[Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge and Education

[Christie Dudley]

Oh, what I could say to this if I had infinite time.  Nevertheless, I think
it's really useful to consider our options.

Personally, I never considered learning in anything other than a schoolroom
teacher/student paradigm until I went to learn International Folk Dance
where they had a lot of people who liked to do it but not a lot of people at
any given time who wanted to learn.  I found I was picking stuff up pretty
fast by just following people.  Then I moved to where there were and started
taking classes, which I promptly learned to loathe.  It took me a while to
figure out why I liked the first stuff better, but it resulted in
considering what it meant to learn, as well as the best way to learn.

I also wanted to throw in a few more models that I've observed in
anthropology, although I have not specifically studied too much pedagogical
anthro:

6) Apprenticeship: Where a novice learns by practice and loose direction
from a master.  Although a master may have many apprentices, the
relationship between the master and apprentice is personal and specific.
The master will generally define specific exercises for the apprentice to
address on their own.

7) Community learning:  There is a large community of knowledgeable people
and young members learn by following multiple teachers.  There is no
explicit relationship between those who have the knowledge and those who
learn it, although occasionally someone will step out and demonstrate
something tricky.  It's often mistaken for 'self-taught' for this reason,
but the knowledge comes from the community, rather than effort of the
newcomer.  It is interesting to note that the vast majority of cultural
knowledge is spread this way.  In fact, the vast majority of what people
know is learned via community learning.

Christie

---
Disrupting paradigms since 1967


On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 1:10 PM, aestetix aestetix <aestetix at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hey,
>
> I'm pretty sure it comes as no surprise to anyone that Noisebridge has sort
> of assumed identity as a one-room schoolhouse<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-room_school>,
> or, in more abstract terms, a modern variation of either the Pythagorean or
> Socratic schools. When we get a group of both self-progressing and
> competitive individuals together, we run into culture clashes as to what
> everyone thinks works, or how things "ought" to be.
>
> To me, it seems the next natural step is to try and break down different
> types of education models, so we see why people like one over the other; for
> example, comparing a class to a workshop. Also, understanding education
> history really reveals a lot about our current models. Three references I
> have found utterly excellent for this study: *The Underground History of
> American Education* by John Taylor Gatto, *Technopoly* by Neil Postman,
> and *Democracy and Education* by John Dewey. Incidentally, these all lift
> ideas from *Emile* by Rousseau, one of the first recognized and definitive
> analyses pertaining to education.
>
>    1. Greek style. This involves a lot of peer review and mentorship. One
>    could also call it a round-table discussion. Very loose-formed, it is an
>    interative discussion among a group of friends or colleagues seeking to
>    better understand or refine a concept. Often there will be a mentor or
>    "tutor" who acts as moderator to prevent discussion from getting too heated,
>    and keeps things from digressing too much.
>    2. Greek style with a leader. Rather than having a moderator on the
>    side, we have someone who acts as leader, who can settle disputes, and is
>    recognized as having some sort of excellents in the subject at hand. In some
>    communities, they are also a figurehead who takes the blame when things go
>    wrong.
>    3. Loose Teacher/students model. This is when, rather than having a
>    discussion about something, there is a clear path that a teacher follows.
>    The goal is for the teacher to communicate ideas to the students, and all
>    the students recognize their superiority.
>    4. Strict Teacher/students model. Unlike the loose model, the teacher
>    assumes a form of authority. Rather than simply teaching the subject matter,
>    they are also instilling discipline. Students must raise their hand to speak
>    or ask questions, questions are directed at the teacher, rather than at
>    everyone, and all students are expected to be silent while the teacher goes
>    on with the lesson.
>    5. Self-taught. This requires a great deal of autonomy, and does not
>    work for everyone. You work alone or with someone else, and provide your own
>    guidance.
>
> I'm pretty sure there are more, but that's all I can think of right now.
> Each serves a different purpose, and fits a different environment. There are
> a lot of factors I'm leaving out, such as:
>
>    - Group or class size. Do different models work better depending on the
>    size of the crowd?
>    - The subject matter at hand. The best lessons integrate everything. If
>    you read the references I cited, there's a lot of evidence that the concept
>    of "subjects" wasn't created until about a century ago. However, it's
>    important to recognize that certain things should be taught differently. You
>    can memorize all the hardware you want from a book, but until you get into a
>    lab and play with it, it won't totally make sense.
>    - Taboo subjects. Some ideas are simply not taught for cultural
>    reasons. And yet, creative teachers find a way to sneak them in.
>    - Age. Young people learn differently than older people. Also, having
>    different experiences helps you see new perspectives. This is one of the
>    reasons there are multiple variants of the IQ test.
>    - The concept of student vs teacher. Can someone be both at once?
>    - What is the purpose of education? Is it to teach someone else a
>    lesson, or to share ideas?
>
> A lot of this is mental rambling. Pretty much every notable writer or
> philospher I have encountered has had a different idea of how to teach, and
> how things should be. I'm curious as to what noisebridgers think. Perhaps if
> we better understand each other, we can work on having less social tension
> until the move happens.
>
> aestetix
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20090709/c76e0ffa/attachment-0003.html>