Thinking about students as customers is ridiculous.If knowledge is for sale, does that make teachers the sales representatives? Our mission is to create and transmit knowledge. We create knowledge by doing research. And we transmit knowledge by teaching.

This is the heart of the issue. Even though we are transmitting knowledge to students, that doesn't make them customers. The real customers are the people on whose behalf we educate our students.It is true that students and their families pay for the education that acdemic institutions provide. But there are things that we pay for without thereby becoming customers. It is better to think of the money students pay for their education as an investment. They are investing both in their own future and in the institution to which they have entrusted their education.

About evaluation, most of the educational evaluation is mainly focussed on Cognitive domain; less emphasis is given on Affective and Psycho-motor domains of learning.

Once in a train I had a discussion with an administrative about that subject. In his eyes students are customers. We did not find a consensus and it made me sad to hear something like this. I think this is why we have discussions that young people want/need edutainment instead of education in Germany.

On the other hand we have many discussions that students have too much to learn since the Bologna process and the change from the original diploma to the Bachelor/Master system, because the timetables were straightened and it is said that the same amount of content is to be learned in three/four instead of five years. One things that seems to be true is that while students had more reponsibility for their university career in former times today the university career seems to be very scheduled and students have only little variety of lectures they can choose within their subject of studying.

Actually Prof. Gabi Reinmann and me have written a paper on the questions. We (actually she) came up with with a typology of different perspectives on students https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230675715_Studierendenorientierung_Wege_und_Irrwege_eines_Begriffs_mit_vielen_Facetten). Unfortunately the article is in German, so it will not be of much help here. Basically we think that seeing students as customers can be ONE perspective but one that does not fit educational contexts very well. Teacher-student relation is always in a way hierarchical, as students have to be assessed (A huge problem e.g. in executive education - can you have students fail?) It can, however, be applied e.g. to student services (administration etc.). In some contexts, we also think of students (at University) as citizens, shaping the University and participating a great deal.

Article Studierendenorientierung: Wege und Irrwege eines Begriffs mi...

Apart from question of administration and and administration, it depends on two factors:

1. The purpose for which the educational institution is established. In my country I find many teaching shops with the main purpose to make money be it engineering, medical or management. Of course, in these institutions students are customers and as much money they are ready so much quality they will get.

2. How a teacher takes his/her job either to impart knowledge and in the process gain knowledge and a meager salary or only as a n employment, then policies and purpose of the administration will be on the fore of the teacher.

Thank you for your feedback. Meanwhile, I will tell you a story (see the attached conference proceeding presented in Melbourne this year). The initial class size was more than sixty students. Many students stood up and left as I was clarifying the thick syllabus that I distributed. At the end of the semester, I had about twenty students, or a little bit more. Fourteen students passed the course.

I designed a very radical curriculum. I encouraged team works (and persuaded students to be cautious of free loaders in their team). Student dealt with ill-structure problems. Everyone in the classroom was co-teachers and co-learners. The final assessment included a learning portfolio, a reflective journal, and a mind map. Administrators, I guessed, were not happy because of the small class size. But, we were having fun learning.

Please give me your feedback (specifically the three questions in the yellow card and what you have learned from the attached manuscript). If you have time to read the 14 learning journeys of my students, I can do an attachment next time. As a teacher, my concern is that my students really learn and that I have successfully inspired them to learn and that they have become life-long learners. I believe that students are not my customers in the sense that I should pamper them with easy learning. Society is my customer and therefore I should be able to transform them to be good citizens who know how to think critically.

@ Suresh Rajkumar. Your images of teachers are: (1) research to create knowledge and (2) teaching to transmit knowledge. I wonder if a third image could be that (3) as facilitators? In the third image, students are responsible for their learning. Teachers simply facilitate. In your teaching and learning environments, what is the profile of people who treats students as their customers? As products of teaching? What should be the appropriate behaviors to identify teachers who strongly believe that their students are customers or their products? Are these questions culturally sensitive? I wonder :-)

@ Gudrun Smith: I like your image of teaching and learning as “edutainment.” This conception is particularly useful in a big class-size lecture. Entertainment is inevitable so that students do not get bored. However, lecture, in this instance, belongs to surface approach to learning.

