I think divergent thinking is a good thing, and to encourage it is good as well. It allows for creativity, and expanding of the mind. Students are forced to think that there is one answer for one question, yet they should be encouraged to see the many outcomes from the question. When i was younger I would ask TONS of questions, I would question EVERYTHING, people to this day remind me of how i used to be. They would tell me "when you were younger , you would ask so many questions, for example, if the dog was sleeping you'd ask why? and i would say because it was tired? and i would yet again, ask why? and so on and so on. Now I don't question things like i used to, i accept an answer that is given to me, if i agree with it. I think that it is a good thing to see things in many ways, for example philosophers have many theories as to why things happen, and they are super smart, they think out of the box.
What would prevent rote memorization from happening in schools?
If teachers focused more on getting the children entertained on the subject they wouldn't just have to memorize it for the test, if they like it they'll pay attention and they'll understand it more. Instead of just making them remember a bunch of facts that they'll be tested on they should go more in depth than just making them remember the random facts that they'll be tested on. Rote memorization is not learning, it seems like it is a form of the banking concept, teachers are drilling information into the childrens' minds and expecting them to memorize it so that they can repeat it out on the test, doesn't even matter if they understand it, as long as they remember it, they pass.
What is the difference depth and breadth?
The difference between depth and breadth is how much detail is put into the topic. When something is in depth it means that there is more than the surface area of a topic towards it. When it is in breadth it means that only some of the things are present. For example, when something is in depth the teacher provides much more information, rather than what the students will be tested on. It is more than what is required to be taught. In breadth is just a simple explanation of a topic. For example when teaching about WWII if you were to go in depth, you'd say what were the causes that it had to do with Germany being angry with its inflation, and they wanted to blame someone and they took it out on the jews, and how the U.S. didn't want to get involved and the whole thing with Japan a breadth explanation would be WWII started because germany was angry and they killed a bunch of jews.
Is it possible for teachers to plan lessons based on a students interest in learning?
I don't think that it is possible for teachers to plan lessons based on students interests, because everyone likes different things, it is hard to involve everyone on one particular topic. What is interesting to some might not be to others. For example, many people like football, but for me, i honestly don't get it, and i'm sure it is a good sport, i'm just not really interested by it... while somethings that i think are cool, might not be too interesting to others. I think the only way to do that would be to split the children into groups where they have similar likes, yet i don't think that is very productive, because then it wouldn't seem much like a class, because everybody is doing different things.
No comments:
Post a Comment