tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8438349.post112528548443880772..comments2024-03-28T00:28:06.035+13:00Comments on leading and learning: Back to the real basics!Bruce Hammondshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07031065790535111400noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8438349.post-1125528959729867772005-09-01T10:55:00.000+12:002005-09-01T10:55:00.000+12:00If National get in the Ministry will have to do so...If National get in the Ministry will have to do some new learning -or, listening to National's policies, some really old learning!Bruce Hammondshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07031065790535111400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8438349.post-1125463494921558782005-08-31T16:44:00.000+12:002005-08-31T16:44:00.000+12:00It is a shame that all the good ideas, researched ...It is a shame that all the good ideas, researched in those days and based on real classroom experience, were pushed to one side in rush to check off, or track, idiotic learning ojectives. I guess those in the Ministry weren't even around in those exciting days? They wouldn't even know, believing now that there was nothing much happening until they took over!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8438349.post-1125462999765326142005-08-31T16:36:00.000+12:002005-08-31T16:36:00.000+12:00It is learning - but not what the teachers intend!...It is learning - but not what the teachers intend! They learn, as John Holt said in the 60s, not to use their intelligences constructively.<BR/><BR/>Trouble is we seem happy to blame the kids without looking at the dull fare 'we' provide!<BR/><BR/>In some ways schools haven't changed much at all! As one writer said, 'they are OK if it were still the 60s'.Bruce Hammondshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07031065790535111400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8438349.post-1125449327587863082005-08-31T12:48:00.000+12:002005-08-31T12:48:00.000+12:00Could not agree more! Schools, it seems, are not r...Could not agree more! Schools, it seems, are not really about learning.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8438349.post-1125355539149535762005-08-30T10:45:00.000+12:002005-08-30T10:45:00.000+12:00The ideas, as you say, don't date (they go back to...The ideas, as you say, don't date (they go back to philosophers like John Dewey) but they do get forgotten, or overwhelmed, by those who know better than the classroom teacher!<BR/><BR/>If teachers really valued 'constructivist' ideas their programmes would be based around students questions. And their clasroom walls would reflect student's questions, prior ideas and research. And, of course, the class culture would reflect teacher and students interacting and learning together to develop shared meaning - meaning that will be slighty different for each learner.<BR/><BR/>All a bit messy for our tidy technocats ( and some graph orientated principals) but it's the stuff of real science and art.<BR/><BR/>To do all this while at the same time teaching to curriculums - particularly with this 'new' emphasis on 'intentional' teaching makes it difficult.Bruce Hammondshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07031065790535111400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8438349.post-1125350542456468772005-08-30T09:22:00.000+12:002005-08-30T09:22:00.000+12:00Very valid points, the Learning In Science Approac...Very valid points, the Learning In Science Approach shows how important it is for teachers to respect and value children's thoughts and ideas in the learning process and requires that teachers truely 'interact' with their students. These are the essential components of teaching and learning that don't date!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com