|
|
Re: Pseudoteaching
Posted:
Feb 22, 2011 4:39 PM
|
|
Nice catch Josh. However, why do we not call it "pseudolearning"? It seems that students have a very high affinity to pseudolearning and it is very difficult to thwart without failing them in the process.
> Here's a working definition of "pseudoteaching" at
> (http://fnoschese.wordpress.com/pseudoteaching/):
>
> "Pseudoteaching is something you realize you?re doing
> after you?ve attempted a lesson which from the outset
> looks like it should result in student learning, but
> upon further reflection, you realize that it [sic]
> the very lesson itself was flawed and involved
> minimal learning."
>
> Another link here: (http://blog.mrmeyer.com/?p=9413).
>
> Now read some of those posts and behold a couple of
> not-really-surprising things: (a) open-ended,
> discovery learning is never or hardly ever
> pseudoteaching, and (b) little to no evidence is
> given for (a).
>
> All these inkhorn arguments for an already-accepted
> conclusion. These folks should be theologians.
|
|
