1. He’s very detail-oriented. Rabbit is usually the one to plan trips and things, but Rabbit, while smart, is a very big-picture sort of bunny. So sometimes Eeyore will point out the smaller things that he misses.
2. Though a lot of Christopher Robin’s other animals often end up at the bottom of the bed in the middle of the night, Eeyore holds on tight. He doesn’t want to lose his Home.
3. The pink ribbon was his mother’s. She gave it to him before she died.
“What the PISA and NASSP analysis shows is that, when we take out the bottom quintile of students based on family wealth and income, American students are doing just fine. More than just fine, in fact—we are right up there with the top scoring nations. But because we have more children per capita living in poverty than any developed nation on Earth, the effects of poverty take their toll on our national standings in the international test score derbies.”—Schools Matter: How Much Teachers Affect Student Achievement, and Other Myths (via girlwithalessonplan)
Next semester, I’m doing a research project on gifted students. I think most all of you fall into this category, so what do you think is a specific area I should study? It could be anything from how many ducks the typical gifted student owns to what learning style they typically have, to bullying, to how effective certain types of teaching are. It just needs to be measurable and interesting. So drop me a line telling me what types of teaching appeal to you/what the biggest challenge you think there is for gifted students/what would make you willing to take on more work simply because you’re smart. I’m really excited about this project, but I need to narrow down a topic before next week, so really any rambling on the part of you guys is welcome
He is actually right. A professor may be an expert in his or her chosen field, may be incredibly knowledgeable and have a genuine desire to help students, but nonetheless still be unable to convey the very basic bite sized ‘hooks’ that every students needs to get an initial handle on a subject.
I’m doing a postgraduate degree at the moment and have sat and listened to teachers waffle and digress and waste valuable time because they can’t organise and present the information in an accessible and engaging manner. Universities are full of experts who simply have no clue how to convey the information to people who are relative beginners in the subject.
Interesting that the very best lecturer in the course I’m doing has only been qualified in the area for 4 years, and yet is uniformly acknowledged by students to be about ten times better at actually teaching you something than the far more senior people in the department to whom she defers. She is innately talented at conveying information and has a natural ease in front of a class; it is not necessary she be the foremost expert but just be competent enough in the area to teach us the bones of the subject - and she does this very, very well.
Universities have got this all wrong. Focus less on paying lots of money for experts to pump out research and a little more on implementing a ‘teach the teachers’ program, or simply hiring people who are good with other people. Survey university students in every western country and you will find a clear majority of students who will tell you that many of their professors are actually crap at teaching other people.
I disagree. Based on my experiences, the “experts” do not teach intro classes. So by the time students get to the “good classes,” the 3000 or 4000 level classes that these experienced profs teach, they should have slogged through all the material necessary to talk on their level. The problem comes when expert professors are more interested in research than in caring about their students, which can’t be helped, since universities are interested in turning out research, too. To be fair, I am an English Education major, of which both concentrations involve being very good at “hooks” and communication, so maybe I should shut up.