I truthfully did not know what was going on in the reading. It was extremely confusing. I understood that there needs to be active learning. If you don't continue to improve upon what it is that you know, there will be no learning happening and knowledge will continue to be unattainable. It is one thing to go in and teach someone what it is they already know, and another to go in and attempt to teach something that someone knows absolutely nothing about. The trick in teaching is to find what it is a person does know and continue to expand that person's knowledge into something he or she never thought they would know. It is impossible to force someone into knowledge if they are not willing to learn or bend their thoughts to fit with the knowledge they are being given, but as long as you keep trying, it will eventually get through to someone, somewhere.
I do not agree with being unable to change the heart of a person. I do not believe that the best way to teach is simply to change the structure. People rebel against dictators, and it is overall an inefficient way to teach people. The best way to teach someone is to relate what you are teaching to something that the person holds dear to them. If you succeed in that, the person is more likely to understand what it is you are trying to teach and will become more amenable to different methods of teaching in the future. If you simply force a person to do something, they aren't really learning. The person will simply be acting like a robot and resenting every minute of it. In order to truly teach, one must get to the heart and go forward from there.
I don’t think you can not impart some of your own opinion when teaching. Why would you want to? Wouldn’t your knowledge of the subject and your life experiences, make for a more complete learning experience? Isn’t charisma usually positive?
ReplyDeleteIncluding personal views when teaching, depends on the subject matter as well as self control. When teaching something like basic science or math, I think it is easier to not include self. If it were a more advanced science class like, atomic nuclear physics, at some point, social responsibility plays an integral part, hence, giving personal feelings. The same applies to a math class in statistics; how could you not interject an opinion? It would have to be included for the context of the course to be comprehensible. In order to better teach the concepts, you need to relate the material to day to day experiences (your opinion). The author addressed this issue [We Make the Road by Walking pg 104].
There are some instances when not influencing your class is necessary; at the grade school level, this most important. You must be careful what you say to these young impressionable students. Curriculum for this age group is written so as to not leave so much room for personal opinion, but you still have to put some of you in it to make it interesting. You need to constantly make the choice not to veer to far from the template. The constitution and other laws in some instances mandate what is acceptable in the classroom. You are limited, but still you would find yourself in some form or another giving your opinion.
I believe charismatic leaders have a special gift, and it is important and it is important that they use it responsibly, to cause no harm to themselves or others. Leaders are vested with having the people’s interests at heart. Leaders need to be careful not to get drunk with power and turn into a dictator, narcissist etc. The power invested in them at this point is no longer power, but an abuse of power. There is a thin line between doing what is right for the people and taking advantage of them.
The campaign that I am working for (project), my candidate has an agenda that supports what the people want. The author made this evident [We Make the Road by Walking pg 112]. This reiterated for me the importance of not misleading people; and telling them exactly what you stand for. In regard to being neutral, how is this possible? Politicians don’t have the luxury of always being neutral. When you take a stance on the issues, people respect you, and you are viewed as being more solid.
President Obama a recent example of a charismatic leader, who has the same vision as the people, and is able to motivate individuals to change, and do the right thing. He is humble, and speaks, expressing the feelings, concerns, hopes, dreams, and expectations of the masses; without being a manipulator, usurping his own will. The author spoke of this type of hope and charisma [The Impossible Will Take a Little While… pg 276]
I believe the civil rights movement brought forth some of the most powerful charismatic speakers we have ever had, in this country. If this movement had not taken place, I don’t think these individuals would have had the opportunity to step up to the plate as great organizational leaders.