February 11, 2008
Topic in class for the second week
The truth of the matter is, we will probably not see a classroom strategy that goes for less test and teacher talking at us and the system staying the way it is. This is especially true at the University of Michigan because it is a traditional place, it has to uphold certain aspects of the universities. Plus this university, as much as we want to believe, is not the front-runner in creative thinking. I say this because as a whole we are known for putting young people in the world to become CEO's, neurosurgance, and stock-brokers. Not for people who are poets, muscians, and acotrs (exclude Lucy Lu). Plus the system in place works: they want to churn out people who get jobs and that's is what the University does. So why, at least in the presidents eyes, would you change up your strategy. For these two reasons I think that you should no t hold your breath for any changes.
Posted by shakire at February 11, 2008 09:03 PM
Upholding a tradition reinforces a particular framing system, helps to prevent collapse and assists in rebuilding in the event that collapse occurs.
Such an approach likely assumes that collapse is undesirable, that effects of major (must be defined according to circumstances) collapse perhaps could be overcome
but can framelessness exist?
If a framing system collapses, is there another that takes shape? --including a framing system that perceives collapse?
Well, it certainly (pardon my use of "certainty" --I don't generallt trust certainty) seems that the framing system in place is perceived successful; it works according to particular definitions of success; works according to particular perceptions of success,
but outside those framing systems, other possibilities for assessment emerge.
I hope to see lots more in your blog.
Posted by: thyliasm at March 10, 2008 01:09 PMLogin to leave a comment. Create a new account.