Robert Heiny
The Stimulating Classroom Fallacy of Teaching
ONE OF THE MOST COMMON ARGUMENTS about education and learning might be called, from a learners' view, the stimulating (or rich) environment classroom fallacy of teaching. It is commonly applied by teachers who hang posters, animal cages, and other items to dress their classrooms as stages for learning. For almost a century, some teachers have added various kinds of “projects” as lessons in order to foster student efforts to blend these props with learning subject matter content and skills. The argument goes like this:
There are many skills and interests in life and good teachers bring part of those into their classrooms. Educators opine (theorize) that these props and projects inspire and create an eagerness to learn by introducing students to real life options available beyond their experiences. To the extent that props and projects feature choices learners may use while learning, they may support lessons that accelerate, increase, and deepen (AID) learning from lessons at rates scientists have demonstrated possible.
The fallacy lies in assuming that learning lessons requires the inspiration and eagerness of students in order to AID learning. Suppose inspiration and eagerness are essential ingredients of learning, it should be possible to test teachers and to measure their ability accurately and precisely in these areas in order to defend the stimulating classroom argument. Lacking experimental research results that demonstrate contributions to AIDing learning, the point remains an opinion (theory) without technical support.
Related Reading
Related Resources
Last Edited: 10-15-14
http://www.tuxreports.com/robertheiny/2014/10/15/the-stimulating-classroom-fallacy-of-teaching/
The Stimulating Classroom Fallacy of Teaching
ONE OF THE MOST COMMON ARGUMENTS about education and learning might be called, from a learners' view, the stimulating (or rich) environment classroom fallacy of teaching. It is commonly applied by teachers who hang posters, animal cages, and other items to dress their classrooms as stages for learning. For almost a century, some teachers have added various kinds of “projects” as lessons in order to foster student efforts to blend these props with learning subject matter content and skills. The argument goes like this:
There are many skills and interests in life and good teachers bring part of those into their classrooms. Educators opine (theorize) that these props and projects inspire and create an eagerness to learn by introducing students to real life options available beyond their experiences. To the extent that props and projects feature choices learners may use while learning, they may support lessons that accelerate, increase, and deepen (AID) learning from lessons at rates scientists have demonstrated possible.
The fallacy lies in assuming that learning lessons requires the inspiration and eagerness of students in order to AID learning. Suppose inspiration and eagerness are essential ingredients of learning, it should be possible to test teachers and to measure their ability accurately and precisely in these areas in order to defend the stimulating classroom argument. Lacking experimental research results that demonstrate contributions to AIDing learning, the point remains an opinion (theory) without technical support.
Related Reading
- A Learners' View (ALV) in One Lesson
- A Learners' View (ALV) Redefines Highly Qualified Teachers
- Education Argot Misdirect Teachers
- Teachers Do The Hokey Pokey
Related Resources
- The Stimulating Classroom Fallacy of Teaching subsequently appears in Classic Education: A Learners' View Of Choices in Teaching and Learning
Last Edited: 10-15-14
http://www.tuxreports.com/robertheiny/2014/10/15/the-stimulating-classroom-fallacy-of-teaching/