More attempts to add more misfortune to bad fortune

[Loren Pechtel]

Good teachers use the textbook as a source, not the be all and end all! Students who use only textbooks to learn are shortchanging themselves as they are not given further examples of the content in use. Teachers can also provide other points of view not given in a textbook and encourage students to critique what they have been presented with. Can a textbook do that?

If you're correct you're simply arguing for better textbooks.

 

[gmbteach]

Good teachers use the textbook as a source, not the be all and end all! Students who use only textbooks to learn are shortchanging themselves as they are not given further examples of the content in use. Teachers can also provide other points of view not given in a textbook and encourage students to critique what they have been presented with. Can a textbook do that?

If you're correct you're simply arguing for better textbooks.

No one textbook can replace a teacher. Ever!

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Good teachers use the textbook as a source, not the be all and end all! Students who use only textbooks to learn are shortchanging themselves as they are not given further examples of the content in use. Teachers can also provide other points of view not given in a textbook and encourage students to critique what they have been presented with. Can a textbook do that?

If you're correct you're simply arguing for better textbooks.

No one textbook can replace a teacher. Ever!

I'm saying a textbook can replace the non-interactive parts of teaching. We have no need of a human being a glorified VCR standing up in front of the class saying things. Use the human to do interactive things only! Have the student read the book/watch a lecture, the teacher spends their time helping the students that are stuck.

 

[gmbteach]

If you're correct you're simply arguing for better textbooks.

No one textbook can replace a teacher. Ever!

I'm saying a textbook can replace the non-interactive parts of teaching. We have no need of a human being a glorified VCR standing up in front of the class saying things. Use the human to do interactive things only! Have the student read the book/watch a lecture, the teacher spends their time helping the students that are stuck.

So there is a place for a teacher? Thank you for finally admitting it!

BTW, there are no non-interactive parts of teaching. You would know this if you were a teacher.

 

[Philos]

BTW, there are no non-interactive parts of teaching. You would know this if you were a teacher.

gmb,

Truth.

A.

 

[TV and credit cards]

I'm saying a textbook can replace the non-interactive parts of teaching. We have no need of a human being a glorified VCR standing up in front of the class saying things. Use the human to do interactive things only! Have the student read the book/watch a lecture, the teacher spends their time helping the students that are stuck.

The text will transmit the knowledge, providing one path toward understanding, the author's. The students, having done their reading will use this as a framework in which to engage in critical discussion and better understanding, especially for those who may have struggled with the author's. The teacher (subject matter expert) will better contextualize the reading for the students by prompting students during these discussions. Imagine what attrition rates would be without this class and teacher interaction.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

No one textbook can replace a teacher. Ever!

I'm saying a textbook can replace the non-interactive parts of teaching. We have no need of a human being a glorified VCR standing up in front of the class saying things. Use the human to do interactive things only! Have the student read the book/watch a lecture, the teacher spends their time helping the students that are stuck.

So there is a place for a teacher? Thank you for finally admitting it!

BTW, there are no non-interactive parts of teaching. You would know this if you were a teacher.

I've been a student, that's enough. Look at the large lectures you often see in 100-level courses in college--most class periods are the teacher speaking, the students listening. That's it. Even in a more typical size classroom the majority of the class period is the teacher talking. Questions generally come at the end.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm saying a textbook can replace the non-interactive parts of teaching. We have no need of a human being a glorified VCR standing up in front of the class saying things. Use the human to do interactive things only! Have the student read the book/watch a lecture, the teacher spends their time helping the students that are stuck.

The text will transmit the knowledge, providing one path toward understanding, the author's. The students, having done their reading will use this as a framework in which to engage in critical discussion and better understanding, especially for those who may have struggled with the author's. The teacher (subject matter expert) will better contextualize the reading for the students by prompting students during these discussions. Imagine what attrition rates would be without this class and teacher interaction.

And the author isn't a teacher??

 

[gmbteach]

I'm saying a textbook can replace the non-interactive parts of teaching. We have no need of a human being a glorified VCR standing up in front of the class saying things. Use the human to do interactive things only! Have the student read the book/watch a lecture, the teacher spends their time helping the students that are stuck.

So there is a place for a teacher? Thank you for finally admitting it!

BTW, there are no non-interactive parts of teaching. You would know this if you were a teacher.

