| Discussion: | Research Area |
| Topic: | More on Drill and Kill, practice and learning |
| Post a new topic to the Research Area Discussion discussion |
| ||||||||
| Subject: | RE: More on Drill and Kill, practice and learning |
| Author: | Mathman |
| Date: | Jan 18 2005 |
 |
|
> At
> one local college, I had a student who came up after class and said,
> "Why do I have to think to pass your course? I get along fine with
> memorization in all the others."
The course in question was an
> introduction to computing for business applications. I admit that I
> injected some philosophical questions into the course, like "You
> need to consider your objectives before you settle on a course of
> action."
This might sound like it's all about me, but it's not. It's just recognition of
the problem from the point of view of both teacher and student:
I see the problem, and might have been your worst student, since I tend to barge
right into it [and have paid the price at times], but there are differences in
people. Some can see 3D in their heads [I'm one] while others have to go
through stages to get there. If you want to accomplish your wishes and have
students do flow-charts etc, it might be necessary to make part of their
objective such that there is 5% for the initial presentation of ideas [The TOE
chart in VB], and 95% for the actual program development. Unfortunately, I'd
lose 5% off the top. The only analogy I can think of was the old necessity to
make a Euclid reference for each line of proof in geometry. I couldn't recall
if it was Book I or Book XII, so lost marks constantly. It also slowed me down
considerably. However, when let loose [I just decided to ignore the required
Euclid statements and just write down the logical proof statements] it was a
flood, and Euclidean Geometry has long been my favourite, and I've solved
problems that completely stumped others. That's it really ...different strokes
for different folk.
David.
| |||||||
| Post a new topic to the Research Area Discussion discussion | |||||||