Tipos de estudiantes:
Estrategas, cuya motivación es el reconocimiento, las notas ...
Strategic learners are driven by a desire for recognition, usually in the form of higher grades. They will do what they think is necessary to get those grades, but that is not the same as the deep learner who intends to understand, to think about implications of that comprehension, to think about applications and possibilities, to identify arguments and to distinguish in those arguments between evidence and conclusions. Strategic learners tend not to take risks (for fear it will jeopardize their grade point average) or to learn conceptually. They learn procedurally, how to plug the right number in a formula, or the right words in a particular form of essay.
Y profundos, cuya motivación es comprender y conectar las ideas y conceptos.
Deep learners, by contrast, grapple with ideas, concepts, and the implications and applications of those ideas and concepts
Y, entonces, la forma de conseguir que más gente sea de este segundo tipo: puesto que el aprendizaje profundo se obtendría cuando se tratan de responder preguntas a problemas que se consideran importantes, intrigantes o simplemente bellos.
Como los estudiantes no suelen tener participación en las preguntas, una forma de resolverlo sería cederles esa responsabilidad (con la limitación de que los más nuevos no siempre imaginarían todas las preguntas interesantes).
The connection is this: people are most likely to take a deep approach to their learning when they are trying to answer questions or solve problems that they, the learners, have come to regard as important, intriguing, or just beautiful. Yet in a formal educational environment, the learner is usually not in charge of the questions. We could solve that problem by putting the learners always in charge of all the questions, and some people have attempted to do just that. But while that has some benefits, it also has limitations. Novice learners cannot imagine some of questions that advanced learners have begun to consider. Thus, we need to have advanced learners (teacher/scholars) raising questions for novice learners (students) to think about.
Y, claro, considerar a los profesores como aprendizes avanzados (advanced learners) que tampoco es tan raro si pensamos en los aspectos de enseñanza e investigación como partes fundamentales de un proceso de aprendizaje:
I guess my fundamental point, however, is that I believe that there is no inherent conflict between faculty and student learning and that if we understand that research and teaching are really two important parts of a larger process of learning, we can avoid systems that simply blindly encourage publications, publications, publications with no emphasis on anyone's learning.
Desde el punto de vista del profesorado no es un paso obvio pensar en estas cosas. El mismo entrevistado reconoce que tardó tiempo en empezar a revisar lo que otros ya sabían sobre el aprendizaje:
I sometimes tell audiences that I taught for twenty years before it ever occurred to me to look at much of the literature on human learning despite the fact that such a body of literature existed and I was trying to cultivate other people's learning. Fortunately, I have been at this long enough (because I started teaching when I was five years old) that I have had another twenty-five years to read that literature. I think people should do it earlier in their careers.