2. Compare Marton’s idea that some students regard learning as something that just happens to them with Sfard’s account that you read in Week 4.
My first thought was that there is a difference between the ‘surface learner’ who memorises the course material with the object of passing the assessment and the student who is entirely passive (where learning ‘just happens to them’).
The former fit closely with the ‘acquisition’ metaphor used by Sfard. The latter however do not – ‘acquistion’ still implies activity and engagement on the part of the student, even though their efforts may be misdirected or yield little in the way of learning. The entirely passive student who recalls or not by chance rather than because they have engaged with the course, does not appear to view learning as ‘acquisition’ but instead as something analogous to being caught in the rain. If they are in the classroom they ‘learn’, just as if they are in the rain they will get wet – without effort on their part.
The conception of learning as ‘somthing that just happens’ suggests either complete disengagement and unwillingness to work or (if I were feeling kind) a total lack of self-confidence.
Comments
Critical thinking
Hello Vikki, me again.
I like the analogy of getting 'caught in the rain'. I think that's the way my (Arabian Gulf) students feel, as they have always known rote learning at school and don't seem to have any interest in getting more than the absolute minimum 'required output' from any activity. I do have some success involving them in collaborative tasks, but a lot of scaffolding is needed to guide them as they are not used to having to think 'outside the box'.