It is true that there are curricular expectations, even in student-centered
curricula, and that at some point learners will be called upon to
demonstrate mastery of that content, but this doesn't necessarily imply
that what is learned is the same in student-centered and teacher-directed
methods. Learners, in a student-centered approach, are not only learning
content, but also how to recognize when they don't know, how to go about
researching it and to what depth, and how to critically appraise resources.
In a teacher-directed method these skills are not exercised because the
teacher sez, "This is what you will need to know and this is where you can
find it". "Fostering of the skills" does not mean teaching them, but
rather providing opportunities for these skills to emerge and be
strengthened. I don't think there is any assumption that the skills do not
exist, in fact, I think the opposite is the case. To the extent that there
is a mismatch between the curricular expectations and the needs of the
marketplace, than the blame should reside with the curriculum designer, not
the worker nee student. The hope is, however, that students who learned
via student-centered methods will be in a better position to learn a,b,c on
their own should that become necessary.
>A medical student approriates a certain level of assumptions and
>beliefs that are held prior to participating in a PBL community, which is
>not always the case in other communities. So, upon entering a community of
>practice I may approriate, identify, or own the activity, but I may also
>chose to ignore, resist or leave in an ideal situation. Where I tend to
>have struggles with the assumptions of student centered arrangements is the
>appropriation, identity etc. is often a built in prerequisite to the
>community itself.
>
>Tools, in reference to lifelong learning, have a double nature I believe.
>Again for me its the difference between taking something as a pre-given
>that children construct or identify with an activity or community to
>various degrees, which is a wonderful thing, where it becomes dangerous,
>like internalization, is when it becomes the prerequisite.
>
>Teacher Centered: Internalization is the goal or prerequisite of the
>community or activity rather than the byproduct.
>
>Student Centered: Appropriation, identity formation, construction,
>ownership is the goal or prerequsite of the community or activity rather
>than the byproduct.
You seem to be conflating student-centered methods with Social Practice
Theory, which is confusing because one is a pedagogic method and the other
a theory of learning.
I suppose you are right that there is an element of manipulation to any
kind of teaching method. I would also concede that entry into a community
of practice often (inevitably) involves appropriation of attitudes and
biases that go along with participation in that community.
Student-centered methods, unlike teacher-directed methods, provide the
tools by which the learner might begin to critically question these
attitudes and biases. ---Tim