Re: Three solutions for school game.

Darlene Sybert (c557506@SHOWME.MISSOURI.EDU)
Tue, 20 Aug 1996 09:42:18 -0500

On Tue, 20 Aug 1996, Eric Crump wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Aug 1996, Darlene Sybert wrote:
> > What I am trying to say is that I don't think the students buy this
> > collaborator or co-learner routine although, of course, they'll go
> > along with whatever rules you set for the game. Do they have a choice?
> That's true, I reckon. That's exactly what I object to about the
> institutional model of education. As long as students have no choice but to
> go along with me, we've got a bad learning situation. Introducing
> collegiality into a college classroom is like spitting into the fires of
> hell. The odds of extinguishing that blaze are mighty small.

Now you see, we do have a level of agreement here on which to build.
A place to begin writing... :)

> One spitter can't hope to make much difference.

Well, Margaret Mead disagreed with you. She said, one person can make
the fact, that's all that ever makes a difference. (Or
something like that.) And I know you don't even really believe that, so
moving on...
> You see why I resort to revolutionary rhetoric & other forms of hype? I'd
> like some company in the spitting battle with the devil!

(I'm not going to take that "devil" bit personally...too lazy today.)
Actually, your rhetoric about grading is the most effective I've ever
read or heard, partly because you are so reasonable about it. But my
experience keeps me from believing it will work for most classes in
today's world. In a class where the instructor is totally comitted to
it, it might work for many students because nothing is so attractive and
convincing as the enthusiasm of total committment, but some students
will fall through the crack...(we've had this conversation before,
haven't we? And isn't it humid today!!!)

Darlene Sybert