Someone to write my paper for me
Vicarious lecturing thus provided a bridge 196 THE EXPERIENCE OF LEARNING between extrinsic experiences and the intrinsic experiences of relevance which were associated with personal understanding.
This kind of anchoring can equally fruitfully be attempted in a variety of teaching-learning someone to write my paper for me situations, as shown in an account of efforts by a group of tutors and curriculum development specialists at Sussex University to redesign part of an introductory economics course (Eraut, MacKenzie and Papps, 1973). Their initial response to the perceived shortcomings of the existing course was to devise self-instructional packages linked to lectures, tutorials and group discussions. The turning-point was the Demand Theory package, an analysis of the Brighton housing market. This had been seen as a complex problem to which students could relate the basic economic concepts of supply and demand. Perhaps the students could also be involved in formulating the problems, clarifying the assumptions about the situation to be studied, choosing the analytic techniques and disentangling value judgments and empirical judgements. The discussions were deliberately open-ended and free ranging, with the tutor taking the role of chairman rather than chief discussant. Moreover, they were being treated as economists rather than as novices, so it became possible for them to acquire some confidence in the value of their own personal judgement. Previously it had been assumed that the most difficult aspects of learning economics were the concepts someone to write my paper for me and techniques, and that their application would arise naturally. The process of analysing economic problems and deciding which techniques were relevant was the most difficult thing to acquire. The second consequence was a recognition of the implications of intersubjectivity. Our focus of attention has been chiefly upon the content of learning and teaching, and we have stressed the importance of acknowledging its intersubjective and interpersonal character.
To instruct someone in these disciplines is not a matter of getting him to commit results to mind. Rather, it is to teach him to participate in the process that makes possible the establishment of knowledge. We teach a subject not to produce little living libraries on that subject, but rather to get a student to think mathematically for himself, to consider matters as an historian does, to take part in the process of knowledge-getting. This is a shift of emphasis rather than a substantive change. Content and process are complementary and Interrelated aspects of the experience of learning and teaching. Teaching Students How to Learn If one thread common to the preceding chapters has been a concern with learning as understanding, a second and no less important thread has been a concern with the pathways along which understanding is pursued.
The distinction drawn was between a surface roach, which involved a passive and unreflective attempt to memorize reproduce a text, and a deep approach, where there was an active rt to grasp the main point or message which the content of the text II Intended to convey. In a surface approach, what was to be learned I Interpreted as the text itself. In a deep approach, the text was seen as means through which to grapple with the meaning which underlay it. Yet despite the striking conceptual affinity between these various descriptions of how students go about learning, it should be stressed that the differences between them are not fortuitous but reflect the many-sided complexity of learning itself.
Implicit in this approach are the beliefs that there is no one way of learning which suits everyone and that it is your right and responsibility to shape your own learning. These are intended to centre the book on you and to help you discover your own purposes and methods for learning.