I thank Arathi and others for their enlightening comments and would like to
point out that there there are different ways of lecturing, of which I would
like to identify two. One is the traditional spewing out of facts to be
memorised and regurgitated on an exam, which fails to provoke any critical
thinking on the part of the student. The other is a critical analysis of the
subject which exposes the student to the way in which the professor thinks
and interprets, which can be a template to be followed when the student
carries out his or her own research.
Imagine how a professor might present the data on Darwin's finches. One
might simply provide all the details on the taxonomic features, while
another might ask (rhetorically) why the finches on this island have
unusually thick beaks, etc. Then imagine that the exam includes a question
about foxes in the Arctic and asks why the foxes in one area have unusually
thick coats of fur. The second professor's students could probably figure
that out while the other students were complaining that the course did not
cover Arctic ecosystems.
Bill Silvert
----- Original Message -----
From: "Arathi Seshadri" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: domingo, 24 de Janeiro de 2010 20:50
Subject: [ECOLOG-L] decline in education, comment on active learning
Dave,
I do agree with all what you are saying. May be I did describe active
learning but thought it was not so.
I did not do any of my education in the US. All my education was in India
...