I've been a student, that's enough. Look at the large lectures you often see in 100-level courses in college--most class periods are the teacher speaking, the students listening. That's it. Even in a more typical size classroom the majority of the class period is the teacher talking. Questions generally come at the end.

That type of situation requires a lecturer not a teacher. Don’t university courses also have tutorials where further discussion takes place with a teacher? And IIRC, conversation during lectures was encouraged. It wasn’t always the lecturer talking. Further, the Lecturer also provided further points of view to those provided in the readings, thereby giving alternate opinions. Also, if. A person has made it to university, one would assume that they are already critical thinkers and life long learners who know hamto find alternative points of view and so the Lecturer can facilitate further discussion.

Also, being a student does not make you an authority on teaching. If the teaching you are describing the only type you have ever had, then it is No wonder your opinions on this subject are so narrow and I pity you your lack of understanding.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm saying a textbook can replace the non-interactive parts of teaching. We have no need of a human being a glorified VCR standing up in front of the class saying things. Use the human to do interactive things only! Have the student read the book/watch a lecture, the teacher spends their time helping the students that are stuck.

The text will transmit the knowledge, providing one path toward understanding, the author's. The students, having done their reading will use this as a framework in which to engage in critical discussion and better understanding, especially for those who may have struggled with the author's. The teacher (subject matter expert) will better contextualize the reading for the students by prompting students during these discussions. Imagine what attrition rates would be without this class and teacher interaction.

And the author isn't a teacher??

Not always, no! You can be an expert on a subject, and provide reference material for it, but that doesn’t make you a teacher, or give you the skills necessary to teach the content.

 

[Toni]

The degree is worthless is you'd have been financially better off never getting it. A degree is just a piece of paper. The knowledge paid for at universities can be obtained practically for free elsewhere. Great, you've a got a degree in blah, blah, blah, drowning in debt. The guy who chose a skilled trade is debt free, driving a nice car, and working on the second remodel for his home. If a university is not about training, then there is little reason to pay money for what you get. Most anything can be self-taught. We've got these things called the internet, libraries, etc. But if there are institutions profiting off of this at public expense, those institutions ought to pay their fair share.

Learning on your own, you are restricted to your own biases. A good instructor and the class will take you out of your comfort zone, challenging you to think about a topic in ways you would not have were it just you and the book.

A good textbook accomplishes pretty much the same thing.

Maybe. If:
a) you can determine which are good text books
b) you are only interested in what a textbook can tell you
c) you are content to be able to parrot back what a textbook tells you and not develop any deeper understanding of the material. Or life.


And what gmteach wrote above.

 

[TV and credit cards]

The text will transmit the knowledge, providing one path toward understanding, the author's. The students, having done their reading will use this as a framework in which to engage in critical discussion and better understanding, especially for those who may have struggled with the author's. The teacher (subject matter expert) will better contextualize the reading for the students by prompting students during these discussions. Imagine what attrition rates would be without this class and teacher interaction.

And the author isn't a teacher??

Yes. The worst kind. The lecturer would be next in line. The best is "learner centered teaching".

 

[Loren Pechtel]

That type of situation requires a lecturer not a teacher. Don’t university courses also have tutorials where further discussion takes place with a teacher? And IIRC, conversation during lectures was encouraged. It wasn’t always the lecturer talking. Further, the Lecturer also provided further points of view to those provided in the readings, thereby giving alternate opinions. Also, if. A person has made it to university, one would assume that they are already critical thinkers and life long learners who know hamto find alternative points of view and so the Lecturer can facilitate further discussion.

Ok, in my experience an awful lot of the people wearing the "teacher" hat are lecturers by your definition. It's the lecturer role that I'm saying should be replaced with books/video.

Also, being a student does not make you an authority on teaching. If the teaching you are describing the only type you have ever had, then it is No wonder your opinions on this subject are so narrow and I pity you your lack of understanding.

In smaller classes there is more interaction but I can't recall a class that didn't have a pretty major component that you would describe as lecture.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Learning on your own, you are restricted to your own biases. A good instructor and the class will take you out of your comfort zone, challenging you to think about a topic in ways you would not have were it just you and the book.

A good textbook accomplishes pretty much the same thing.

Maybe. If:
a) you can determine which are good text books
b) you are only interested in what a textbook can tell you
c) you are content to be able to parrot back what a textbook tells you and not develop any deeper understanding of the material. Or life.