Aside your idea of “edutainment,” I am happy that you have mentioned “too much to learn.” Many teachers think that loading students with huge contents to learn is the right way to teach.

I use the "threshold concept" in designing my curriculum. In my Financial Statement Analysis course (see attachment above), I had chosen a textbook with fourteen chapters. Although the last two chapters are the most important, experience of prior lecturer revealed that he could only cover up to the tenth chapter.

The FSA curriculum that I designed with an authentic learning in mind focused on Chapters 13 and 14 throughout the semester. Combining the Threshold concept with the T learning concept, the two chapters represented the vertical line and all chapters 1 to 12 represented the horizontal line. A third concept was that of a triangle (see attached paper). I intentionally maximized (overloaded) students' learning during the start of the semester and gradually reduced the scope of their learning as the time passed.

Likewise, I started Financial Accounting 2 (i.e., Introductory Accounting 2) with a difficult chapter (Chapter 13 on Cash Flows Statements). During the rest of the semester, all other chapters were linked back to this chapter.

Returning back to the images of customers or products, I wonder if you have good stories (or nightmares) to share with us in context of your teaching and learning environments or your teaching.

@ Tobias Jenert – I wonder if you can translate the abstract for us in English. Also, I am particularly interested with the typology of different students’ perspectives.

Assessment is a huge problem, not only in executive education. I agree that this problem magnifies in executive education. I remembered a story from my peer when he, as a “foreign-ger” (foreigner and stranger), was almost “bullied,” not physically of course, by an executive MBA student. To this type of “strategic” students, it is the qualification after their names in their business cards that is crucial.

I had a nightmare when 75% of my students walked out my MBA class in IFRS (International Financial Reporting Standards) during their first examination. I gave them a news clip from Financial Times and asked them to write an essay and connect it to the IFRS knowledge. These students expected multiple choice questions or questions that demand short answers. I did not want to pamper my students. In the end, only very few students passed. Many complained and dropped the course. This experience during the first semester in a foreign land let me to reflect and review my teaching philosophy.

The experience was a blessing in disguised.

Designing radical authentic learning curricula in the second semester (see attached paper in my other remark) let me enjoy my teaching in Kazakhstan and rediscover the reality that there still are many Kazakhstani students who are committed to think and to conduct independent active learning engagements.

Dear Tobias, I wonder if you have anecdotes to share with us: Customers versus Products.

@ Mohammad Firoz Khan – Make money. This is the reality in my side of the world. Make more money by increasing the tuition fee. Make most money by overloading the teachers and demanding them to handle twenty four units in a semester.

This greed (is this the right choice of the word) leads to undesirable consequences: Low quality of education and less enrolments. The reduction of students further compels schools to increase their tuition fees. And as expected, there are lesser number of students.

I wonder, can you recommend something to resolve this dilemma (your #2 observation)? Can we do something to let these administrators to realize that the situation is not viable?

Education, in my opinion, has a 40-year cycle. When leaders commit to improve the education, one can see the effect after 40 years.

@ Nadhir Hammami - You are right. Students must be at the center of teaching and learning while teacher serves as a bridge between students and knowledge. Speaking of knowledge reminds me of the Singapore vision of Teach Less, Learn More (TLLM). It is consistent to the method of "teaching [and learning] in ways that help students learn without being taught" (Loong, 2004) and to your statement that students are the products of our method of teaching and learning.

If you have visited any private secondary schools in Manila, you will be surprised to see students carrying heavy school bags. Inside the school bags reside their learning resources. The image seems to be that of Carry More, Learn More. It presupposes Learning More by Teaching More.

When I designed the Financial Statement Analysis curriculum for senior students in Kazakhstan, without encountering the TLLM concept, I embraced the Threshold concept and focused in the curriculum design only the last two chapters of the textbook. Students asked me at the start of the semester how it is possible to skip Chapters 1 to 12 and to learn Chapters 13 and 14. Many students did not like my vision of independent active learning engagements. Others did not like to commit to reflecting weekly and submitting their thinking as an attachment in their emails. So, a class of more than 60 students shrunk to about 20 students (see the conference proceeding attached). In the end, the remaining students (and I as the "bridge" between the student and knowledge) became a community of co-teachers and co-learners and we have a great time learning together.

