G. Hayward
" I always get worried by categorical statements about what is and what is
not
to count as 'good teaching'."
Vygotsky would say a "good teaching" is that one which goes beyond
subject's current development level (ZPD).
I think he's right. But I do not say you're not rightly so at all. To
qualify teaching as "good" or "not good" only makes sense within a
specifical collection of pedagogical values (there are - thaks to God - a
large diversity of pedagogical practices:)
GH
" I am sure that good teaching can be
improvisational but I am also sure that good teaching can be highly
scripted, can be delivered to large groups of individuals as well as in
small groups, may involve students improvising (but not necessarily always)
and always depends upon what is being taught, to who and for what purpose."
I think that even a "scripted" teaching may be open to unpredicted new
facts, happenings and situations. And, on the other hand, that an
improvisational teaching can be highly "scripted" or carefully planned by.
I have in mind the idea of a hidden curricula - or what a "scripted"
teaching can be in fact teaching beyond the contents and issues approached
by a certain discipline. In my opoinion, the pedagogical relation advocated
by a kind of teaching is a very relevant content to be taught to
students/audience. I'm not saying that the teacher does not has to focus the
specific knowledge and topics to be "socialized" in a certain course. But,
on contrary, that the course is made while we walk down its "free" ways or
roads.
I also believe teaching ALWAYS involves improvising. A certain lecture
will never be the "same" if given to different classrooms or audiences, or
in different times a same day. Never, never... Even if a teacher or
professor literally "reads aloud" her/his appointments/text... It will never
be the same... New questions emerge, new gestures, new facial expressions...
eyes cllaping, cough etc... The teacher reacts to (INTERACT with) audience
actions, and the audience to her/his actions, speechs, thinking, silences...
without planning... It will emerge from the quality of the presential
interactions while teaching goes on...
Keith's "emergence that follows from improvisation" was understood by me in
that sense I pointed above...
Ricardo Ottoni Vaz Japiassu
Professor da Universidade do Estado da Bahia-Uneb X
http://www.ricardojapiassu.pro.br
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Phillip White" <Phillip_White@ceo.cudenver.edu>
> To: <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 6:28 PM
> Subject: Re: Teaching as improvisation
>
>
> > Keith wrote:
> >
> > >In response to Phillip, yes I believe that good teaching is
> > >improvisational.
> > >Especially with those who are trying to implement sociocultural,
> > >collaborative
> > >classroom methods; for them to work the students have to have the
freedom
> > >to
> > >improvise. And collaborative emergence is a common outcome of
> > >improvising
> > >classroom groups.
> >
> > there, i think you have it - that the more open/flexible the top-down
> > organization of teaching is, then more opportunities for bottom-up
> > emergence are probable.
> >
> > a lecturer delivering a lecture to a hall of sixty is less open to
> > noticing emergence that small group collaborative activities.
> >
> > phillip
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > * * * * * * * *
> > * *
> >
> > The English noun "identity" comes, ultimately, from the
> > Latin adverb "identidem", which means "repeatedly."
> > The Latin has exactly the same rhythm as the English,
> > buh-BUM-buh-BUM - a simple iamb, repeated; and
> > "identidem" is, in fact, nothing more than a
> > reduplication of the word "idem", "the same":
> > "idem(et)idem". "Same(and) same". The same,
> > repeated. It is a word that does exactly what
> > it means.
> >
> > from "The Elusive Embrace" by Daniel
> > Mendelsohn.
> >
> > phillip white
> > university of colorado at denver
> > denver, colorado
> > phillip_white@ceo.cudenver.edu
> >
> >
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 01 2002 - 01:00:07 PDT