When I first started teaching in college (at Stanford) I just stood up and started talking. The students were there because the course was required, not because they wanted to know what I had to say. They just cared about doing whatever they had to do to get a good grade. By the time I got to Yale I had acquired more sense about teaching. The first day I would ask students why they were there. This question was met with blank stares. When I pushed them I got answers about how the course fit into their schedule and that they heard I was an easy grader. By the time I got to Northwestern I had acquired more sense and more power. I did what I wanted to do: started arguments, made students defend their ideas, told them what I thought didn't matter, what mattered was what they thought. As I began to think about online learning during that time, I became convinced that the teacher didn't really matter in these courses except as a course designer. I laid out the groundwork and forced the kids to think hard. I started designing online courses. The student has to achieve an agreed upon goal. You make sure they can achieve that goal by providing good resources. Online courses must have deliverables that students want to create, not teachers they have to listen to.
Very well put. I've arrived at the same conclusion by teaching as an amateur outside an academic setting - coaching/mentoring FIRST Robotics teams. There, it's easier - the primary deliverable is known in advance and is largely what draws students to the 'course.'
The "learning by doing" mantra had the flaw that learning truth requires challenged dialogue -- Socratic Method does that. You are an excellent teacher. Argument is essential to online. It is good to lie if students talk the lies out. Check this. https://medium.com/@rhtcmu/https-medium-com-rhtcmu-fiat-lies-are-genocide-on-the-human-race-a4d76b093530?source=friends_link&sk=def42b91e45b457ef3abc64ab440c8ae Online needs Mendaciology.. https://medium.com/@rhtcmu/mendaciology-4e21bd47d8ba?source=friends_link&sk=0c189fc7d0c94e0c63e9ff8030599b69 IMHO
A journey many of us took in our teaching careers. Amazing how many students got angry when forced to be agents of their own learning. It was easier for many to sit back and listen but not good preparation for a life that requires you initiative and creative collaboration.
Education (especially post-secondary) is long overdue for a Reformation.
I spent the Winter of 1996 and 1997 at ILS Roger! It was a game changer for me! And I was already in the DE business well before! Som
Great insight and the background story is just spot on. I wouldn't have understood the solution if it was not included! Thanks. Do you have a link to an online course you have designed?
The real challange is to solicitate students to achieve their goals without good resources
I used to tell my students to find an idea that they were interested in and then present evidence to support their opinion. I told them I didn't care what side of an argument they took. I was interested in their ability to defend a thesis. I actually had one student get mad because I wasn't telling them what to think. Obviously many moons ago....:)
Nothing more fulfilling for the mind than the Socratic dialogue... debate, discourse and critical thinking are the pillars of making a modern society and becoming an INFORMED citizen. It's unfortunate that we, as a society, are distancing ourselves from what brought on reason and rationality ... the Socratic period thinking, together with the Age of Enlightenment and the age of reason is much needed. There is a difference between democracy and polity ... that's great Roger Schank, that you've given your students, NOT the power of knowing, but the power of understanding. Also, that hairdo is epic 😎
Maître de recherche presso Université de Tours
2yReport
Report
Hi. I took a look at shank academy.com. It seems conceived around some very specific topics. Do you also train people who work with elementary school children? engines4ed.org, maybe? or Alternative Learning Places?