I like your conception of teacher as "a bridge between the student and knowledge." In fact, this is a bridge to the 21st century. Since learning is effective if it is imperfect, then students, depending on their levels, should somewhat feel safe relatively in order to assimilate their learning. Dear Nadhir, thank you for your insight.

A famous Irish man Oscar Wilde once said - Education is an admirable thing, but it is well to remember that anything worth knowing cannot be taught. This in my opinion gets the heart of the argument. Unfortunately our formal and modern education systems are strongly focused on teaching rather than learning with the student being a product. There really is not enough consideration of the student as a consumer of the expensive education process process. We also need to be clear about who the stakeholders are and what values they hold.

Seamus

Learning – teaching is a two way interaction process ,,, the teacher , I believe ( as long- term university professor of 26 years’ experience) is an instructor ,,, a guide ,, a trainer ,, a breeder ,,a good older friend ,,,a father /mother ,,brother / sister … in short I think that the role of the teacher should be to present an idle ,,a good example to have an influence on the learners in order to have a successful learning process .

Presenting the best example is very important ; moreover the teacher should be highly educated , well qualified so that he/she can fulfill the requirements of the post of an instructor ,,,

The learners at all ages and stages have competence , capacities and certain levels of intelligence and performance . So, the teacher should be aware of each of his/her learners in order to train and guide any group according to their abilities . Paying attention to the individual differences, age ,personal problems and circumstances ,,,,It is then and only then can the teaching / learning process succeed .

@ Seamus Cowman – Thank you for “… nothing that is worth knowing can be taught” (Wilde, 2003). I agree that your comment gets into the heart of the argument. In my original questions, the conceptions of students are as (1) customers or as (2) products. The image of products can easily be construed as the product of teaching of loads of contents. Teachers might feel insecure (or unsafe) to reduce contents in designing curriculum, probably fearing to be criticized by the administrators or probably feeling constraint by the moderation process against an established standards. Your valuable contribution to the discussions seems to enlighten me (and us) of a new conception of students. I wonder if we can have “stakeholders” as a third conception. When I conceive students as products, I implicitly consider society as the customers as well as society as the stakeholder. Thank you for bringing out the idea of “who the stakeholders are” and “what values they hold.” In your opinion, can you share with us further in your context? I wonder if you can suggest a third conception of students? Is the image of stakeholder appropriate to this thread of discussion?

Reference

Wilde, O. (2003). Nothing...Except My Genius: The Wit and Wisdom of Oscar Wilde. New York: Penguin Group (USA) Inc.

This is in interesting question. Whoever is paying is the customer. If the student is paying with their own money, they are the customer. If the parents pay, they are the customer. If the kids are on federal support, the taxpayer is the customer. That being said, the students at the conclusion of the class really don't have much context for its value in their career or life. So evaluations or somewhat myopic. Also, they can be tampered with, which I have seen happen (the prof photocopied his evaluations and ran those through the scanner. They came out over 1 point higher on a 5 point scale than the official ones, which someone in the department office had apparently fudged.)

@ Nidhal Al-Nakkash (and Nadhir Hammami) - I agree with you. A conception of a teacher is as someone to inspire students to learn.

I like your insight as to “paying attention to the individual differences” for the teaching and learning process to succeed.

Nadhir Hammami (refer above) argues that “student must be at the center of the educational and pedagogical act.” Likely, he is also referring to being attentive to the individual needs of students.

A teacher or a curriculum developer who designs a one-size-fits-all syllabus could be interpreted to be insensitive to the individual differences and individual needs. Note however that paying attention of the individual differences, in my opinion, is not exactly being paying attention to the students’ individual needs. Both ideas are related, but they are not the same.

I agree with you that a good teacher should pay attention to the individual differences. Likely, the teacher should be sensitive to the learning environments at macro (societal or cultural differences), meso (institutional or school cultural differences), and micro (individual differences of students) level. However, the teacher has his or her hands tied and is not free or is unable to make the learning more effective if the class size is big or if he or she is bound to follow a structured curriculum.

