Stephen Kullas and I are having a lengthy conversation on the blogs about the appropriateness of grading participation. We are doing this as our final few blog posts, a minimum of three of course. This is an attempt to cut down on jumping from link to link and the plethora of "A Response to Jacob" titles and numerous posts. This method will concentrate the discussion on a single page. If interested: see his blog here:
http://accidentallyreflective.blogspot.com/
Sunday, May 15, 2011
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Dialogue
Is dialogue the key?
This is the question upon which our discussion was woefully brief. This begs the question: key to what? We tacitly assumed in our discussion that the indirect object of key was education and I will continue with that. Is dialogue the key to education? We also stipulated that dialogue was any interaction of opposition. So, is the interaction of opposition the key to education?
No, but it is vitally important. Education is not a lock with but a single key, a quandary with but a single solution. At the most basic level, it is important for educators and learners alike to be able to consider more than a single point of view, to be forced to entertain opposing sides of any issue. In a vaguely Hegelian manner, it is a synthesis of thesis and antithesis that drives conclusions. And on a more specific level, reinforcement of material through conversation, through question and answer is extremely helpful for comprehension and retention.
Question: Is this a good definition of dialogue, or should it be more specific?
This is the question upon which our discussion was woefully brief. This begs the question: key to what? We tacitly assumed in our discussion that the indirect object of key was education and I will continue with that. Is dialogue the key to education? We also stipulated that dialogue was any interaction of opposition. So, is the interaction of opposition the key to education?
No, but it is vitally important. Education is not a lock with but a single key, a quandary with but a single solution. At the most basic level, it is important for educators and learners alike to be able to consider more than a single point of view, to be forced to entertain opposing sides of any issue. In a vaguely Hegelian manner, it is a synthesis of thesis and antithesis that drives conclusions. And on a more specific level, reinforcement of material through conversation, through question and answer is extremely helpful for comprehension and retention.
Question: Is this a good definition of dialogue, or should it be more specific?
Monday, May 2, 2011
Finding Fault
John Dewey warned, in his book Experience and Education, against dichotomous thinking, or what he called "Either-Or Philosophy." One of the many dangers he spoke of was that either side can become content with a refutation of the other. This, though, leads to few solutions.
I noticed today in class that we were successfully condemning capitalism, education, and the tetra-complex (Military, Industrial, Government, Media). However, despite how many faults were were able to point to, there were no suggestions for alteration. I understand that understanding the failings of the current is an important step to the creation of the new, but I do not want to be bogged down by this.
I do remember Professor Johnson talking about making examples in math textbooks socially and politically relevant, which was a great suggestion, but that was the only one I remember.
Question: The educational system is broken, yes. How then, do we fix it?
I noticed today in class that we were successfully condemning capitalism, education, and the tetra-complex (Military, Industrial, Government, Media). However, despite how many faults were were able to point to, there were no suggestions for alteration. I understand that understanding the failings of the current is an important step to the creation of the new, but I do not want to be bogged down by this.
I do remember Professor Johnson talking about making examples in math textbooks socially and politically relevant, which was a great suggestion, but that was the only one I remember.
Question: The educational system is broken, yes. How then, do we fix it?
Direction and Degree; Or, a Response to Nick
Nick asked: Is [homogeny] always negative?
In short, no. As the title of this post would suggest it is always a matter of direction and degree. The implicit assumption of his question, i.e. that homogeny is often negative, I think is correct. However, while most of the homogeny currently in practice is negative, that does not mean that homogeny is, per se, negative.
Direction, I think, is the most important variable. What is the object of homogeny? As Professor Johnson pointed out, a homogenous desire for critical thinking could be positive, what about a homogenous thirst for knowledge? And obviously, degree is important as well. Is there a necessary ill for two people to be homogenous in a specific trait? No, the danger becomes when homogeny accrues a large constituency.
Question: If degree is an important variable for the potential effect of homogeny, what degree becomes negative?
In short, no. As the title of this post would suggest it is always a matter of direction and degree. The implicit assumption of his question, i.e. that homogeny is often negative, I think is correct. However, while most of the homogeny currently in practice is negative, that does not mean that homogeny is, per se, negative.
Direction, I think, is the most important variable. What is the object of homogeny? As Professor Johnson pointed out, a homogenous desire for critical thinking could be positive, what about a homogenous thirst for knowledge? And obviously, degree is important as well. Is there a necessary ill for two people to be homogenous in a specific trait? No, the danger becomes when homogeny accrues a large constituency.
Question: If degree is an important variable for the potential effect of homogeny, what degree becomes negative?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)