Reply to comment

I think that emergent educaiton challenges the concept of the teacher's responsibility beyond the realm of school.  I believe that emergence fosters an idea that education and learning is lifelong, while the temporary education system tells teachers that they must ready students for college; that college professors must ready students for "life," which seems to say that there is no longer any need for learning in life.  I think that this concept is sorely mislead.  Learning should be a lifelong process, and our education system doesn't entirely encompass this ideal.  Perhaps emergence can start a new process: stress the development, stress the ideal of lifelong learning, with conclusions and right answers as a secondary, helpful addition.

From a student's point of view, I feel like tests that colleges require, such as the ACT, are geared toward telling students that they should pursue what they are good at rather than what they are interested in.  I am quite positive that colleges thought that I wanted to pursue a degree an english because I did so well on the english and writing section of the ACT.  I think that this underlying assumption of the test really discourages the need to explore.  I believe, then, that emergence can tend to foster interests rather than what students are "apt" or "good" at -- because, while I have always been praised for my english abilities, I have no interest in pursuing an english degree.  However, when classes are taught in an emergent fashion, I would be more interested in taking an english emergent course because I know that the discussions could include my own interests and I would not just be fed information.  This, to me, is particularly stimulating and makes me want to learn more.

-----------------

Blog Examples:

Brie

Emily