Thus, for a teacher to pay attention to “the individual differences” and for “student [to] be at the center” in the teaching and learning process, I wonder if radical curriculum design should be a critical antecedent. Is so, what constitutes a radical and effective curriculum design that pays attention to individual differences and that puts students at the center of the teaching and learning process.

Thank you (Nidhal Al-Nakkash and Nadhir Hammami) again for your valuable insights.

May I ask a perhaps provoking questions? Is a lectures who teaches students and understands those as customers are allowed to let them fail in a test or exam?

What does it mean to pay attention to the individual differences? Does it mean teaching on the weakest level and to give extra work to those who are stronger or visa versa? How to deal with this in a reading? Team work is fine for excerises, but hardly in a reading. What is your opinion?

@ Nadhir Hammami - Hello again, about your insight of students being “at the center of the educational and pedagogical act” is a recent article from The Chronicle of Higher Education (Burger, 2012). The image of the center stage is relevant to:

1st vignette: Baylor University dares teachers to teach their students how to think, not just about but also through the course materials. One management accounting teacher inspires students to thinking about “myself” and “my life.” A student, having learned to develop the two cognitive perspectives, has succeeded to think everything differently. The anecdotal evidence infers that thinking and creativity in teaching and learning enhance the discovery of similarities (rather than differences) of disparate areas of study to teacher and students who collectively create a community of co-teachers and co-learners, having “profoundly inspired one another.” In this story, each participant of the teaching and learning activities resides at the center of the community of co-teachers and co-learners.

2nd vignette: A professor of film and digital media thoroughly reviewed the details of the syllabus with his students, then instructed them to rip up the document, and asked them of their needs (that is, their gaps). Later collectively, they, acting as co-teachers and co-learners, crafted their syllabus. One student said: “As directors, we’re supposed to create a space where actors can play safely. The openness and flexibility of this class allowed us to experience such a safe space within our learning environment.”

Dear Nadhir, when I read this article, I recalled your insight about “the teacher [playing] the role of a bridge between the student and knowledge…[and the teacher organizing his or her] knowledge so that students can move safely…” Thank you for this insight. I am sure other participants to this thread of discussions will find your comment relevant to their contexts of teaching.

@ Gudrum Smith - hmmm, certainly provocative. I wonder if we can speculate that a teacher whose conception of students is as customers is likely biased against high mortality (i.e., students' failures) in his or her class. But, this speculation embeds certain assumption(s). Would it be possible for the teacher to craft the test or exam in a way so that more students will pass it? Or to conduct revisions prior to the test or exam?

About “teaching on the weakest level… or vice versa,” I remembered being involved with discussions of this topic. In one instance, school authorities grouped students by sections. Section A had students who were academically strong. Students who were not academically strong belonged to Section B. The same rule goes on to Section C and so on. This practice was criticized and reverted back to combining academically strong students with academically weak students. Both practices were found to have respective strengths and weaknesses.

In the context of higher education (not secondary education nor primary education), I pay attention to individual differences by making myself available to students for consultation, tutoring, or coaching. Also, I pay attention by crafting my curriculum at the right level, neither adjusting to the weakest level nor to the strongest level. However, during the lecture, I would adjust my communication and presentation to suit a majority of my students, assuming that I know my students’ profile in advance. Regardless, my practice is to encourage more active students to engage in learning through bonus project(s) that will not help them to pass the course but the bonus marks will help them improve their final grades. Personally, I prefer to assessment using rubrics and give a pass or fail based on the established standards.

My vision of teaching is to encourage students to conduct independent active learning engagements and to demand students to conduct weekly reflections of their learning (individually, collectively, or in classroom setting). *IN SHORT, BY BEING SENSITIVE TO THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT AND BY ALLOWING STUDENTS TO CHOOSE THEIR OWN PROJECT FOR ASSESSMENT (IN THE SYLLABUS), I am able to meet the need of individual students and pay attention to individual differences. To reiterate, this practice is in context of higher education.

About team work, many of my peers do not encourage team works. They believe that working by the team tolerates free loaders. Although there is the risk of students free loading, this risk can be managed. Therefore, I have positive bias *IN FAVOR* of team works and assessments. I devise a form for students to report on their group works. I find the form effective to reward or to penalize team works…

*AS TO YOUR QUESTION ABOUT TREATING INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN CONTEXT OF READING, I WANT TO LEARN ABOUT HOW TO DEAL WITH THIS TOO.* :-)

For institution they are customers but for teacher thay are the products of teaching & learning activities.

