Kath Murdoch uses the need to keep learning as a frame within which to wrap a discussion of the debate between proponents of direct instruction and inquiry learning. "No educator should ever feel they have 'arrived' at a place of complete understanding about teaching and learning. We are never done learning and always need to grow and adapt to new information." This especially is necessary "when inquiry is characterized as involving 'minimal teacher guidance' (such as in the oft quoted research paper by Sweller et.al. from the early 2000's)." Yeah. Murdoch wraps up her article with a long series of sharp questions that pundits should read before holding forth, questions like "How can we argue for what is best without asking, 'best for what purpose'?" and "What does 'evidence-based' really mean?" These terms are tossed around without any thought - without any curiosity! - and really should be rethought before being reused. Image: Suzi Travis.
Today: 0 Total: 1601 [Direct link] [Share]
