Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kid Twist" data-source="post: 1223547" data-attributes="member: 10894">I'm also super interested in the process of learning, and I can tell you that in medicine among other fields, the generational complaints of students &quot;wanting to be spoonfed&quot; or using different methods (videos, lectures, etc. to distill teaching points) is a huge generational difference that I recall as a youth all the way into professional environments I'm now in. I defend the younger generation in this regard --- a lot of the older guys have a tremendously annoying proclivity to &quot;just do what we did&quot; and don't realize how completely inefficient teaching and learning can be. I would argue that training (non-dexterity specialties) from a book point of view in medicine is at least 2 years longer than it has to be, in nearly ever specialty. For example, 1 of those years (med school being 4) in medical school could be done away with immediately.The point of a teacher is that you have a mastery so that you can distill what the big picture is fairly easily, make sure the framework of fundamentals is recognized and understood, then mastery comes later with filling in of a LOT of details. Notice that the fundamental outline would still allow a person to do a job to a reasonable aptitude. The mastery is incorporating the details and asking questions regarding how anything really changes if different roads are taken or methods applied. That involves both creativity and efficiency. So much of modern life is a waste of time on details that don't matter. Men are particularly good at understanding that most details don't really matter, they are a focus that wastes much time and energy, re: the big picture.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kid Twist, post: 1223547, member: 10894"] I'm also super interested in the process of learning, and I can tell you that in medicine among other fields, the generational complaints of students "wanting to be spoonfed" or using different methods (videos, lectures, etc. to distill teaching points) is a huge generational difference that I recall as a youth all the way into professional environments I'm now in. I defend the younger generation in this regard --- a lot of the older guys have a tremendously annoying proclivity to "just do what we did" and don't realize how [i]completely inefficient[/i] teaching and learning can be. I would argue that training (non-dexterity specialties) from a book point of view in medicine is at least 2 years longer than it has to be, in nearly ever specialty. For example, 1 of those years (med school being 4) in medical school could be done away with [b]immediately[/b]. The point of a teacher is that you have a mastery so that you can distill what the big picture is fairly easily, make sure the framework of fundamentals is recognized and understood, then mastery comes later with filling in of a LOT of details. Notice that the fundamental outline would still allow a person to do a job to a reasonable aptitude. The mastery is incorporating the details and asking questions regarding how anything really changes if different roads are taken or methods applied. That involves both creativity and efficiency. So much of modern life is a waste of time on details that don't matter. Men are particularly good at understanding that most details don't really matter, they are a focus that wastes much time and energy, re: the big picture. [/QUOTE]

Verification