@ Ray Givier and UMMED Singh - Ray, you got a point about myopic. Ummed argues that institutions will [most likely] consider students as customers. Your comments let me think about “sie tien” (education-store) and “sie shiao” (education-school) in Chinese Mandarin. As a member of the faculty, I will want myself to be part of an “education-school.” But reality is that most educational institutions have the conceptions of “education-store,” which is in fact a “prostituted” (sorry for this word) image of “education-school.”

This is the state of many schools in the “space” where I am active. Take for example the licensure examination (or the Board examination) of the Accounting profession. During my time, we did not have calculator. We had to do the old fashion manual calculation. We used yellow worksheet and worked, for instance, on trial balance, etc. We wrote paragraphs to answer questions. We had to wait months to know if we passed the Board exam. Now, the accounting examination in the “space” that I reside examination composes of multiple questions. With the use of information technology, results of the examination are available in few days. Schools teach their students not on the good knowledge and good skills but on how to pass the Board examinations. Effectively, accounting students learn how to guess if they do not know the answer. Also, they become, what I called, one-liner students, who would have difficulty to do complex thinking and who would be an expert in answering objective type questions or questions that ask for brief one-line phase or one-line sentence. Also, they bring with them calculators as they sit in their examination.

If this is the model of learning, then our education (in my space) is messed up badly. These accountants, who have passed the Board, would very likely find themselves inadequate of real knowledge and real skills to sustain themselves in the future where the only constant is change. Most likely, they cannot reinvent themselves for new situations to come and to succeed.... This narrative flashes the images of sie-tien and sie-shao.:-)

@ Nadhir Hammami - I would say that you live in a real world, but on a space with roads less travelled. If you are familiar with the "Diffusion of Innovations" theory and the S-shaped curve, you can categorize yourself to belong to a small group of rare specie. You still will have to continue the advocacy of the image of the bridge and the image of the center of the teaching and learning. In this way, you will evolve. Also, look forward the image of a turtle “who” overtakes the rabbit. Diffusing a new image is not easy. Also it takes time. But your will enjoy as you conduct your journey and as you evolve yourself. :-)

@John Voris - From all prior discussions, the conceptions of students are as customers, as products, as a stakeholder, as a space (e.g., center) for students of navigate knowledge safely, and as an end of a bridge (of which the other end is knowledge).

You have described administrators as incompetent. I have described them as insecure. Actually, you are right. Many are incompetent.

The Partnership for 21st Century Skills has developed a Framework for 21st Century Learning. If the 21st Century education must be tied to DELIBERATE OUTCOMES (in terms of proficiency in core subject knowledge and 21st century skills that are valued in in schools, works, and communities), I wonder if we can infer rightfully that students are the PRODUCTS and schools, works, and communities are the CUSTOMERS.

How about the parents of these students? I believe that they are stakeholders. But, a story that I am about to tell you would indicate them as customers. I know of a mother who bought two sets of Encyclopedias from teachers at two different times in order that her son (or daughter) could pass the subject. Since, she did not need two sets of the resource, she gave one out. This happened about two decades ago. The practice of buying grades might still be rampant in under-developing countries.

I frequently asked whenever I gave workshops or seminars, do we need to give grades to students? Why not simply establish the standards (e.g., unit standards) and then assess students’ engagements in terms of a PASS or a FAIL? Teachers and principals however argue that this is not possible because parents want (or need to know about) the grades. Some even want high grades.

In this instance, the insecure or incompetent administrators are not only to be blamed, but their actions are consequences of the needs or expectations of the parents. So, who should be placed in front of the firing squad if we are to straighten the education systems?

Next, (insecure or incompetent) administrators, (non-teaching qualified or old fashion) teachers, and society at large (parents and students) often or traditionally equate good education (that is, the rigor of teaching and learning activities) to the mastery of huge amount of contents. My students were bothered when I designed my syllabus to focus on two last chapters of the textbook (see manuscript attached and prior discussions). At the time when I designed the curriculum, I used the threshold concept as a lens. This concept is consistent to the Singapore’s concept of teaching less learning more.

