> In my experience and observations in the project, you can reverse
everything
> that Expert said there and it is still will be Expert's highly valuable
> claims. I think that wisdom of expert (which I see as an experienced
> novice) is to understand that statements make sense only in an
appropriate
> context which often has a dynamic character. When some novices seek for a
> stable universal rule, many seasoned participants look for priorities
that
> guide them in specific circumstances and themselves are dynamic, shared,
> negotiable, and interpretative.
>
> What do you think?
I am confused, isn't that what the expert/novice script is saying. I
always read it against DAPism, which fills many of the novice's roles. The
expert being decisions relating to a dynamic context and novices applying
broad generalizations about learning and development.
>
> Eugene
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nate [mailto:schmolze@students.wisc.edu]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 1999 8:00 PM
> > To: xmca who-is-at weber.ucsd.edu
> > Subject: Re: the calculus wars
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Timothy Koschmann <tkoschmann who-is-at acm.org>
> > To: <xmca who-is-at weber.ucsd.edu>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 1999 3:03 PM
> > Subject: Re: the calculus wars
> >
> >
> >
> > > Your perception of the PBL tutor/coach's role is accurate to the
extent
> > > that faculty members when in this role are discouraged from telling
what
> > > they know, but you should realize that there are multiple faculty
roles
> > in
> > > PBL. Once students have formulated a "learning issue" (i.e.,
> > recognized
> > > that there is something that they need to know), they are encouraged
to
> > > utilize faculty as resources along with reference works, journals,
the
> > > Internet, and anything else they can think of. Tutor/coaches do
> > facilitate
> > > inquiry and do model appropriate strategies for problem solving, but
an
> > > important part of the method is that at no point does the tutor/coach
> > tell
> > > the students "This is something that you need to learn."
> > > ---Tim
> > >
> > I took a math math class awhile back that was very similar to the PBL
> > approach. I interpreted the Dean's style as playing mind games. My
> > experience in the School of Education is most students get very
resentful
> > at such a pedagogical style. It IMHO is based on an outdated form of
> > constructivism in which the teacher is simply unfolding cognitive
> > structures inside the head. If we see our students as "humans"
> > it seems to
> > me it would go against either extreme. In this sense I would go so far
to
> > argue such an approach is very inauthentic.
> >
> > For example; if we are in a conversation on xcma, for example, and
someone
> > has an inquiry we do not sit back and wonder how to set the question
asker
> > on some sort of problem solving trajectory. In everyday conversation
we
> > don't think that way. If I ask someone who has read a mutual book a
> > question, I would become upset if their response was withheld because
they
> > did not want to get in the way of my learning. For me, I see both
extreme
> > forms of constructivism and teacher directed teaching as forms of
control.
> > In teacher directed classrooms knowledge is only in the teachers head,
and
> > in constructivism its still in the teachers head but is approached as a
> > mind game of the teacher guessing what is inside the head. Everyday
> > conversations normally does not go to either extreme.
> >
> > In a more Foucaultian framework such approaches of the "students need
to
> > learn" is seen as the use of power through decenterism. My problem
with
> > PBL is not so much the practice in itself, but the ideology and
> > assumptions
> > about learning behind such an approach. It is actually ideologically
very
> > congruent with Socrates. A belief that education is simply an
> > unfolding of
> > universal, innate cognitive abilities. Such an approach it seems would
> > also convey a teacher as observer rather than a participant in
learning.
> > For me an good educational context is one where its difficult to
> > distinguish what part of the activity is teacher centered or student
> > centered.
> >
> > Such an example is below with the differentiation of novice/expert from
5D
> > Clearinghouse.
> >
> > Expert: Do not assume that a child has understood something he or she
has
> > read on the computer screen or in the Adventure Guide
> > Novice: Rely upon the computer or Adventure Guide to instruct
> >
> > Expert: See the task as a joint activity and will use words like
> > "Why don't
> > we try this?"
> > Novice: See the task as being the primary responsibility of the child
> >
> > Expert: Tend to anticipate when a child needs help before he asks
> > Novice: Will wait to be asked by the child to provide assistance
> >
> >
> > http://www.ced.appstate.edu/projects/5dClhse/tehome.html
> >
> > I see the example as a challenge to both teacher directed and
neo-student
> > centered environments.
> >
> > Nate
> >
> >
> >
>