From: "amy lynn young-leith" <alyoung@kiwi.ucs.indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: Characterization of quack theories
Organization: Indiana University, Bloomington
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 19:54:19 -0500

In article <dhalliwe.726788960@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca> userDHAL@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (David Halliwell) writes:
>   I hope that you just were exposed to a rather poor subset of all
>the possible teachers. In my own courses, I definitely try to avoid

I hope this as well!

>a situation where students are just expected to "remember facts".
>However, a good number of students have been so strongly affected by
>the regurgitation approach that it can be a real struggle to actually
>get them to think. The number of times I have had students say "just
>give me the answer - don't bug me with that 'why' stuff..." often
>leaves me rather depressed. Critical thinking is such a hard thing
>to teach...

I can understand that.  I have a wonderful example of this: 
[long, LONG example follows here...]

I took part in a criminal justice class a few semesters ago taught by,
in my opinion, the best professor at Indiana University.  As students
filled into the 350 seater lecture room, we all settled in for another
boring class.  In walks a man, dressed pretty much like you and I.  He
hands out a syllabus, and after small talk, begins to delve into the
most informative handout I'd ever seen. 

"Most of our class will be discussion..."  I really can't remember the
rest of the sentence, because I believe I'd sucked in the scarf the
person in front of me had draped over their chair.  Surely he must be
trying to pull our legs. 

He wasn't.  He was up front about what he wanted from the class, up to
and including presenting the questions that made up the two tests we
would have.  Four questions each, 500 word essays.  Along with three
quizes, that would make up our grade.  You could see the eyes light up
and hear people whispering, "Oh man, he GAVE us the tests!  This'll be
easy!"  Those are the people that only showed up once a week from that
point on.  They are also the ones that didn't do quite so well as they
thought they would in the class. 

Anyway, yes, the class WAS mostly discussion.  Discussion on readings,
issues both local and global, movies we'd shown in class, etc.  I woke
up and bounded out of bed for this 8:00am class, let me tell you!

The first test came.  He had all along said that the answers could be
talked over with him, AI's, friends, whoever.  But they had to be
yours.  They had to come from the heart.  They had to be logical and supported.
Many people didn't believe him, and replayed some of his own comments
and opinions.  They didn't fare well. 

From day one in that class, he invited us, begged us, and pleaded with
us to speak our minds.  He explained that he had some big ideas
himself, and he was prone to expounding on them frequently, and that
we should do the same.  He tested what you said.  He put you on the
rack sometimes.  He asked the same from us.  Put him through
the wringer.  We'd both come out the better for it.

I, and most people who participated in the class, LOVED this.  A car
wreck couldn't keep us from that class.  

But it scared the hell out of a few people.  They said they felt
bullied, because his ideas didn't match theirs, and they were not used
to an "authority figure" being open and treating you more like someone
with a brain with decent things to say instead of a cash register. 
I knew a few people who reacted this way, so I asked what they meant.
They said that they couldn't put that on a test because he wouldn't
grade it objectively. First off, the grading was done by the AI's with
whom we had a weekly disccusion class with.   I asked if they had done
so.  They said no, they'd put watered down version of what they
thought he wanted, and had been graded low.  I showed them my answers,
in which sometimes the grader's comments were as long, or longer, than
my answers, in which they didn't agree with me at all, but graded me
high because I gave what has been asked for.  Logical, supported ideas
that came from the heart.  "Well, he's unfair, I mean, you can't even
tell what he wants us to say!"  A real quote, that is.  That was the
whole point, he didn't *want* anything specific, aside from convincing, logical
arguements.  Many students were not capable of understanding or 
supplying these.
   
>   Now, if we could only figure out a reliable way to get the good
>students back with the good teachers...

There are great teachers out there.  There are good teachers out
there.  And, every now and then, there is a piss poor teacher out
there.  It's sad that sometimes the poor teachers make the bigger
impact upon the student than the good ones.  I went through public
school with a label, so I was placed under the good more frequently
than some of my peers.  I'm hoping that we can shift our priorities
more towards education and attempt to change both the poor teachers
and the poor students, and poor learning situations in general. 

amy

-- 
alyoung@kiwi.ucs.indiana.edu for personal mail
			    All business mail to alyoung@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             I.U. probably doesn't agree with me.  I don't speak for
                    them so it doesn't matter, now does it?