And what gmteach wrote above.

And teachers are magically good?
And they somehow magically teach you everything?
And it's not just about parroting by any means. Little of what I use professionally these days came from school. I've picked up the skills I need from books, and these days supplemented by Google.

 

[gmbteach]

A good textbook accomplishes pretty much the same thing.

Maybe. If:
a) you can determine which are good text books
b) you are only interested in what a textbook can tell you
c) you are content to be able to parrot back what a textbook tells you and not develop any deeper understanding of the material. Or life.


And what gmteach wrote above.

And teachers are magically good?
And they somehow magically teach you everything?
And it's not just about parroting by any means. Little of what I use professionally these days came from school. I've picked up the skills I need from books, and these days supplemented by Google.

Who taught you how to research? Who taught you the skills to be life long learner you are?

Teachers are not always good, nor magical, or do they teach everything. I think you are under the impression that I, and I alone, as a teacher should impart everything a person needs to know on one person. If so, then that thought is delusional. It takes many teachers, using many different methods to do the job properly.

Loren, you have a severely biased opinion based on your limited experience with teachers. Until you are a teacher, or know one intimately, you will have no real idea of what teachers do, or how they do it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Maybe. If:
a) you can determine which are good text books
b) you are only interested in what a textbook can tell you
c) you are content to be able to parrot back what a textbook tells you and not develop any deeper understanding of the material. Or life.


And what gmteach wrote above.

And teachers are magically good?
And they somehow magically teach you everything?
And it's not just about parroting by any means. Little of what I use professionally these days came from school. I've picked up the skills I need from books, and these days supplemented by Google.

Who taught you how to research? Who taught you the skills to be life long learner you are?

Teachers are not always good, nor magical, or do they teach everything. I think you are under the impression that I, and I alone, as a teacher should impart everything a person needs to know on one person. If so, then that thought is delusional. It takes many teachers, using many different methods to do the job properly.

Loren, you have a severely biased opinion based on your limited experience with teachers. Until you are a teacher, or know one intimately, you will have no real idea of what teachers do, or how they do it.

You're still not addressing my issue: the non-interactive part of "teaching". In a large class it's simply not practical to make it interactive, so what's the point in having a human up there rather than something canned?

I am not objecting one bit to the interactive part of it--what I want is for 100% of the time to be that, the current part that yyou call "lecturer" should be replaced with something canned.

 

[laughing dog]

And teachers are magically good?
And they somehow magically teach you everything?
And it's not just about parroting by any means. Little of what I use professionally these days came from school. I've picked up the skills I need from books, and these days supplemented by Google.

Who taught you how to research? Who taught you the skills to be life long learner you are?

Teachers are not always good, nor magical, or do they teach everything. I think you are under the impression that I, and I alone, as a teacher should impart everything a person needs to know on one person. If so, then that thought is delusional. It takes many teachers, using many different methods to do the job properly.

Loren, you have a severely biased opinion based on your limited experience with teachers. Until you are a teacher, or know one intimately, you will have no real idea of what teachers do, or how they do it.

You're still not addressing my issue: the non-interactive part of "teaching". In a large class it's simply not practical to make it interactive, so what's the point in having a human up there rather than something canned?

I am not objecting one bit to the interactive part of it--what I want is for 100% of the time to be that, the current part that yyou call "lecturer" should be replaced with something canned.

Lectures may or may not be interactive. A good and attentive lecturer tailors the lecture to the audience - good lecturers read the audience for clues as to what they are getting and what they are not getting. And there is nothing to prevent a lecturer from interacting with a large audience. I know - I taught introduction to probability and statistics to classes of 200 to 300 students, and I asked them questions during lecture. And they asked me questions as well.

 

[gmbteach]

And teachers are magically good?
And they somehow magically teach you everything?
And it's not just about parroting by any means. Little of what I use professionally these days came from school. I've picked up the skills I need from books, and these days supplemented by Google.

Who taught you how to research? Who taught you the skills to be life long learner you are?

Teachers are not always good, nor magical, or do they teach everything. I think you are under the impression that I, and I alone, as a teacher should impart everything a person needs to know on one person. If so, then that thought is delusional. It takes many teachers, using many different methods to do the job properly.

Loren, you have a severely biased opinion based on your limited experience with teachers. Until you are a teacher, or know one intimately, you will have no real idea of what teachers do, or how they do it.

