This lecture was really interesting. It was all about how perhaps we shouldn't rely on the teacher to teach and educate us, but rather we work as a collective, with the students deciding what they want to learn and the teachers taking a step back.
This way the learning is embedded a lot more, because its student centred, you tell yourself what you want to learn.
In France in 1968, students took to the streets to fight for a more equal opportunity to go to university. They took over an art school and started making hundreds and thousands of prints to put out all around the city. They were visually communicating a message of revolution. They worked as a unit, as a collaborative, which i guess is what this is all about.
We went on to look at some philosophers, such as Jaques Ranciere, who always looks at society from a flipped/different way.
We also looked at Jacotot who was a french teacher. And I guess the principles of universal teaching come from him teaching french in the Netherlands. He couldn't speak flemish to his students, and they couldn't speak french, so he decided to give them a book to read, one in each language and they were to read each book and teach themselves the translations. It was completely student led, and they ended up being incredible at speaking french.
Teacher centred 'explication'=enforced stultification
Stultification-Repression
Self-Education-Emancipation
Education as a social form.
There are a few places around the world that actually do use this method of education, such as the Art Academy Islington Mill and The school of the damned.
There are many things that I think are great about this theory, and in many ways it could work, however as a society I feel we are far too comfortable with rules and routine, and Im not sure what would happen if we threw all of that out of the window.
No comments:
Post a Comment