Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.
|
|
|
|
Re: Learning and Mathematics: Nolen, Motivation
Posted:
Mar 7, 1996 12:31 PM
|
|
>It is hard for a teacher to change a teaching style because one of the
>duties of the teacher is to prepare the students for society, and that also
>means whatever is negative about society. I believe that the only thing
>that teachers can do is to stress to students that they should learn for
>themselves, but tell them why they need to get good grades and how to make
>that competition healthy and not stressfull for themselves.
>
>
Nolen's thesis is that learning for its own sake is superior to/deeper than
learning for other exogenously based reasons. What this implies is that
children who are educated in a noncompetetive environment (assuming the
competitive goal structure will be replaced by a learning-centered one) will
actually be better prepared for that competition. I whole-heartedly agree
with your realism, and I know children are capable of discussing and dealing
with that competitive reality. I don't, however, think you need to give it
a place in the classroom. If you do, you may send the message that
competition is, in the end, the endorsed philosophy of the classroom. You
can prepare for it without endorsing it, is my point.
I think what goes hand and hand with learning for its own sake is skill in
problem-solving because the learner would have the motivation to get over
hurdles and figure stuff out. This is one of the skills most attractive in
that competitive adult world. Pursuing knowledge for the self rather than
within a goal structure of pleasing others or some arbitrary system also
pertains to building self-respect, and assertiveness. The great thing about
learning for its own sake is that everyone can have self-respect, not just
the 1.5% that make it to grad school in the problematic traditional (though
obviously far from universal) goal-schema Dana describes.
-Will
|
|
|
|
