A colleague of mine recently, commenting on poor teaching skills by some university dons, said he heard somebody one time define a 'lecturer' as 'a person who transfers knowledge from his/her notebook to the student's notebook without either parties understanding what is in the notes'. This was said during a discussion among university dons who having admitted that some of them have very poor skills in causing learning in the students (learner), agreed to focus more on creating opportunities / environment for learning than assuming to be the 'givers' / 'transmitters' of knowledge.
That statement can attract lots of questions and hence generate quite a bit of debate. My role in this post is to ask questions that will hopefully elicit a thought process and also stimulate a fruitful debate.
In that statement and considering the context, is the word 'knowledge' rightfully used? Could it be substituted by 'information'?
Would you buy a suggestion that in this case the word 'understanding' cannot be substituted by 'learning' because the latter occurs when some experience and reflection process takes place? Some schools of thought say that learning is claimed to have taken place when behaviour changes as a result of experience and that understanding is manifested through behaviour.
What do you think?
No comments:
Post a Comment