Note: To protect the privacy of our members, e-mail addresses have been removed from the archived messages. As a result, some links may be broken.
> In our rush to teach efficiently perhaps we are not
> giving our students a complete education. Peter
Is this not the question every administration is grappling with? There is
TOOO much information and little time.
It seems to me, what I gather when I can weed through all the educational
jargon, is that the current mode is to not teach specific information but to
teach how to learn. We are supposed to give the skills to know how to
investigate what is relevant to, and useful in the student's pursuit of
whatever avenue they take. "Life-long learning skills" I think they call it.
Yeah, and I'm not sure how that is accomplished in all these group learning
activities. They sure do learn how to depend on the responsible ones.
What perplexes me, way much more than not knowing how to use a ruler, is
that I have high school students that have no sense of a time frame in
history. When I talk about art history, I spend much time trying to get the
context so they can have some appreciation of the art produced.
I also give too much instruction in writing. (BTW Any of you out there
starting an AP Art History class, you better be prepared to teach them how
So, what is a complete education? In the year 2000, what is most important
for our young people to know? A ruler?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 06 2000 - 12:10:21 PDT