3 Comments

  1. Eddie Cazayoux

    Well said Joe. The two things I learned in trying to develop a curriculum that gave architecture students what they needed to survive in the world was; 1) Students learn in many different ways. The more creative seem to be great with their hands and learned by doing things. When they participated in hands-on activities, they tended to learn faster and remember better. At first we had to take any student with a high school degree because there were no community colleges at that time. We would get students with very bad grades in high school. However, in our first two years of drawing and building things they were excited and did great. And they also improved in their remedial courses because they knew they could do good work. They were bored to death in high school. And 2) that when you give a student information, you needed to make them use it. When this happens that information becomes knowledge. If they did not use it, it was forgotten.

    • Bookscrounger

      This is an outstanding comment. There are two critical ideas here: we are boring kids to death; and the importance of engaging them in analyzing, critiquing, and creating is what they really want to do, and will do well if allowed to.

      I have seen professors at UL who simply did not accept that the students were inferior because of grades and test scores, and demanded high quality work of them — not memorization, but research, writing, and producing — and most of the kids groaned, but rose to the occasion. And many of them realize in retrospect that they enjoyed it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *