What does being a student at university entail? What does it mean? What is it for? Some like the noted educationalist, Sir Ken Robinson, concur that the tertiary education of a country is the means by which university teachers are found. However, that view seems to restrict the outcomes of graduation.
Surely, going to university is something more than just producing people to fill slots – vacant positions in commerce and industry or education. Surely, going to university is about something more than ingesting facts and an outpouring of those facts in final examinations.
Surely, going to university has something to do with making students think for themselves. In my day, going to university meant not just finding the answers to questions, but, more importantly, finding out more questions to ask. It is by formulating and asking questions that students come to realize the full implication of their time spent studying for a degree.
A healthier society, a more successful company, a more thorough piece of legislation, a more conclusive report, and a more inclusive piece of research – all are achieved by means of the ability to formulate questions.
But studying at university is also the first chance most young people get to leave home, to live away from their nearest and dearest, and stand on their own two feet. It is about taking responsibility for their own lives, and it is about learning how to live with others. It is an integral part of the forming of a civilized society, in which everybody comes to respect each other’s rights as citizens of that society.
It is a sort of social experiment. If it doesn’t work out, a student can always journey in from home every day. Students who do that, who live at home and go in as day students, miss out on the full import of a university education; they miss having to integrate into campus society, they miss taking part in everything that goes on after classes finish at five, and they miss the vital opportunity to enter an adult world, and that is arguably the most vital part of any education.
Robert L. Fielding
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Respect for students - respect for teachers
Respect is a coin with two sides – I respect you and you respect me. That is how it works’ it’s a mutual recognition of trust and accord.
In the classroom, it is doubly important – again, for you and I – for students and for teachers. However, it is not automatic, as it might once have been. Respect for the headmaster, usually a large man with a booming voice, was often akin to fear of him.
In these more enlightened days, respect is most probably nearer to its true quality. But students often complain of certain things.
They say, for example:-
We are ignored.
We feel judged or rejected.
We are not taken seriously.
We are mocked.
We are stereotyped.
We are not asked for our ideas.
Others make decisions about us without our input.
Others do not try to understand us.
We are not listened to.
Our preferences are not taken seriously.
We are not asked what we think we need.
Others believe they what is best for us.
We are not given reasonable explanations.
We feel controlled.
Our way of doing things is not accepted.
Others believe they know us better than we know ourselves.
http://www.rlfielding.com/respectenglish.htm
Now some of these complaints point to various problems –
a) In the institution
b) In the teacher
c) In the students
d) In the ‘accepted values of the teaching profession’.
It is clear that if such complaints persist, some things must change – (a, b, c, d or all of the above). Change requires several things to happen:-
i) There must be a perception that change is needed.
ii) There must be a willingness to change.
iii) There must be conditions that promote change.
iv) There must be time to change.
Of these sources of the problems, I would say that (d) …the accepted values of the teaching profession – would take the longest to change or be changed.
If teachers are the main source of the problem, then the most likely course is observation of lessons followed by counseling of the teacher.
If students are the source of some of the problems, then there is another problem that is very hard to eradicate – it is this: students’ attitudes to learning, to what is entailed in learning, to their attitude to their teachers, all may have been formed and fossilized prior to their coming up to university.
Studying at university always entails a different set of methods and attitudes to learning, and it is often these differences that students find hardest to take on board.
Teachers at universities should not be seen merely as ‘fonts of all knowledge', like some oracular authority, but rather, should be facilitators, encouraging and indeed facilitating students’ attempts to discover for themselves.
In this digital age, in which access to information is universal, the idea that teachers can know all there is to be known about any particular topic is palpably untrue.
Teachers should guide rather than lead, assist rather than just approve, and discuss rather than arbitrarily mark right or wrong. So teachers need to rethink their roles, and students also need to rethink what they think their teacher is there for.
Once that happens, most of the complaints mentioned above will disappear. Students will have taken control of their own learning and accepted responsibility for it, taking something away from traditional teaching, and adding something to teaching in and for the new millennium.
Robert L. Fielding
In the classroom, it is doubly important – again, for you and I – for students and for teachers. However, it is not automatic, as it might once have been. Respect for the headmaster, usually a large man with a booming voice, was often akin to fear of him.
In these more enlightened days, respect is most probably nearer to its true quality. But students often complain of certain things.
They say, for example:-
We are ignored.
We feel judged or rejected.
We are not taken seriously.
We are mocked.
We are stereotyped.
We are not asked for our ideas.
Others make decisions about us without our input.
Others do not try to understand us.
We are not listened to.
Our preferences are not taken seriously.
We are not asked what we think we need.
Others believe they what is best for us.
We are not given reasonable explanations.
We feel controlled.
Our way of doing things is not accepted.
Others believe they know us better than we know ourselves.
http://www.rlfielding.com/respectenglish.htm
Now some of these complaints point to various problems –
a) In the institution
b) In the teacher
c) In the students
d) In the ‘accepted values of the teaching profession’.
It is clear that if such complaints persist, some things must change – (a, b, c, d or all of the above). Change requires several things to happen:-
i) There must be a perception that change is needed.
ii) There must be a willingness to change.
iii) There must be conditions that promote change.
iv) There must be time to change.
Of these sources of the problems, I would say that (d) …the accepted values of the teaching profession – would take the longest to change or be changed.
If teachers are the main source of the problem, then the most likely course is observation of lessons followed by counseling of the teacher.
If students are the source of some of the problems, then there is another problem that is very hard to eradicate – it is this: students’ attitudes to learning, to what is entailed in learning, to their attitude to their teachers, all may have been formed and fossilized prior to their coming up to university.
Studying at university always entails a different set of methods and attitudes to learning, and it is often these differences that students find hardest to take on board.
Teachers at universities should not be seen merely as ‘fonts of all knowledge', like some oracular authority, but rather, should be facilitators, encouraging and indeed facilitating students’ attempts to discover for themselves.
In this digital age, in which access to information is universal, the idea that teachers can know all there is to be known about any particular topic is palpably untrue.
Teachers should guide rather than lead, assist rather than just approve, and discuss rather than arbitrarily mark right or wrong. So teachers need to rethink their roles, and students also need to rethink what they think their teacher is there for.
Once that happens, most of the complaints mentioned above will disappear. Students will have taken control of their own learning and accepted responsibility for it, taking something away from traditional teaching, and adding something to teaching in and for the new millennium.
Robert L. Fielding
Friday, March 26, 2010
Respect: what it is?
Dialogue #1: Respect for others
Don't insult people or make fun of them.
• Listen to others when they speak.
• Value other people's opinions.
• Be considerate of people's likes and dislikes.
• Don't mock or tease people.
• Don't talk about people behind their backs.
• Be sensitive to other people's feelings.
• Don't pressure someone to do something he or she doesn't want to do.
U. Thant – former DG of the UN
Every human being, of whatever origin, of whatever station, deserves respect. We must each respect others even as we respect ourselves.
Here, two people, Roger Lewis Fullerton and Len Smith discuss respect. They are trying to understand what it is.
RLF: Some believe that we must respect other people as we respect ourselves.
LS: The question is: Can you respect others if you don’t respect yourself?
RLF: I think it would be impossible – surely respect begins with self-respect. I mean, if you do not think well of yourself, you will find it difficult to think well of others.
LS: I think people who lack self-respect only respect those who are more powerful in some way.
RLF: Yes, I think you are right, but is that respect or just a sort of fear? Remember, fear is not the same thing as respect.
LS: Then perhaps we should begin by defining what we mean by the word, ‘respect’.
RLF: I think it means something like having esteem ; for a person you think has qualities you admire.
LS: Or has abilities you admire.
RLF: What about the word ‘deference’? Do you think that is the same thing as respect?
LS: Perhaps we should think of a particular situation, involving several people, and then we might be able to say whether respect was being shown, deference, or esteem.
RLF: Can you think of a scenario that would illustrate those aspects of respect/
LS: First, let’s think about a schoolboy and a headmaster; what sort of feelings do you think the schoolboy has regarding the headmaster?
RLF: That would depend upon what the boy had done; if the boy had done something wrong, and was about to be punished in some way, then I should think that the boy would be afraid of the headmaster.
LS: And what would that feeling be closest to – respect, deference, or esteem?
RLF: It would be close to none. As I said, fear is not at all the same thing as respect, although we often confuse the two.
LS: And many people in positions of authority might prefer someone to be afraid of them.
RLF: Yes, they might, but that is probably because of some insecurity they feel about their own position.
LS: I agree, but I still think such people prefer to be feared for other, more practical reasons too.
RLF: What reasons are those?
LS: For the reason that if someone in authority is feared – let’s say that some men who work under a manager are afraid of him, then they might do as they are told by the manager, whereas if they are not afraid of him, they might not always obey him so readily.
RLF: I see, yes, I think you are right. But is that kind of feeling always effective in getting the best out of someone?
LS: I should say that it isn’t, no!
RLF: Why?
LS: Because people who are afraid will often come to hate and detest those swho they fear.
