Discussion: View Thread

Esteban, David and Everyone Else Who is Participating in this
Fascinating Conversation--

Re: Teaching a broad-based body of knowledge, I'm not the right person
to ask because I believe that even those of us with multiple graduate
degrees learn the vast majority of what we need to know on the job. I'm
not even sure that I know what the "right" body of knowledge is. I know
what it was for the twentieth century, but my students are operating in
a different world. (Of course, I'm a behavioral scientist and that
biases my views.) I was a practicing manager for fifteen years before I
went to graduate school, so I am painfully aware of the subtle (or,
sometimes, gross) gap between how the world looks to a manager and how
it looks to an academic, even those with extensive consulting
expereince. I'm an academic now and have no reason to believe that I am
not also "losing my grip" on the manager's reality.

For this reason, I believe that we should be focusing not on teaching
people "what they need to know" but on how to learn it on their own, and
on the fly, in the work setting--how to identify problems and issues,
how to select information from the overwhelming mass of it that is out
there, how to formulate questions, how to evaluate ideas, and so on. (I
don't usually use published cases in my teaching because they are far
too neat and tidy!) We all give lip service to the need for critical
thinking and self-directed learning but few of our syllabi (including
mine) actually support these goals. (Why, for example, do we make all
the students, who have different backgrounds and learning styles, read
the same text?) Personally, I am struggling to overcome the inertia of
functioning in the safe, comfortable paradigms to which I have been
enculcated--the positivist educational assumptions and nineteenth
century learning techniques--and figure out how to really practice what
I preach!

Re Esteban's quote:
> Jim Doran, once told me "To learn you need to first wonder", actually he
> first asked "what was the fundamental requirement needed for learning",
> made me wonder about it, and then he told me...

I think you're right that we need to ask questions (hail, Socrates!) but
the problem I have is identifying questions that interest them enough
that they really "work" to figure them out. So, I find myself more and
more using the "discovery" technique of prescribing exercises (in and
out of the classroom) that force them to ask their own questions by
creating situations in which they must confront the realities of their
own behavior and, often, its inconsistency relative to their goals. I
also use the Dewey method of having them identify real-world projects
that interest them and learn as they go.

How do we know that students will learn what we think they need to know
through these methods? I remind you that research shows that the best
of students pick up something less than 16% of the material from the
best of lectures. I expect that the figure is about the same, or lower,
for reading texts. So, can we really say that they will learn less from
a self-selected, self-directed project even when we know that it will
not call for the full range of knowledge and skills that we feel we
should be transmitting?

For me, the biggest issue is not my concern about the body of knowledge
but, rather, the emotional difficulty of letting go. To teach this way,
we have to stop seeing ourselves as content experts (directors) and
start acting as facilitators of learning (coaches), to give up control
and "trust the process", that is, trust that the process will provide
opportunities for the students to "discover" (with assistance) the basic
principles that we think they need to know. And that's as scary for us
as teachers as it is for the executives whom we advise to delegate,
engage in participative management and empower self-managing teams!

Ruth

As a newly minted PhD, teaching an undergraduate course in human resource
management, I find this discussion fascinating. I am a
manager-turned-academic, like many others who have participated in these
discussions. Teaching students to think for themselves and to learn how to
learn is, I agree, the ultimate pedagogy. But how does one do it in an
institutional setting where the norm is far more directive and less
facilitating (Ruth)?? I am struggling with developing a classroom model
that will incorporate the principles of self-directed learning, and
critical thinking in academic settings that are predominantly different. I
believe the dichotomy in pedagogical methods that I refer to are endemic to
academia in general...

