I have just begun Gross's book and, as Bret points out, the six major fears of learning--stemming from various sources in different individuals--are compelling and necessary to consider as a teacher and fellow-learner. It is not even mid-semester and I have heard each of the six fears expressed by my students (fear of not knowing how to learn, learning is boring, difficult, passive, lonely, unrelated to one's real interest, and, in the current state of affairs, institutional learning is ungodly expensive--which intensifies student fear and anger greatly).
At some point in their experience, strong, negative, anxiety-provoking feelings have been associated with learning thus activating and processing memory and emotion in the "reptillian" (fight or flight) portion of the brain. The good news is that the brain is not as "hardwired" as once thought; that feelings, so important in learning (starting the process, continuing the process, and remembering and building upon the process), can be changed thoroughout one's life. As I listen to Pink Floyd's The Wall, I find this encouraging.
No doubt exorcising the "learning fears" bolsters one's confidence which can lead to success. And, in the best of cases, vocation combines with avocation in a kind of "flow" or "zone." Yet, one reservation I do have is with Gross' subtitle: How to Create Your Own Lifelong Education Program for Personal Enligtenment and Professional Success. I may do Gross disservice at this point, but I am leery of the notion of education as a "product" leading to professional or worldly success. Education ('paideia") and "enlightenment," especially of the highest Socratic sort (as Socrates' life attests), is not necessarily a fast-track up the corporate ladder. At this point, the notion of what it is education and what is an educated human being, or whether such a question is relevant, might be considered.
Clearly, Gross is right about this: we learn best that which is suited to us individually, suits our natural talents and their development, and sparks our passions ("eros"). We each travel our own unique journey, a journey that needs be self-directed. And the path and/or direction of that journey may change--very likely given the nature of our global economy.
But what of teachers? Socrates, in Plato's Theaetatus, likens his role as a teacher to that of a midwife. It is a pregnant metaphor (sorry). Students, self-directed, can certainly give birth to knowledge or truth without the midwifery of teachers; teachers often are superfluous. Moreover, teachers, but midwives, cannot impregnate students with knowledge. Many students, in fact, discover "admirable truths" within and bring them forth unaided. Other students will benefit from a midwife, yet do not realize it and as a result truth is aborted at birth or is birthed and brought up badly. Others, says Socrates, have minds that can never "conceive" though he can still find a place for them. Finally, there are those students whose "minds are in labor" and realize the comfort they may receive from the ministrations of someone like Socrates.
For Gross, teachers are a last resort: on tap, but never on top. After all, he says, "it's your learning, not theirs." (49) Fellow educators: what do you think?
1 comment:
I just got back from watching "Oleanna," and I agree that it's dangerous ground for us to suggest that teachers are not necessary and that the structured environment of college isn't required for adult learners.
When I read views like Gross's -- and Peter Elbow came out with a similiar thesis for English in his book "Writers without Teachers" -- I wonder how sincere the authors are being. To be sure, the kind of people that are attracted to reading these books may not need teachers, per se; but I'd hate to eliminate the role of teachers (and schools) or ever suggest that they serve no purpose and have no value to the vast majority of society.
Post a Comment