them is Luddite behavior.
As one of my instructors would tell uncooperative students: “do as you like, I already have your money.” I will do my part, presenting the material and evaluating assigned work. About 1/4 of students just don’t do the work, fail accordingly, and (I hope) learn from the stark reality of squandering a large sum of money. Those who use their technology wisely will succeed, those who don’t won’t; don’t punish those who will because others don’t.
Too often the student is not held culpable for his part in the learning process, instead blaming the instructor/system or punishing good students for bad behavior of others. Take notes as you see fit - it’s your grade.
Alright. Assume an oil refinery as part of a vertically integrated energy company. The issue is siting, storage and distribution. Run Vogel’s Approximation Method for no more than thirty variables and give me the results after a few hundred iterations. Do it longhand with paper and pencil.
Millions depend on getting workable results so don’t make any math errors.
Alright. Assume an oil refinery as part of a vertically integrated energy company. The issue is siting, storage and distribution. Run Vogel’s Approximation Method for no more than thirty variables and give me the results after a few hundred iterations. Do it longhand with paper and pencil.The point is that you need people who not only know how to run a program, but who understand what the program does. Any monkey can follow instructions. But I want people who can make an informed choice of which approximation algorithm is right, how many variables to pick, and how many iterations will give a result that is accurate enough for the problem domain.Millions depend on getting workable results so don’t make any math errors.
To be able to do that, you need a deep understanding of the background. You gain that understanding by thinking about the methods and techniques, and indeed working through a few exercises by hand. You also get a feeling for numbers that way, so that you can instantly see when results are an order of magnitude off, or when you are in a special case where your standard algorithm fails. This is something you should rather not learn “on the job.”
If you know and understand a numerical algorithm, learning how to use a program that implements it is easy and can be done in a few minutes. Understanding the background is harder, and why you need to spend some time in college before being allowed anywhere near a real project.
If I was sitting in a classroom taking notes, I’d have to have a laptop to type the notes. My hands are so stiff from arthritis that I can hardly read my own writing anymore. Besides, I can type faster than I can write.......
Yes, you need to spend time in college for most important jobs but you do not need a deep understanding of a tool that does the drudgery of your job. You need to understand that the tool exists, that it is accessible, generally (not deeply) how it works and when to use it. Repetitive, rote practice of manual calculation is a pointless waste of time for 10 year-olds. We don’t teach Ag students how to manage oxen and we don’t teach fighter pilots how to hand spin a prop driven biplane. They can learn those things on their own time if they have any interest
What he stated is right.
It has nothing to do with the technology. The technology only makes the basics easier (usually).
As an engineer I can say unequivocally he is correct, even at college level. One must understand principles in order to really “get it” with ANY technology. One gets it better by DOING - writing (visual) and hearing (audio) reiterates it in the mind. then you don’t need to keep going back to instructions because you can do it yourself.
My mother was a teacher, and this was always her philosophy, too.
All that tech is fluff. All it is is a tool; it is NOT the end in itself, which far too many fall for. It will be here today, gone tomorrow, anyway. Meanwhile, the principles STILL STAND for centuries.
You are absolutely correct.
All that tech is fluff. All it is is a tool; it is NOT the end in itself, which far too many fall for. It will be here today, gone tomorrow, anyway. Meanwhile, the principles STILL STAND for centuries.Well put!
For anyone interested, I now use a 9.7 Boogie Board. It's a bluetooth enabled LCD that you can write on (like an etch-a-sketch but uses a stylus pen). I write my notes, draw my pictures and captions and when I'm ready for another page, I press the button and it saves my chicken scratch notes via bluetooth on my phone or laptop in PDF format. High-tech, but in a low-tech presentation and I don't lose my notepads anymore
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fGoU9VmbSY
Symposia.
any one in class with no lap top is not rally a student
pencils and spiral note books are anachronistic
You couldn’t in the 70s, either. Especially in organic chem.
No, if you read the article research is showing that typing on laptop is not condusive to information processing and retention the way writing on paper is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.