Karthik




At 10:38 AM 10/13/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>Esteban, David and Everyone Else Who is Participating in this
>Fascinating Conversation--
>
>Re: Teaching a broad-based body of knowledge, I'm not the right person
>to ask because I believe that even those of us with multiple graduate
>degrees learn the vast majority of what we need to know on the job. I'm
>not even sure that I know what the "right" body of knowledge is. I know
>what it was for the twentieth century, but my students are operating in
>a different world. (Of course, I'm a behavioral scientist and that
>biases my views.) I was a practicing manager for fifteen years before I
>went to graduate school, so I am painfully aware of the subtle (or,
>sometimes, gross) gap between how the world looks to a manager and how
>it looks to an academic, even those with extensive consulting
>expereince. I'm an academic now and have no reason to believe that I am
>not also "losing my grip" on the manager's reality.
>
>For this reason, I believe that we should be focusing not on teaching
>people "what they need to know" but on how to learn it on their own, and
>on the fly, in the work setting--how to identify problems and issues,
>how to select information from the overwhelming mass of it that is out
>there, how to formulate questions, how to evaluate ideas, and so on. (I
>don't usually use published cases in my teaching because they are far
>too neat and tidy!) We all give lip service to the need for critical
>thinking and self-directed learning but few of our syllabi (including
>mine) actually support these goals. (Why, for example, do we make all
>the students, who have different backgrounds and learning styles, read
>the same text?) Personally, I am struggling to overcome the inertia of
>functioning in the safe, comfortable paradigms to which I have been
>enculcated--the positivist educational assumptions and nineteenth
>century learning techniques--and figure out how to really practice what
>I preach!
>
>Re Esteban's quote:
> > Jim Doran, once told me "To learn you need to first wonder", actually he
> > first asked "what was the fundamental requirement needed for learning",
> > made me wonder about it, and then he told me...
>
>I think you're right that we need to ask questions (hail, Socrates!) but
>the problem I have is identifying questions that interest them enough
>that they really "work" to figure them out. So, I find myself more and
>more using the "discovery" technique of prescribing exercises (in and
>out of the classroom) that force them to ask their own questions by
>creating situations in which they must confront the realities of their
>own behavior and, often, its inconsistency relative to their goals. I
>also use the Dewey method of having them identify real-world projects
>that interest them and learn as they go.
>
>How do we know that students will learn what we think they need to know
>through these methods? I remind you that research shows that the best
>of students pick up something less than 16% of the material from the
>best of lectures. I expect that the figure is about the same, or lower,
>for reading texts. So, can we really say that they will learn less from
>a self-selected, self-directed project even when we know that it will
>not call for the full range of knowledge and skills that we feel we
>should be transmitting?
>
>For me, the biggest issue is not my concern about the body of knowledge
>but, rather, the emotional difficulty of letting go. To teach this way,
>we have to stop seeing ourselves as content experts (directors) and
>start acting as facilitators of learning (coaches), to give up control
>and "trust the process", that is, trust that the process will provide
>opportunities for the students to "discover" (with assistance) the basic
>principles that we think they need to know. And that's as scary for us
>as teachers as it is for the executives whom we advise to delegate,
>engage in participative management and empower self-managing teams!
>
>Ruth

Dear Ruth,
Wow! beautiful response. Of course, I like it because it fits my values and
my belief system and the way I attempt to teach.

The one point I would like to add and, perhaps, differ with you is that the
cutting edge that maybe we professors can contribute is to change the
paradigm from defect, deficiency focus to an appreciative approach as David
Cooperwriter has introduced. There are, no doubt, other ideas as well that I
an not familiar with at the moment

Nonetheless, I will share your ideas with my fellow professors in our MBA
Program.
Thanks so much, Ruth.

Peace and Love,
Harry

******************************************************
Prof. Harry J. Bury, Ph.D.
Professor of Organizational Behavior and Systems Management
Baldwin-Wallace College
275 Eastland Road
Berea, Ohio 44017-2088
Office Phone: (440)826-2395
***********************************************************



-----Original Message-----
From: Ruth H. Axelrod [mailto:raxelrod@gwu.edu]
Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2001 10:39 AM
To: MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
Subject: Re: [MG-ED-DV] Experiental Education--LONG


Esteban, David and Everyone Else Who is Participating in this
Fascinating Conversation--

Re: Teaching a broad-based body of knowledge, I'm not the right person
to ask because I believe that even those of us with multiple graduate
degrees learn the vast majority of what we need to know on the job. I'm
not even sure that I know what the "right" body of knowledge is. I know
what it was for the twentieth century, but my students are operating in
a different world. (Of course, I'm a behavioral scientist and that
biases my views.) I was a practicing manager for fifteen years before I
went to graduate school, so I am painfully aware of the subtle (or,
sometimes, gross) gap between how the world looks to a manager and how
it looks to an academic, even those with extensive consulting
expereince. I'm an academic now and have no reason to believe that I am
not also "losing my grip" on the manager's reality.

