Purpose Learning: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Objective, purpose, task-oriented learning is a critical component of [[Pedagogy]]. However, Direct Instruction (DI) in pedagogy is a technical term that refers to highly scripted, sequenced learning, but not explicitly connected to Purpose Learning. | Objective, purpose, task-oriented learning is a critical component of [[Pedagogy]]. However, Direct Instruction (DI) in pedagogy is a technical term that refers to highly scripted, sequenced learning, but not explicitly connected to Purpose Learning. | ||
Direct Learning is supposed to be the learning of things directly related to accomplishing things, physical, mental, or spiritual. | Direct Learning is supposed to be the learning of things directly related to accomplishing things, physical, mental, or spiritual. It is not learning theory first - it is practice first - from which more profound theory can be learned. Theorists accomplish amazing things - such as Einstein in E=mc2 - but the downside is the atomic bomb. Practitioners, on the other hand, are more influential - because they actually get shit done. However, practitioners, such as Buckminster Fuller, are nothing without sufficient [[Moral Intelligence]] to collaborate. I say this because even Fuller believed in patents. | ||
What we need is Purpose Learning - https://www.nais.org/magazine/independent-school/winter-2022/purpose-learning-reimagining-what-and-how-students-learn/ - Think-feel-do - as an antidote to the | What we need is Purpose Learning - https://www.nais.org/magazine/independent-school/winter-2022/purpose-learning-reimagining-what-and-how-students-learn/ - Think-feel-do - as an antidote to the [[Factory Model]] of education. | ||
Revision as of 16:29, 15 October 2023
Objective, purpose, task-oriented learning is a critical component of Pedagogy. However, Direct Instruction (DI) in pedagogy is a technical term that refers to highly scripted, sequenced learning, but not explicitly connected to Purpose Learning.
Direct Learning is supposed to be the learning of things directly related to accomplishing things, physical, mental, or spiritual. It is not learning theory first - it is practice first - from which more profound theory can be learned. Theorists accomplish amazing things - such as Einstein in E=mc2 - but the downside is the atomic bomb. Practitioners, on the other hand, are more influential - because they actually get shit done. However, practitioners, such as Buckminster Fuller, are nothing without sufficient Moral Intelligence to collaborate. I say this because even Fuller believed in patents.
What we need is Purpose Learning - https://www.nais.org/magazine/independent-school/winter-2022/purpose-learning-reimagining-what-and-how-students-learn/ - Think-feel-do - as an antidote to the Factory Model of education.