Most of my Kazakhstani MBA students argued that they wanted to learn from experts (equating lecturers as experts). They were unhappy when I told them (humbly) that because knowledge and information change constantly, I cannot even consider myself as expert.

My conception of teaching is that of teaching them how to fish, how to cook the fish, and how to eat it right. I wonder then if you will agree that skills to students are more important than knowledge. If so, would you agree that skills set (and the competence in skill sets) should be an antecedent to knowledge? Would you also agree that ALL TEACHERS ARE DEEMED INCOMPETENT OR FAILURE IF THEY CANNOT CONTRIBUTE TO TRANSFORMING THEIR STUDENTS INTO BECOMING LIFE-LONG LEARNERS? Hehe, probably I too am incompetent if my students refuse to be life-long learners.

@ John Voris - You mentioned that “I then need to KNOW when to hunt for them and at what particular spot. The skill is in fixing the bait to the line and tossing it in the water connected to a pole.” In your example, assuming you are the learner, you need both knowledge (when and where to hunt) and skill (fixing bait and tossing it). You are right to have illustrated explicitly that both knowledge and skills are intertwined. Both are essential. Another quote that I like from you is: “A skill is a technique to fulfill what you KNOW is needed. . . . They have a desire to know before they are aware that a skill exists.” In this quote, knowing seems to be an antecedent of developing skills. Some authorities, like Ron Brandt, argue that students learn by using skills to acquire knowledge. And therefore, LEARNING SKILLS COMES FIRST AND LEARNING KNOWLEDGE COMES NEXT.

All these flashes of ideas cause me to think about a challenge in curriculum development. HOW DO I IDENTIFY THE RIGHT SKILLS THAT FIT AN EXISTING CURRICULUM? HOW DO I IDENTIFY THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH TO FACILITATE MY “TEACHING” (E.G., MOTIVATING MY STUDENTS TO CONDUCT ACTIVE INDEPENDENT LEARNING ENGAGEMENTS) WITH THE RIGHT AMOUNT OF CONTENTS? FINALLY, HOW TO I CREATE AND MAINTAIN THE RIGHT LEARNING ENVIRONMENT AND MANAGE THE COMPLEX TEACHING AND LEARNING PROCESS? Lastly, in teaching and learning which needs to come first, knowing knowledge or developing skills? This reflection however deviates from the discussions about whether students are our customers or our products.

I beg to disagree about team work and team assessment in my context (which is adult education). I however agree with you that "education is a human enterprise." Because it is a human enterprise, therefore in the context of the real world, adult learners need to work in team and be cautious in accepting someones who are free loaders. Thus, I have used a marking instrument that gives carrot and/or stick for group works.

@ Nadhir Hammami - Your conceptions as to the “bridge” and the central space where students need to safely navigate as they engage to learn as well as your idea of the “vertical relationship between teacher and students” are something worth exploring further. I wonder if you have stories to share with us. If you do, then I am your that your idea will slowly crystallize.

You said that you still defend your idea and continue to fight for it. Probably, you feel challenged or unfulfilled. M. Scott Peck said, “The truth is that our finest moments are most likely to occur when we are feeling deeply uncomfortable, unhappy, or unfulfilled. For it is only in such moments, . . ., that we are likely to step out of our ruts and start searching for different ways or truer answers.” Who knows, probably your conceptions are the truer answers than the initial two images of students and products.

I don't think students are the product of the teaching and learning that takes place in our classrooms. There are several other factors that influence the learners' learning. Moreover, students construct their own learning. All student get the same experience but all of them learn different things because they have different background, previous knowledge, learning styles, intelligences etc. The word 'curriculum' itself tells us that it is everything thaat goes on in the school.

As for the other question I think that students are our customers not in the business language but in the interpersonal sense. We sell the teaching strategies, concepts etc. we try to present new knowledge in the most attractive way so that the students willingly buy them (learn and apply the knowledge). So, they are customers.