You're still not addressing my issue: the non-interactive part of "teaching". In a large class it's simply not practical to make it interactive, so what's the point in having a human up there rather than something canned?

I am not objecting one bit to the interactive part of it--what I want is for 100% of the time to be that, the current part that yyou call "lecturer" should be replaced with something canned.

Oh FFS, there is no non-interactive part of teaching! At any point in time, lecture or otherwise, the teacher interacts with the students! Lectures cannot be replaced with books etc! Not if you actually want people to learn.

Loren, until you have been a teacher, please do not presume to know how teachers teach! Whether it be a lecture or otherwise.

And before you go off that I don’t know, let me tell you I have taught people from 4 years of age and just starting school, right through to experienced teachers on better teaching methods. I have taught small groups, one on one and large numbers of people. At no time was there a non-interactive part to anything I did!

Not even watching documentaries! No matter what material you have you use it to your advantage and at no time can you learn from a non-interactive source. Not effectively. And you claiming you have speaks volumes about your lack of understanding in the matter.

- - - Updated - - -

Who taught you how to research? Who taught you the skills to be life long learner you are?

Teachers are not always good, nor magical, or do they teach everything. I think you are under the impression that I, and I alone, as a teacher should impart everything a person needs to know on one person. If so, then that thought is delusional. It takes many teachers, using many different methods to do the job properly.

Loren, you have a severely biased opinion based on your limited experience with teachers. Until you are a teacher, or know one intimately, you will have no real idea of what teachers do, or how they do it.

You're still not addressing my issue: the non-interactive part of "teaching". In a large class it's simply not practical to make it interactive, so what's the point in having a human up there rather than something canned?

I am not objecting one bit to the interactive part of it--what I want is for 100% of the time to be that, the current part that yyou call "lecturer" should be replaced with something canned.

Lectures may or may not be interactive. A good and attentive lecturer tailors the lecture to the audience - good lecturers read the audience for clues as to what they are getting and what they are not getting. And there is nothing to prevent a lecturer from interacting with a large audience. I know - I taught introduction to probability and statistics to classes of 200 to 300 students, and I asked them questions during lecture. And they asked me questions as well.

Thank you laughing dog.

 

[Toni]

A good textbook accomplishes pretty much the same thing.

Maybe. If:
a) you can determine which are good text books
b) you are only interested in what a textbook can tell you
c) you are content to be able to parrot back what a textbook tells you and not develop any deeper understanding of the material. Or life.


And what gmteach wrote above.

And teachers are magically good?
And they somehow magically teach you everything?
And it's not just about parroting by any means. Little of what I use professionally these days came from school. I've picked up the skills I need from books, and these days supplemented by Google.

FFS, Loren. I've had enough of you using special words for women you you disagree with.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Maybe. If:
a) you can determine which are good text books
b) you are only interested in what a textbook can tell you
c) you are content to be able to parrot back what a textbook tells you and not develop any deeper understanding of the material. Or life.


And what gmteach wrote above.

And teachers are magically good?
And they somehow magically teach you everything?
And it's not just about parroting by any means. Little of what I use professionally these days came from school. I've picked up the skills I need from books, and these days supplemented by Google.

FFS, Loren. I've had enough of you using special words for women you you disagree with.

What in the world makes you think I'm using "books" as a word for women I disagree with?

 

[J842P]

Maybe. If:
a) you can determine which are good text books
b) you are only interested in what a textbook can tell you
c) you are content to be able to parrot back what a textbook tells you and not develop any deeper understanding of the material. Or life.


And what gmteach wrote above.

And teachers are magically good?
And they somehow magically teach you everything?
And it's not just about parroting by any means. Little of what I use professionally these days came from school. I've picked up the skills I need from books, and these days supplemented by Google.

FFS, Loren. I've had enough of you using special words for women you you disagree with.

... uh, what?

 

[Toni]

And teachers are magically good?
And they somehow magically teach you everything?
And it's not just about parroting by any means. Little of what I use professionally these days came from school. I've picked up the skills I need from books, and these days supplemented by Google.

FFS, Loren. I've had enough of you using special words for women you you disagree with.

What in the world makes you think I'm using "books" as a word for women I disagree with?

Nope. Not book. Pretty sure you don't associate the word book with woman.