Skip to main content

My Teacher's Off-hand Remarks

  When I was a high school freshman my locker was next to a teacher's office named Mr. Hanson. During passing periods when the students were exchanging books in their lockers, Hanson would always talk with Mr. Fleege (another social science teacher) outside his office in earshot of the students.  They would intentionally talk in earshot of the students, as these people were not stupid, and they knew what they were doing. It had something to do with transparency and casually imparting information to people. I am always rivoted to conversations like that if people are talking in a way which means they want to be heard by everyone, but it's directed at one person next to them.
   One day Mr. Hanson was trying to get to the heart of the matter as to what his work as a high school teacher was doing for people. "It is not so much that we are imparting knowledge for people to remember forever. Indeed, we do impart knowledge and students use the things they learn sometimes. But to expect that everyone is going to remember everything forever is ridiculous. I have come to grips with the fact that what we are doing for people is teaching them life skills, especially how to be life-long learners. In other words, we prepare them and give them the tools to learn outside the walls of this school. We train people and give them the tools to survive in the world."  That is not precisely what he said, but it sounded very much like that.
   Having taught high school myself, I can really empathize and agree with that sentiment. Sometimes the most profound interactions had to do with attitude and life direction, not information. We have google and wikipedia, so why do people go to class to learn, right? [sarcasm intended].  I hate to say it, but teachers help with etiquette and social skills sometimes as well. Never should the role of schools be to simply impart information. Human interaction is a huge part of life, and that is what teachers can give to people that people can't get by sitting at home with a book or in front of text on a computer.
   That said, many teachers in my pre-college years left huge imprints on my brain in terms of the information they imparted to me.  It would be impossible to claim that I was not influenced by their thinking on the topics of American freedoms, civil rights, and a bundle of other issues. A lot of things my early teachers taught me are emblazened in my brain forever.
   Generally I agree with Hanson, and I think that it's both-and.  When I studied brain development I learned that people go through periods of plateaus in their learning as they grow up, and there's nothing teachers can do to "make them" learn better during those times. Some teachers find they can use powerful strategies and best practices to beat the odds and get people to retain information for a long time. Mostly, people will find as they grow older that "if you don't use it, you lose it."  Information which is not directly relevant to surviving daily life will be soon forgotten if not reviewed. Knowing that, people would be better served to think of education as not simply just imparting information to be regurgitated. I could write a lot about my particular field in regards to this, but I'll save the remarks for later.  Thanks to Mr. Hanson, and warmest regards.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Nice Dissenting Opinion on the Fairness of the Criminal Justice System

   I was recently having a conversation with someone about the possibility for unreliability and/or unfairness in the criminal justice system. I was reminded of this quote from a Supreme Court case which is from Justice Harry Blackmun's dissenting opinion. The case was Darden v. Wainwright 477 U.S. 168 (1986). Obviously he's talking about the Supreme Court level, but if this could be said about their accuracy, then how shall we communicate about fairness at the trial court level? "JUSTICE BLACKMUN, with whom JUSTICE BRENNAN, JUSTICE MARSHALL, and JUSTICE STEVENS join, dissenting. Although the Constitution guarantees a criminal defendant only "a fair trial [and] not a perfect one,"  Lutwak v. United States,   344 U. S. 604 ,  344 U. S. 619  (1953);  Bruton v. United States,   391 U. S. 123 ,  391 U. S. 135  (1968), this Court has stressed repeatedly in the decade since  Gregg v. Georgia,   428 U. S. 153  (1976), that ...

Personality Types and the Fall of Man Argument

   There will be some who will want to say that I was being illogical or unbiblical when I wrote the post about how personality differences get misunderstood.  Their argument is basically that differing personalities are a consequence of the Fall of Man- a consequence of the DNA getting disordered.  Therefore, they will say, that people who don't fit the "perfect personality" are sinful. God created one man, they will say, with a perfect personality (Adam).  In truth, they can cite Adam, Eve, and Jesus.  That argument is not correct, and I will stand my ground on this.    The reason why they are not correct is because they are making the unwarranted assumption all of Adam's descendants would have had the same personality had the Fall never happened. I can say with a fair degree of certainty that had the Fall never happened, there would have been different kinds of people with different personalities, it just would have been a more perfect world. ...

We Have Freedom of Speech, right?

   How come everyone seems so afraid to speak against the real politik in our country? We used to have lively political discussion and dissent, and now people with minority opinions seem scoffed at and outcast. This is a bad trend, don't go in that way. The first amendment was set up with one of the intentions being that people would be able to criticize those in charge. It is unbelievable that people could say that a scenario happened like Pearl Jams' "Dissident" describes, and these things happen on American soil?    The 1992 Presidential election is something to look to consider the way things used to be. Third party independent candidate Ross Perot was considered as having equal weight as the two other candidates. There was a strong freedom of the thought in the political spectrum. Perot's money went a long way for him. All things considered, though, billionaires still exist. Where are the Ross Perots of our time, then, who are not afraid to jump in and shake...