I realized that I had not written much that was not military related in some time. It got me wondeing why I was so obsessed with the Army?
Well, isn't it logical? I am serving a deployment. To say that I am working for the Army full time is an understatement. I carry my weapon nearly all of my waking hours, and am on call for military duties 24/7. I do have some down time, but even that is spent performing maintenance on my equipment and getting ready for more work.
We are in a sort of news vaccuum out here, and the people I see, even at the "store" or at dinner, are all here for the same thing, and only reinforce the mindset that comes along with a deployment.
Needless to say, I have to make every effort to redirect my thoughts away from the Army, and I don't often have epitomies about things that used to occupy my mind. So, it's hard to be clever about topics about which a Factotum should be clever.
But it's important. I don't want to be so narrow. Does it not go to the heart of the question about whether it is good to be generalists or specialists? I would rather be the former, but certianly our society needs specialists. Maybe I am still looking for what really motivates me. Do we all find a speciality in the end?
I hope that's not the inevitable conclusion to our lives' paths. I love teaching, but I joined the military knowing full well that it could take me away from it. I am also trying to get into investing, but a teacher's salary doesn't exactly foster a climate of investment opportunity. The Army has taught me a bit about video editing, and I am learning more in hopes of applying it to my teaching. I also love writing, and both math and my military service have given me fodder to practice the craft.
At any rate, I like to dabble in lots of things. It's enjoyable, and I would encourage those around me to do the same. I am making my best attempt to avoid keeping my mind on one lonely track.
Showing posts with label teaching. Show all posts
Showing posts with label teaching. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Monday, August 18, 2008
The Responsibility of Learning
I am an American Soldier.
My brief experience in the United States Army has been eye-opening. It strikes me with awe to think of the vast resources with which we are trained to fulfill our mission, and the professionalism with which most soldiers approach it. It has also given me plenty to think about in terms of learning.
Whether it's called "training," or "learning," the process is the same. What I get at DINFOS depends upon the same fundamental principlesas what a third-grader gets in his science lesson, or what a high school math teacher tries to give her students in a geometry lesson.
Given that an organization exists as a goal that its students learn a set of information, the entire responsibility of the affair rests on the organization. When students are learning, or don't meet the programmed outcomes, then at least one of the things designed to produce the outcome has failed. In standards-based teaching system, instruction is planned from the end. Each instructional unit is designed to bridge the gap between students' abilities to the standard ability.
For example, if I want to teach someone how to create a header in MS Word, and I plan the instruction, then I would expect anyone who recieved my isntruction to be able to create a header. If the student attempted to follow my instruction and couldn't create the header, then some part of my instruction was faulty. There is no other way around it.
Teachers have a hard time coming to grips with this reality. They want to attribute all of the gaps in learning to students. True, some student behaviors contribute to a lack of learning, but instruction can resolve such a lack.
The military instructors at DINFOS need to learn the lesson even more. If a certain instructional strategy consistently has bad reviews and results in poor knowledge acquisition, then it SHOULD BE ABANDONED. Whe do teachers continue to put their faith in methods that yield such dismal results?
My brief experience in the United States Army has been eye-opening. It strikes me with awe to think of the vast resources with which we are trained to fulfill our mission, and the professionalism with which most soldiers approach it. It has also given me plenty to think about in terms of learning.
Whether it's called "training," or "learning," the process is the same. What I get at DINFOS depends upon the same fundamental principlesas what a third-grader gets in his science lesson, or what a high school math teacher tries to give her students in a geometry lesson.
Given that an organization exists as a goal that its students learn a set of information, the entire responsibility of the affair rests on the organization. When students are learning, or don't meet the programmed outcomes, then at least one of the things designed to produce the outcome has failed. In standards-based teaching system, instruction is planned from the end. Each instructional unit is designed to bridge the gap between students' abilities to the standard ability.
For example, if I want to teach someone how to create a header in MS Word, and I plan the instruction, then I would expect anyone who recieved my isntruction to be able to create a header. If the student attempted to follow my instruction and couldn't create the header, then some part of my instruction was faulty. There is no other way around it.
Teachers have a hard time coming to grips with this reality. They want to attribute all of the gaps in learning to students. True, some student behaviors contribute to a lack of learning, but instruction can resolve such a lack.
The military instructors at DINFOS need to learn the lesson even more. If a certain instructional strategy consistently has bad reviews and results in poor knowledge acquisition, then it SHOULD BE ABANDONED. Whe do teachers continue to put their faith in methods that yield such dismal results?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)