For this reason, I believe that we should be focusing not on teaching
people "what they need to know" but on how to learn it on their own, and
on the fly, in the work setting--how to identify problems and issues,
how to select information from the overwhelming mass of it that is out
there, how to formulate questions, how to evaluate ideas, and so on. (I
don't usually use published cases in my teaching because they are far
too neat and tidy!) We all give lip service to the need for critical
thinking and self-directed learning but few of our syllabi (including
mine) actually support these goals. (Why, for example, do we make all
the students, who have different backgrounds and learning styles, read
the same text?) Personally, I am struggling to overcome the inertia of
functioning in the safe, comfortable paradigms to which I have been
enculcated--the positivist educational assumptions and nineteenth
century learning techniques--and figure out how to really practice what
I preach!

Re Esteban's quote:
> Jim Doran, once told me "To learn you need to first wonder", actually he
> first asked "what was the fundamental requirement needed for learning",
> made me wonder about it, and then he told me...

I think you're right that we need to ask questions (hail, Socrates!) but
the problem I have is identifying questions that interest them enough
that they really "work" to figure them out. So, I find myself more and
more using the "discovery" technique of prescribing exercises (in and
out of the classroom) that force them to ask their own questions by
creating situations in which they must confront the realities of their
own behavior and, often, its inconsistency relative to their goals. I
also use the Dewey method of having them identify real-world projects
that interest them and learn as they go.

How do we know that students will learn what we think they need to know
through these methods? I remind you that research shows that the best
of students pick up something less than 16% of the material from the
best of lectures. I expect that the figure is about the same, or lower,
for reading texts. So, can we really say that they will learn less from
a self-selected, self-directed project even when we know that it will
not call for the full range of knowledge and skills that we feel we
should be transmitting?

For me, the biggest issue is not my concern about the body of knowledge
but, rather, the emotional difficulty of letting go. To teach this way,
we have to stop seeing ourselves as content experts (directors) and
start acting as facilitators of learning (coaches), to give up control
and "trust the process", that is, trust that the process will provide
opportunities for the students to "discover" (with assistance) the basic
principles that we think they need to know. And that's as scary for us
as teachers as it is for the executives whom we advise to delegate,
engage in participative management and empower self-managing teams!

Ruth

From: rusty rae [mailto:thegraduate@centurytel.net]

Parker J. Palmer wrote in his book, "To Know as we are Known", "To Teach
is to create a space where we are obedient to truth."

You mention that you don't like cases because they are neatly packaged.
Here's one case that is not: Shell in Nigeria - there is an A and a B case.
It's by Anne Lawrence, and is available online at I-case.com. Shell is
struggling with very difficult problems, and this case shows it well. Since
the problem is ongoing, students can research subsequent developments
through press articles, websites (many of which are provided in the case),
and
the like.

Cheers,

Sharon

Why not use a 'problem based learning' approach by writing short
'live ' cases? Each academic year I am contacted by a number of
SMEs who need marketing (my own subject area) but have a limited
budget. I write a short case study for each and designate a
tutorial group to each company. Each week a small group of 3-4
students has to apply the previous week's lecture content to their
particular organisation and present it to the rest of their tutorial
group. Questions and discussion are encouraged. this enables
the tutorial group to interogate the theory and aggregate their
understanding of the practice. A written assignment for the
individual studet is to 'criticallly evaluate the marketing of their
company'. As a result the students gain valuable experience and the
companies gain valuable research. Also I have found final
examination grades have improved since this approach has been
adopted!


Hope this helps.

John
John Milliken
School of Business, Retail & Financial Services
University of Ulster
Coleraine
N. Ireland
BT52 1SA

j.milliken@ulst.ac.uk

John--

> Why not use a 'problem based learning' approach by writing short
> 'live ' cases?

I think that's a great method. I do something similar in my OB and
leadership classes by having students write their own case studies--they
briefly describe an incident or relationship from their worklives
(either as an in-action or after-action review, to use military
parlance), articulate the issues, analyze them using course concepts,
draw conclusions and make recommendations for their own future
behavior. This way, I also teach reflective practice (which is the
first lecture-discussion topic and reading in the course, since I am
trying to help them optimize how/what they learn from experience.) And,
since it's the stuff of their own lives, they are very interested and
involved, dealing with the emotional and spritual as well as the
cognitive issues.

Ruth