| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
JZer
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 3898
Location: Pittsburgh
|
 Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 1:06 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| johnslat wrote: |
Dear JZer,
I'm having a little problem understanding your post.
"People want intelligent people." I'm not sure just what that means.
"What are they going to do?" Who are the "they"? The students?
"Teaching rudimentary English, math or science isn't too interesting after you do it for several years."
Well, I suppose it could become less interesting, but it's the students that we teach, not just the subject. And the students are always changing even though the subject doesn't.
Regards,
John |
Maybe other people have better work experiences, but from my experience life in the workforce is not very challenging and pretty boring. I am switching careers from EFL and hopefully things are better in regards to work.
I have enjoyed living abroad and earning a decent living from EFL. However, I am not sure why one would need highly intelligent people for many jobs. I just feel that the goal of high intelligent people is some ideal that has little application in reality or would actually improve society.
I would be happy for you or anyone else to convince me otherwise. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
LongShiKong
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 1082
Location: China
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JZer wrote: |
| What I am trying to say, is what will all these intelligent people do in the real world? Do we really need to create intelligent people when 50% or more of jobs are pretty boring? Plus they really don't need highly intelligent people to do them. |
Which country or region are you referring to? In N.A. there's a more pressing shortage of highly-skilled workers than low-skilled ones--last summer Australia came poaching the few Canadian oil-industry technologists. In Canada, there's even debate over whether to heavily subsidize training through tax cuts for those (mostly immigrants) with the prerequisite experience to take such jobs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JZer
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 3898
Location: Pittsburgh
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 2:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongShiKong wrote: |
| JZer wrote: |
| What I am trying to say, is what will all these intelligent people do in the real world? Do we really need to create intelligent people when 50% or more of jobs are pretty boring? Plus they really don't need highly intelligent people to do them. |
Which country or region are you referring to? In N.A. there's a more pressing shortage of highly-skilled workers than low-skilled ones--last summer Australia came poaching the few Canadian oil-industry technologists. In Canada, there's even debate over whether to heavily subsidize training through tax cuts for those (mostly immigrants) with the prerequisite experience to take such jobs. |
You need to be a little bit more specific what you mean by highly-skilled. There are some skills that may be highly in demand and not necessarily easy to learn, but when it comes to the job itself it is doing a mundane technical procedure many times a day.
I am not sure that intelligent workers and highly-skilled are really synonymous.
To me highly-skilled refers to some specific skill that takes training. One doesn't necessarily need to be intelligent to do it. You just need the patience to spend the time to learn the skill and average aptitude. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MotherF
Joined: 07 Jun 2010
Posts: 1450
Location: 17�48'N 97�46'W
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 3:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
For me, it doesn't really have to do with jobs at all. But human enrichment.
You persure knowledge and learning for the sake of knowledge and learning.
And you do something else "earn" your living. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johnslat
Joined: 21 Jan 2003
Posts: 13859
Location: Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dear MotherF,
And, if you're REALLY lucky, you can do both: pursue knowledge and learning on your own, and while you earn your living.
I'm always learning more about the English language every time I teach another class.
Regards,
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DebMer
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Posts: 232
Location: Southern California
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| johnslat wrote: |
I'm always learning more about the English language every time I teach another class.
|
This is so true. I keep wondering if I'll ever stop being amazed at how complex it is. I often feel sorry for my students. They have so many irregularities to remember. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spiral78
Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Posts: 11534
Location: On a Short Leash
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 4:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Those of us who teach ESP and/or EAP also often have great opps to learn while working. Having taught writing for Economics from first year through post-grad levels has been extremely interesting to me....also get to teach in the fields of health, psychology, law, and medicine. I've done projects with sustainable manufacturing and the oil industry - it's all pretty fascinating, honestly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JZer
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 3898
Location: Pittsburgh
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 6:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| johnslat wrote: |
Dear MotherF,
And, if you're REALLY lucky, you can do both: pursue knowledge and learning on your own, and while you earn your living.
I'm always learning more about the English language every time I teach another class.
Regards,
John |
That is why I try to read a book a week when I can. Right now I am reading Language The Cultural Tool.
I believe exercise and reading are the best ways to spend ones free time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongShiKong
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 1082
Location: China
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2012 1:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| JZer wrote: |
Right now I am reading Language The Cultural Tool.
|
Mind posting your comments on Fluffyhamster's thread about the book? I've argued that in attempting to denounce Chomsky's universal grammar, author Daniel Everett fails to adequately support his assertion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JZer
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 3898
Location: Pittsburgh
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2012 3:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I haven't finished the book, but I can post later. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MotherF
Joined: 07 Jun 2010
Posts: 1450
Location: 17�48'N 97�46'W
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 11:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://chronicle.com/article/Tools-for-Living/130615/
| Quote: |
| Merrett feels that he is a clear example of why a student needs practical arts with liberal arts. "In terms of how I think about the world, how I think about the impact of my work on the world, and why I care about what I am doing, the education was immensely valuable," even if it doesn't help him day to day in a mechanic shop, he says. At a tech school, he would have missed out on that. "The idea of marrying the two is so appealing to me, because I do think that just a liberal-arts education doesn't leave me in a great position, either. It's limiting, just as a tech-school education is limiting." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongShiKong
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 1082
Location: China
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2012 10:37 am Post subject: Re: Everything you know about curriculum may be wrong. Reall |
|
|
| johnslat wrote: |
| According to Tyler, the general aim is �to bring about significant changes in students� patterns of behavior.� In other words, though we often lose sight of this basic fact, the point of learning is not just to know things but to be a different person � more mature, more wise, more self-disciplined, more effective, and more productive in the broadest sense. Knowledge is an indicator of educational success, not the aim. |
How many teachers resort to their own methods to change students� patterns of behavior when the curriculum fails.
Someone pointed out elsewhere teachers are professionals whereas profs and their grad student TAs have no actual teaching credentials. My home province in Canada recently added an early childcare expert in all pre-K/K classes making them the most professionally taught classes. But unlike their public school counterparts, how many profs could even conceive of themselves in the business of behaviour modification |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongShiKong
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 1082
Location: China
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 4:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
But seriously, if the aim of curriculum is behavioral shift then you need to look elsewhere as McLuhan did for the real curriculum because its not in schools. Declaring technology, especially communication technology, changes 'not only habits of life but patterns of thought and valuation', he considered the future of work as paid learning. There are those that would go beyond McLuhan's City as Classroom to regard 'Internet as classroom' rendering traditional schools obsolete. Or at least, relegating them to houses of detention rather than attention that Neil Postman warned about in End of Education.
If curriculum is to education what liturgy is to religion, then doesn't the gradual demise of both institutions in affecting civic behaviour not parallel the growth in communication technology--beginning not just with the Internet but going as far back as telegraphy and photography? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
