Random Breakfast Coffee is back! This post is a ('mildly') sarcastic one, I'm afraid. But I had to get my opinion out there, after being forced to work on this forced reflection portfolio for my studies... So bear with me, and please tell me what you think about reflecting - both the natural way as part of a continuous progress as well as the forced, fake, unproductive way colleges and universities seem to love.
Reflection on reflecting
Why does just a mention of the word 'reflection' summon up a five-metre thick brick wall for most people?
What is so vile about it that it needs to be kept at a more-than-safe distance at all times?
Why do people keep insisting on, at the very least, trying it over and over again?
In case you haven't guessed, I'm working on my SLB (a course at my university on reflection and making informed choices for your studies and your career) portfolio today. I've been trying to get properly started with the assignments for the last... few weeks. Not that I haven't done anything, I've finished my weekly journals as a good girl should, I've written a reflection (*shudders*) on the first few weeks and I've written yet another reflection exercise on what I have (supposedly) learnt here in SA, so far. Still, the mere thought of 'doing something for SLB' makes me want to stay in bed for the whole day and ignore this looming presence altogether. - I'm not the only one.
Teachers, students, adults and children alike. Most of them don't like this 'reflecting'-thing we're talking about. My aunt (and some of my fellow teachers at Japari* (remedial primary school I'm currently working at)) would say it's simply too 'wishy-washy' to make any sense. I would say most people are their own worst judges. (They are not only unfair to themselves, either ignorant or too aware of their own faults, no... usually people can't seem to make any sense whatsoever when talking about anything concerning their own person!) Others yet would say it is a natural process that should not be forced.
Reflecting is supposed to make people work more efficiently (makes you wonder why the process of 'reflecting' is so absolutely inefficient, doesn't it?) and improve them somehow. I agree. You should reflect, sometimes. Is every year enough? ... Okay, let's say it isn't. Every month? Maybe... Every week? Every day? Every few hours? What is too much?
In my opinion spending 28 hours every term is too much. Time that could be spend giving students actual lectures. Add in another subject (or two, if you get rid of the other time wasting projects... Is it that we don't have enough teachers? Or is it that people really believe making up your own silly project to 'improve your English' actually improves anything (except for – possibly – relationships between students)?)
I don't agree with SLB as a separate course. Reflection should be (and already is) a natural part of other courses, but should not be forced on people as a separate activity. First of all this intimidates people ("Oh, so we're supposed to be reflecting on something, right now.") and can actually damage the progress of some students (it's especially challenging for the shy ones among us). It also uses valuable time that could be spend on learning for tests or working on other portfolios (or giving more, better, different courses!)
Finally, I would like to ask how teachers deal with SLB. It can't be easy to grade an SLB portfolio. What do you look at? How much someone has written? Well, that's silly. I'm sure some people can make more sense in a few sentences than others do in ten pages. Are all the obligatory assignments included? - Some might not be applicable to someone's situation at all, and yet we have to do all of them. Do you even actually read everything every single student writes? (Yes? Really? I'm not too sure about that...)
And POPs and PAPs (action plans) are yet another story, I think it's safe to say that at least nine out of ten students never look at a POP or PAP again until they have to write their next portfolio. And then you just 'dream up something new' which you will, supposedly, be working on. Oh yes, you will in fact be working on these things... Subconsciously, but not in the forced, fake, way we are expected to.
Progress is a natural process that can't be stopped [if people continue to gain experience]. It can't, however, be forced. Which is what SLB is trying to do.
The resistance many people feel against 'reflecting' isn't aimed at the action itself. It merely rejects this superficial substitute that we have tried to create.
Thanks for reading, now I'll continue by spending more precious time on finding some creative ways to say that 'Yes, I have been trying to improve myself and did manage to get some work done.' Hopefully it will be enough to fill another portfolio that will take other people's precious time to read and mark. Have we done some actual 'reflection' that way, though? Who knows.
Showing posts with label universities. Show all posts
Showing posts with label universities. Show all posts
10/14/10
5/27/10
Education is not the catalyst of the [learning] process - it is only the extension.
Education* only exists as it is because of learners.
(* In this article 'education' is used to mean the institutions that (aspire to) provide a learning environment in which knowledge of any kind is acquired in a controlled fashion.)
No learners, no schools, colleges and universities. Seems simple, right?
Well, for some reason most teachers (and students) seem to believe the opposite is true. They live by the "Schools exist, therefore I learn" creed.
Exploring -> Learning -> Education
The most natural and logical way of learning seems to be this; you experience something, explore this, and in your exploration learning takes place.
Education is not the catalyst of the process - it is only the extension.
Humans have this innate curiosity that enables them to learn in the first place. I think we can all agree that everyone learns certain things before a person starts attending school. (Their native language up to a certain point, recognising concepts such as colours and emotions, how to open and close doors etc. etc.) There is no reason whatsoever to assume that people would suddenly need an institution to continue learning after a certain period of time.
Education only exists because people try to monopolise learning.
What am I trying to say here? Well... I'm studying to be a teacher. So I must have some kind of faith in this whole education thing, after all, right?
I think I do. Education is not some big evil overlord, although it might seem to act like one most of the time. Universities are places of knowledge, teachers can be useful. The only thing that we have to remind ourselves of (and we need to do this over and over again) is that the teachers are there for the students. And not the other way around.
Education should serve the learners. Serve them in empowering them to explore, give access to materials to accommodate them in the process of exploration, and thus creating a true learning environment.
Teachers have a part to play in this, they can do immensely useful work in transferring the tools needed to make the learning process more efficient. They can be guides and role models in the learning process. As long as they respect the students and acknowledge that learning happens through exploring done by the learners themselves.
Education is a tool to facilitate learning.
And that is what education should do - facilitate, not cripple.
(* In this article 'education' is used to mean the institutions that (aspire to) provide a learning environment in which knowledge of any kind is acquired in a controlled fashion.)
No learners, no schools, colleges and universities. Seems simple, right?
Well, for some reason most teachers (and students) seem to believe the opposite is true. They live by the "Schools exist, therefore I learn" creed.
Exploring -> Learning -> Education
The most natural and logical way of learning seems to be this; you experience something, explore this, and in your exploration learning takes place.
Education is not the catalyst of the process - it is only the extension.
Humans have this innate curiosity that enables them to learn in the first place. I think we can all agree that everyone learns certain things before a person starts attending school. (Their native language up to a certain point, recognising concepts such as colours and emotions, how to open and close doors etc. etc.) There is no reason whatsoever to assume that people would suddenly need an institution to continue learning after a certain period of time.
Education only exists because people try to monopolise learning.
What am I trying to say here? Well... I'm studying to be a teacher. So I must have some kind of faith in this whole education thing, after all, right?
I think I do. Education is not some big evil overlord, although it might seem to act like one most of the time. Universities are places of knowledge, teachers can be useful. The only thing that we have to remind ourselves of (and we need to do this over and over again) is that the teachers are there for the students. And not the other way around.
Education should serve the learners. Serve them in empowering them to explore, give access to materials to accommodate them in the process of exploration, and thus creating a true learning environment.
Teachers have a part to play in this, they can do immensely useful work in transferring the tools needed to make the learning process more efficient. They can be guides and role models in the learning process. As long as they respect the students and acknowledge that learning happens through exploring done by the learners themselves.
Education is a tool to facilitate learning.
And that is what education should do - facilitate, not cripple.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
