Do you learn in a traditional setting?

[ygolo]

One of my goals in life is to be able to learn in any setting.

I've had experience in many different situations, and am getting better at dealing with pacing that is both too fast and too slow. I've found raising my hand and asking questions is the most sure fire way to slow down a teacher going too fast for me. Having experienced the other side of things, when one student has a question that is usually an indication that many other students have similar questions.

In high-school, my mind used to wander off because I thought the teacher was going too slow. But I made a game of it. I would try to guess exactly what the teacher would say for the next 5 main points, and take note of any differences, however minor they were. Beyond that, instead of taking notes on what the teacher was saying (assuming I thought he/she was slow and I was doing a good job of guessing), I would take notes on my own wandering thoughts instead, and try to keep them related to what was being said.

Ultimately, learning has to be done by the student. A teacher may be able to cut the food for you, but you need to be able to digest it yourself.

I've tried using non-traditional techniques when I teach. I find a lot of people react badly to the more active things I've tried...from large-whole class discussion, to small group discussion, to having students work on the board, and so on. I find that these techniques only serve to further separate the engaged from the disengaged in both amount and quality of participation. The more active the style the quicker the disengaged students drop the course or stop showing up to class. But the engaged students get great results.

I think traditional, lecture style, classroom settings cater to the lowest common denominator. When you are in an extremely large, very diverse, classroom, the lowest common denominator can be very slow indeed.

But lectures are often used as a way to train people about what it is they are teaching. The person learning the most in such a setting is the lecturer himself/herself. In some sense, these are going to be a permanent part of academia. But they should not be confused with the most effective ways of teaching those who are being lectured to.

 

[Amargith]

I despise the obligatory/forced aspect of it, but yes, I do. I have a pretty good auditory and photographic memory and I learn best when taught by another person, especially when they are passionate about their subject. It creates emotional memories for me which are more readily retrieved. This made sure that in high school, I *rarely* had to prep in advance for an exam, despite not having a high enough IQ for the school I was sent to. In fact, I calculated - with the knowledge I had about the person teaching it and what I knew them to consider important and in what way - what and how much I needed to study in order got pass, and not an ounce more - as an act of rebellion in being forced to go to school/take subjects I did not value and have to spend time on school even when I wasn't there. That, combined with my highly photographic short term memory, meant I could spend often less than two hours on a subject to pass it - with the exception of math and some of the sciences as those contained even less emotional grips/negative ones. The downside was that two days afterwards, you couldn't ask me anything anymore about that subject, as I'd erased it all to make room for the next exam

This changed slightly in college, as face time with the professors was less intimate and less in quantity, providing me therefore with less to go on as to what they wanted to hear on the exam - and, I had actually decided myself to go to college and study this, so I was more motivated. There I learned that I needed to see the material 4 times: once to read/hear in class, second time to highlight key passages, third time to summarise and the fourth to read diagonally.

Now, I'm a fan of self study as I despise a class room. It is harder - as in college- as i have no one walking me through the material, but it allows for the ultimate freedom in setting my own pace, going back and forth between topics, following up on tangents and creating the overview of the subject so I can actually pick and choose which parts of the subjects I want to focus on (instead of the traditional method of teaching you something in a linear, block-by-block method without telling you what you need it for - fucking maddening ). I will still take classes in order to shave off time and make sure I got the fundamentals down, when I thoroughly want to study something though (Herbology, Animal behaviourism, Psychology, etc), but if at all possible, I'll go for an elective schedule where I can choose which part of the course to do when, on my own. Most other subjects that I take an interest in, I have books on. At any given time, I have at least 20 unread books in my house, if not more, on a subject that I came across in my internet surfing.

My favourite hobby in fact is taking classes and reading both fiction and non-fiction.

 

[prplchknz]

I'm dxed with a learning disability so that might be a factor for me, as to why I learn differently, or could not be.I don't know

 

[garbage]

I don't naturally have the patience for instruction manuals or step-by-step instructions. 'course, that bit me in the ass from time to time, so I've had to learn to learn from them to some extent. In general, though, I rely on bare minimum instruction and apply the hands-on and intuitive approaches as much as possible. Show me a few steps and let me extrapolate.

'Traditional' classroom-setting learning is fairly close to an instruction manual. In the grad school days, I tended to not bother to buy textbooks for classes unless I was absolutely sure they were required for the class. For online classes, I typically condensed two-hour lectures into 15-minute lectures.

 

[Qre:us]

Critical Inquiry, based on the Socratic method of teaching.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquiry_education

My optimal mode of learning. In high school, I was in a special program, which followed this style of teaching. Emphasis on active, independent learning, problem-solving, and critical inquiry. As well, in undergrad, the program that I was in, this was the explicit goal, so it worked really well for me. I even TA-ed for a few courses in this method of teaching/learning. Was quite fun.

My least preferred, rote memorization. Blah!

 

[xisnotx]

Yes, I do learn in a traditional setting.

 

[Sunny Ghost]

I mean like a classroom in the traditional mannner? Or are you different. I don't learn in the classroom, I tend to learn best with a combination of hands on seeing how it relates to my life (it can be loosely related, but there needs to be a connection, or else forget it) and one on one. I get bored and feel like the teacher goes too slow in a classroom setting, so i'll pay attention for a little bit then get bored wander off in my mind come back and have missed 3-4 important key points. I also don't learn from reading, unless it's my interest of the month. I need to either do it, hear it, see it physically, or speak it.

I'm the same. With the exception that I learn well on my own reading, too. I tend to drown out the sounds of a teacher giving a lecture. I have difficulty learning in that manner and hear "womp, womp, womp, womp, womp..." So I usually just read on my own while in class, tuning in occasionally. Sometimes I'll just work on another assignment altogether.

I prefer to learn how the information I'm learning can best be utilized. I also want to understand the whole picture of what I am learning. I like the use of images to illustrate the subject matter, and consider myself a hands on and visual learner.

 

[prplchknz]

I'm the same. With the exception that I learn well on my own reading, too. I tend to drown out the sounds of a teacher giving a lecture. I have difficulty learning in that manner and hear "womp, womp, womp, womp, womp..." So I usually just read on my own while in class, tuning in occasionally. Sometimes I'll just work on another assignment altogether.

I prefer to learn how the information I'm learning can best be utilized. I also want to understand the whole picture of what I am learning. I like the use of images to illustrate the subject matter, and consider myself a hands on and visual learner.

Yeah I guess I'm sort of a visual learning with maps and directions at least. I can remember maps and landmarks and just know how to get places after once or twice going.

 

[Sunny Ghost]

Yeah I guess I'm sort of a visual learning with maps and directions at least. I can remember maps and landmarks and just know how to get places after once or twice going.

I had always thought some of those traits to be more Se. You sure you aren't ISFP?

 

[prplchknz]

I had always thought some of those traits to be more Se. You sure you aren't ISFP?

I don't know. A pretty spacey one if I am. I just know things, cuz i'm smurt

 

[Noll]

I'm not sure, I don't like it when teachers try to just shove facts into my head, it depends on the subject, if it's math or science I tend to lose focus completely though, I've never been quite good at those things in particular, or school at all. I guess I've never been able to appreciate the 'pointing fingers and then do as me'-mentality, it's so dull and brainwashing, school. I guess the social aspect of school is nice, but honestly I don't even have any friends; I mostly just shy away into a corner, close to no words. Whenever people actually try to talk to me they get the wrong signals, that I don't want them to talk to me, I suppose I'm kind of like a cactus flower; there's no getting close to me and so I'm avoided. I find it that I'm better at learning at home, when I'm alone.

 

[WALMART]