RLF: Again, I ask you why you think that is true?
LS: For the very simple reason that living in fear is very wearing – very tiring, if you see what I mean, and people who live in fear will often rise up against those who instill fear in them.
RLF: And what do they feel once they have faced down the person they once feared?
LS: I should say they feel the opposite of respect for them. I should think they feel loathing, and dislike for them.
RLF: Those two things do seem to be the opposites of respect, don’t they?
LS: Which brings us back to our two other terms: esteem and deference.
RLF: Esteem sounds a lot like respect to me. Again, can we think of the boy standing in front of the headmaster, except that this time, the boy is there to be praised for his excellent schoolwork.
LS: Then who feels what?
RLF: I would say that both feel some sort of esteem for each other- both realize that the other is appraising them positively, and this reinforces the feeling of esteem, of respect.
To be continued
Don't insult people or make fun of them.
• Listen to others when they speak.
• Value other people's opinions.
• Be considerate of people's likes and dislikes.
• Don't mock or tease people.
• Don't talk about people behind their backs.
• Be sensitive to other people's feelings.
• Don't pressure someone to do something he or she doesn't want to do.
U. Thant – former DG of the UN
Every human being, of whatever origin, of whatever station, deserves respect. We must each respect others even as we respect ourselves.
Here, two people, Roger Lewis Fullerton and Len Smith discuss respect. They are trying to understand what it is.
RLF: Some believe that we must respect other people as we respect ourselves.
LS: The question is: Can you respect others if you don’t respect yourself?
RLF: I think it would be impossible – surely respect begins with self-respect. I mean, if you do not think well of yourself, you will find it difficult to think well of others.
LS: I think people who lack self-respect only respect those who are more powerful in some way.
RLF: Yes, I think you are right, but is that respect or just a sort of fear? Remember, fear is not the same thing as respect.
LS: Then perhaps we should begin by defining what we mean by the word, ‘respect’.
RLF: I think it means something like having esteem ; for a person you think has qualities you admire.
LS: Or has abilities you admire.
RLF: What about the word ‘deference’? Do you think that is the same thing as respect?
LS: Perhaps we should think of a particular situation, involving several people, and then we might be able to say whether respect was being shown, deference, or esteem.
RLF: Can you think of a scenario that would illustrate those aspects of respect/
LS: First, let’s think about a schoolboy and a headmaster; what sort of feelings do you think the schoolboy has regarding the headmaster?
RLF: That would depend upon what the boy had done; if the boy had done something wrong, and was about to be punished in some way, then I should think that the boy would be afraid of the headmaster.
LS: And what would that feeling be closest to – respect, deference, or esteem?
RLF: It would be close to none. As I said, fear is not at all the same thing as respect, although we often confuse the two.
LS: And many people in positions of authority might prefer someone to be afraid of them.
RLF: Yes, they might, but that is probably because of some insecurity they feel about their own position.
LS: I agree, but I still think such people prefer to be feared for other, more practical reasons too.
RLF: What reasons are those?
LS: For the reason that if someone in authority is feared – let’s say that some men who work under a manager are afraid of him, then they might do as they are told by the manager, whereas if they are not afraid of him, they might not always obey him so readily.
RLF: I see, yes, I think you are right. But is that kind of feeling always effective in getting the best out of someone?
LS: I should say that it isn’t, no!
RLF: Why?
LS: Because people who are afraid will often come to hate and detest those swho they fear.
RLF: Again, I ask you why you think that is true?
LS: For the very simple reason that living in fear is very wearing – very tiring, if you see what I mean, and people who live in fear will often rise up against those who instill fear in them.
RLF: And what do they feel once they have faced down the person they once feared?
LS: I should say they feel the opposite of respect for them. I should think they feel loathing, and dislike for them.
RLF: Those two things do seem to be the opposites of respect, don’t they?
LS: Which brings us back to our two other terms: esteem and deference.
RLF: Esteem sounds a lot like respect to me. Again, can we think of the boy standing in front of the headmaster, except that this time, the boy is there to be praised for his excellent schoolwork.
LS: Then who feels what?
RLF: I would say that both feel some sort of esteem for each other- both realize that the other is appraising them positively, and this reinforces the feeling of esteem, of respect.
To be continued
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Why respect?
Because we live in a society that is highly competitive. To disrespect another is to place yourself above them in status and in what you presume you deserve. That disrespect permits denial of any harm such competitiveness may cause to another and justification that you deserve more than another. To respect another is to bring to conscious awareness that all of us are more alike in our humanity than we are different across nations, across races, across beliefs, and across gender.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)