The Educational Literature As Explained to a 5 Year Old

Below are the small beginning parts of papers I’ve taken from the big group of papers about teaching you can find written by teachers who don’t actually teach, but with the words changed to be more simple using the same thing that was used to write Up Goer Five / Thing Explainer with only simple words. I did this because I think when you take their big words away, they don’t really say anything interesting or important, and because I’m not a nice person.

Personal Ways I Think About Teaching

This paper shows how I think about teaching and learning because I asked teachers what they meant by the word teaching. There’s four things that came from this. There’s the ‘Transfer’ idea, which means the stuff we know is a special thing that moves from one person to another. There is the ‘Shaping’ idea, which means teaching is like shaping or changing the shape of students into something we came up with earlier. Then there is a the ‘Travelling’ idea, which means that the thing we want to talk about is like the ground with hills to be climbed for better places to see it from with the teacher acting as the travelling friend or as a person who knows the place well. Finally, there is the ‘Growing’ idea, which means we look more at the feelings and thoughts of the people who are learning the stuff we want to teach. These ideas work with bits of what students think of the learning that they do. Whatever idea a teacher uses to help him/her think about the learning that they do will change the way he/she teaches and will change the way he/she looks at his/her students and changes anything he/she wants to do with those students. It is suggested that the ideas talked about here will help stop teachers who work together not understanding each other.

Person Who Helps Things Happen, Person Who Tells Others What To Do or Friend Who Tells You When You’re Wrong?: Way Things Don’t Work Together and Ways Things Come Together in In The Way We Look After and Keep an Eye on Students Who Do Work For Us

I want to talk about how we get and keep an eye on and look after some students we have, especially since they pay a lot of money for it and want to their time to be good for how much money they spend, and like to keep an eye on our teaching through things set by the people who run the country. I will talk about how students wanting to show off how good they are at finishing the things we set them, how this might change how we act toward them when we keep an eye on them, and how this stops us keeping an eye on them better. This paper looks at what we know already about keeping an eye on and looking after them and what they need from us when we keep an eye on them, and I also want to look at how this changes how we teach lots of people, and I want to show you some times that my friends did this.

Changes in The Way We Talk To Big Rooms of People

Many things change the way a talk to a big room full of people is thought about and done. Some of these are our ideas and beliefs about teaching, what we know of the easy-to-know bits about teaching, how much stuff like money we have to do it with, and the place you do your teaching in. In this paper, three different of ways of teaching to a big room are talked about and the things that make them different are talked about a lot, looking at them along with the ideas we have now of teaching and teaching ideas. The three talks to big rooms are then grouped together as the-stuff-we-want-to-teach-driven, all-the-stuff-around-us-driven, and learning-ideas-driven. The things we got together to prove this suggest that the more like learning-ideas the talk to a big room is, the more students like it.

See, once you take the big words out it’s not that hard.

Pray Tell, What is a “Useless” Degree?

I’ll keep the details of this anonymous, because I’m not that much of a tool, but spotted on a Facebook comment’s section somewhere (paraphrased):

I think if you don’t use your degree you should pay for it. You shouldn’t do a useless degree, and paying for it will make kids think about the debt they’ll get into.

I’ll get the dickishness out of the way first: this person’s publicly accessible Facebook profile shows what their educational background is, and what their current employment is. Naturally, the two don’t match up. Ah, you studied psychotherapy but are now in project management? Tut tut. You’ll have to pay it back now, hope that job pays well!

The trouble with suggestions like this is that they get so many thumbs up and “yeah, we should do that!” from people – but they’re absolutely insensible. They literally couldn’t be enforced.

For starters, who gets to decide what a “useless” degree is? Some randomer on Facebook who happily taps and types away their opinions? Or perhaps worse, a cabinet minister whose sole experience of higher education is having “strong views” on it. If we are going to draw a ring around “useless” degrees and warn people off them, then surely we need to know where to put that ring, right?

“Ooh, I know!” pipes up Margaret, from Finance, in the front row “things like Music!”.

Ah yes, that useless degree. No one uses that. Well, apart from all major opera singers, choral singers, soloists and those famous people who you hear on Radio 3 (or Classic FM if you’re not a fan of classical music) and who can get paid quite a wad for what they do. They’re all graduates or some college or university, and clearly such a thing was useless to them.

“Well, what about English? Who needs English as a degree? We already speak it!” – Well, Brian from Marketing, people with those degrees tend to have written a lot, essays and the like, and they tend to get pretty good at it. They end up getting jobs as copywriters, or journalists, or senior planners or any other thing that might call upon the need to be able to type more than a Facebook post, and by a reasonable deadline.

We could go on forever. The irrational hate-on people have for arts degrees has probably been examined elsewhere, so how about I propose an example?

I have a second-year student who is going to graduate and become an army officer. “Ah! He’s not using his degree!” shouts our original poster. “See, there! Why should he get an education on us if he’s going to throw it away?”

Well, he could step into a specialism around NBC warfare, where a chemistry degree will come in handy given the nature of the “C” in NBC. (I mean, I have no personal clue how the internal make-up of our armed forces work, but I assume they’ll have people looking into that sort of thing) Is he using his degree then? Or perhaps he won’t even do that and just be an infantry officer. Is he using his degree, then?

No?

What about the communication skills he’s picked up on from the presentations undergraduates give? What about the self-discipline and dedication to sit in the library on a night when everyone else goes out to a bar? What about the ability to research and work with others in a team? Or his in-depth knowledge about how to handle substances carefully and safely? Surely, as a chemistry degree is more than rote-learning how atoms stick together, he must be using it to good effect, right? Right?

fees

And that’s why such bizarre suggestions are nonsensical (even UKIP’s proposal to make STEM subjects free-of-fees). You teach and learn more than just the core subject at university level, and the diversity of subject matter and activities mean you can’t ring the entire degree and call it “useful” or “useless”. By many metrics, my degree was “useless” owing to my eventual specialism – I probably use less than 30% of that information on a daily basis. Did I therefore waste 70% of the taxpayer contribution to that degree? And should I therefore repay only 70%? Or maybe my estimate is wrong and it’s actually 70% I use on a daily basis and I only repay 30%?

Indeed, how do we even begin to work on these metrics? Does only your final income count? If so you don’t have to pay back your fees or student loan if you become a millionaire, but if you land anything less than £20k a year we get to punish you for it?

Who gets to figure all this out and make it right? Magical “Common Sense” going to help you out there?

There are a lot of problems within higher education – how it’s treated as an expectation for the middle classes, how the government misuses it as a panacea for social mobility, and how a continued attitude towards treating it as a consumer product is converting universities into bigger schools rather than universities – but none of that is fixed by creating an artificial demarcation between “useful” and “useless” degrees. To do so would be to tell a certain class of people that they arbitrarily don’t deserve the shot at HE or even just the experience. And if you want to draw that line, you had better come up with a better reason of where to put it than “because I said so”.