I couldn't find the original paper. Would you give me some information in detail
I'm sorry to say I haven't got any of their printed works here - I became frustrated myself in trying to establish the answers to questions like yours, and didn't give any priority to acquiring their books. I'm sure you can find them on the Internet.
For myself, I have left off trying to impress other researchers with facts and figures - these days I tend much more to follow the precept of 'if it feels good, do it!', and to share my insights which anyone who is ready to try a more human-friendly approach than is normal.
Of course we want a scientific objectivity and reproduceable results: but teaching is done by teachers, rather than scientists or researchers: my reaction to a teacher who asks about the place of educational research is this:
"Treat Education as an art more than a science: read what other people have done, draw inspiration from them, and see how you can apply it in your own situation. But don't be tempted - by research statistics, by respect for an authority-figure, by personal charisma, by your own need for a role model - into thinking that someone else's results will necessarily work in your situation, nor that there are any final answers or ultimate truths. You're the teacher, and they're your students - tune into them and do what feels good with them, and it'll probably feel good for you and produce a fruitful learning environment..."
Everything I've seen suggests that there is a universal and replicable attitude - that the best human life is when each individual is respected for his own unique personality and has space to exercise his own creativity - but that there are no universal specific *techniques* which will produce replicable results. I have no idea whether conditions are right to even start talking about such a concept in a culture like the Chinese - but I'm always ready for a challenge :-)
|
|
|
|
