I’m fascinated by Sky’s article today about developments in education.
When I read the title I thought, ”Oh, no. Not more fanciful pap about tomorrow’s machine-dominated world.” So I read it, just to confirm my prejudices and was disappointed – in spades!
Let me bore you first with the essential structure of my own learning. At college, it was largely DIY, interrupted by foot-sitting in the presence of recognised brains and afficionados in my subjects. I was supposed to gather the pearls cast before me and if I could manage that (in every sense of the word) I could get my degree. The ‘teaching’ as such was minimal. The individual was expected to recognise his/her (sorry I can’t use ‘their’) strengths and weaknesses and adjust as necessary. Those who had identified their intellectual niches early doors (!) went on to harvest their just desserts. The rest did their best or usually less than their best because there was no feed-back except examinations at two levels: college checks every term and ‘public’ exams at half-time and the final whistle.
So please read the article. I would have revelled in such an opoortunity to be taught so professionally.