Distance learning as child bullying

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

The coronavirus-related quarantine confirmed this thesis in the most eloquent way, although I had previously believed that it was so. Maybe I doubted in some places, but I knew; I knew in practice, I knew in theory.

Who can benefit from distance learning?

It is useful to those who owns the item, and he needs to familiarize himself with some of the nuances of the topic; at the same time, this person must have a serious experience of self-education; He must have disciplineand the desire to study, to have a good imagination, well-developed semantic perception, to be able to think independently, since you will have to speculate a lot.

Probably, these are not all the necessary qualities, but even from this list everything becomes very clear on this topic.

When there is a real presence of the teacher, perception is simply innumerable multichannel, i.e. I do not even presume to enumerate with certainty all those numerous channels of perception that are involved in such in-house teaching. It is clear that with remote control the channels are narrowed, as their assortment is also narrowed.

Even if you look visually, you are looking at a narrow flat field, you cannot peep from a neighbor, and you cannot even hope for it. Interactively? But even so, you cannot really convey your record and it is difficult to formulate a question. This is a multidimensional problem: we don’t even know what we don’t know, and the only thing that is reliable for us is this one. incredible narrowing of perceptionthat you do not compensate with anything.

Did pedagogy know about this? And what does she know at all - that's a good question! As pseudoscience, it does not imply technology at all.

Reasonable people know that any technology works only under strictly defined conditions. Looking into any technical process, you will definitely see an indication of the strict conditions of temperature, air humidity, distance of the spray gun, the procedure for degreasing, the temperature of the mold …

Well, okay, this applies to various technical industries. But shouldn't the conditions of perception be technologically taken into account in teaching? Why did the teachers not assume this?

The presence of a real teacher is vital for any student with a lack of previously indicated experience, and this is practically all students. This means that the proposal of a distance woman is the purest profanation, which any science of learning should have excluded; but, alas, pedagogy is pseudoscience with all that it implies, pseudoscience without the slightest doubt; not having a single rational idea, and even in any way tested.

You know that no pedagogical methods have ever been tested anywhere. on practice? They are implemented as it seems at random. And when it seemed to the teachers that distance learning was possible, then without any analysis and verification (as always) it was adopted. Pseudoscience never denies possibility.

And in the changed conditions, the students turned out to be disoriented, not perceiving narrow-channel feed, and, of course, not inflamed with desire (and what did you want to expect?). This is already enough to understand: there will be profanity.

I personally, in spite of all my vast teaching and tutoring experience, categorically blundered about distance learning, because there are reasons for this, which have already been listed. I tried this not of my own free will, but due to the departure of the student to other lands, and I will say without hiding: it was hell.

The lessons begged for consciousness and psyche so much that I could not do anything further. I thought: I'll finish and go on a bike … But no, I already stayed at home on another summer day to come to my senses. I do not mean that I rattled off the lesson - and hello. I mean get things done. The disciple did not have any special achievements from this either, there was more torment than progress.

Perhaps, with linguistic subjects somehow differently; I admit, although it's still doubtful. Not a specialist. Alas, only mathematics, physics, chemistry and biology - everything I own. Almost nothing remains in the minds of the students. We will not play the "naked king" in the Andersen sense, fearing to admit that it will not work out well, if anything will work out at all.

Yes, there were TV lessons, and in the 70s they were of great importance. But these were key lessons for each topic, not a complete course; these were rather complex productions, not a teacher writing on a blackboard; and we were specially prepared for this.

The complexity of the production is the main aspect. I remember myself that before the eighth grade on TV I saw a lesson on the topic of "electrolytic dissociation", and immediately learned it, because there were circuits fed in full screen with a parallel voice. Pictures were exhibited, replaced by others within a reasonable time. It was technology.

I must say that the education of the 70s was based not on pedagogy, but on the academicians of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, since it was they who made up our program. That's why the technology was there. Pedagogy itself did not have technology, and never will.

It would be better if schoolchildren had a rest and gain strength during quarantine, read books, than receive real harm instead of the declared benefit, which, of course, pedagogy could not suggest anything.

Would there be any conditions for the remote control to work at least to some extent positively? Yes. Provided that it would have already been created in advance special social network for educational purposescontaining all the necessary materials in the required formats, as already mentioned earlier.

Alas, in modern conditions, distance learning is generally impossible, in modern conditions, not technically, but in the sense of preparing students, if it can be called training at all.

Distance learning would be possible to some extent if conditions are met, such as the presence of a special social network and the correct formation of semantic thinking.

Well, now, in fact, a complete profanation has emerged, and this is insulting. And, of course, the nature of the preparation of students should have been largely different: no workbooks (soft textbooks with filling and underlining); no unnecessary items such as OBZH, MHK and the ENVIRONMENTAL WORLD; no preparation for the exam or the exam throughout the year, or even two; not any at all test principles (choose an answer).