One thing that was incredibly interesting to me in this week’s readings were the discussions in both Davis and Lang about different models of intellectual development. The first stage, dualism, is one that I have seen in many students in an entry-level, general education course. It seems that many students aren’t choosing to “think outside the box”. They want answers that will be presented on the test and feel no need to delve any deeper. I feel like this would be incredibly frustrating to instructors, more so than students arguing for grades in the relativism phase. My question is how can you help students move beyond this stage?
One thing that Davis mentioned briefly was the idea of “receiving knowledge” (pg. 260). This idea came up during my pedagogical interview with an instructor in the communication department. This instructor mentioned the frustration of a larger amount of students attending college simply to “receive knowledge” rather than to “claim knowledge”. I know that it has been brought up in class that there is a different sort of student that is prevalent in higher education right now. I would like to hear more opinions about this “new” type of student. Is it common for other instructors to feel that many students are only “receiving knowledge”? Could it partially be due to the pressure to go on to higher education in today’s society even though some students are not actually motivated to attend college?
De-emphasizing grades was discussed in the Davis reading. Maybe I am a bit negative, but I think that it is very idealistic to think that it is really possible to steer students towards intrinsic rewards of learning rather than focusing on receiving a good grade. (pg. 281) While I would love students to focus on the deeper-level of learning, at the end of the day they are still going to value an A over a B, even if the B meant that they fully understand material. I wonder if anyone else in the class feels the same way I do? I know Davis mentions techniques to de-emphasize grades, but has this worked for other instructors?
The final thing that I would like to discuss in class is the idea of limiting your interactions with students; “listening but not counseling”. (Lang, pg. 183) While I understand the implications of connecting with students on that level, I do not have full confidence in myself that I would be able to not reach out to a student in need. I would like to hear stories of other instructors that have had to deal with some of the situations Lang mentioned.
No comments:
Post a Comment