@John Voris - I have learned valuable insights from you. I have to associate my questions to the contextual (cultural and the educational levels - that is, primary, secondary, or tertiary) situations. My context to the two questions that I have raised pertains to under developing country in South-east Asia and in higher education. Thus, the concept, the conception, and my perspective undeniably have the particular contextual favor.

With your example about math of $100 to buy $ 12 movie ticket, students have to learn how to divide and to subtract. Probably they need to have this prior knowledge (e.g., the multiplication table). The desire to know is a reason for the action (Dancy, 2000 ), or simply motive. A second set of reasons refers to the good reason for action. or Frankena (1973) refers it as the normative reason in favor of action. The reason for action (that of Dancy) triggers students to engage in learning. As a consequence, students learn (this could be interpreted as the product of teaching and learning.)

John, I have voted up your comment because you have mentioned one important point in teaching and learning. The point is the cognitive presence of student as to their desire to know. Their want is a critical antecedent to education. Thus a Chinese proverb says that although a teacher ushers (inspires) students in, their performance nevertheless relies on their engagements.

Also, I voted up your next comment. You have listed some very critical questions for reflections. For example, the question “which teacher motivated you and why” aligns with the notion of the teacher inspiring or ushering in students (the previous Chinese proverb). Another essential point is the learning environment that best suits a particular students. A third point is the sensitivity to the profile of the student as to whether he or she has prior knowledge or not in order to learn the skills. In fact, in context of higher education, I cannot assume that all my students have the same prior knowledge and skills. Thus, the syllabus that I develop for a particular course takes this premise into consideration. (I am speaking in context of higher education.)

I also like a keyword in your second comment. The phrase is “be your humanity.” The notion that flashes in my mind is HUMANE. There is another saying in Chinese. The purpose of education is to teach students to learn to be humane. Knowledge content is not as important as learning to be a good and useful human being in a society and community. The exact Chinese term to learning to be humane is “cho ren.” Another idea that I like is that there is no magic in teaching. This means there is no short cut in teaching and learning.

About the “free loader” in higher education (your third comment), I can say that adult students, like secondary or primary students have peer pressures too. Thus, the presence of free loaders is inevitable. However, working in an authentic situation, one cannot avoid working in team. Thus in my tertiary teaching or in teaching adult learners, I nevertheless have positive bias in favor of team works and team assessments. I have devised a form that will minimize (but cannot totally eradicate) free loading.

Reference

Dancy, J. (2000). Practical Reality. Oxford, England: Oxford University Pres.

Frankena, W. K. (1973). Ethics (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

@Rahila Aslam - In my previous response to John Voris, I have mentioned about the importance of context to the two questions that I have raised. The context pertains to culture and education level (e.g., primary, secondary, and tertiary). It also depends on one’s perspective and one’s conception of a concept (Baker, 2001). You are right about the same experience but varied learning outcomes because of different students’ profiles. The teacher “sells” the new knowledge by presenting it in the most attractive way so students will be willingly to buy it (learn and apply the knowledge). This statement is consistent to the Diffusion of Innovations theory. Thus, your inference, that students are customers, is right. I voted up your chain of reasoning. :-)

Reference

Baker, G. (2001). Wittgenstein: Concepts or conceptions. The Harvard Review of Philosophy, 9, 7-23.

@ John Voris and others - Perhaps your conception of students (and teachers) as ONE, as a dance of the human spirit, and as [a target audience] of human enterprise might be the right ones.

I have been thinking about my questions and the conceptions of students as customers and as products of teaching and learning. I am beginning to somewhat realize that these two conceptions seem wrong in the 20th century and could be inappropriate in the 21st century unless everyone in the society changes his or her mindset about education, teaching and learning. My above argument derives from the following chain of reasoning.

Innovation is commonly triggered from the outside. Gabriel Tarde (1843-1904) realized that innovation originated from strangers. The movement known as the 21st Century Sklls likewise is triggered from people outside the education sector. These people forecast a dire need for people with skills that are beyond the skills emphasized by today's education. The participating people and entities organized themselves as a Partnership for 21st Century Skills and developed a Framework for 21st Century Learning. The vision is to improve teaching and learning. The process expects to begin with:

Educators modify current educational standards ->

->

Teachers and students align their teaching and learning practices with the modified standards

->

Students conduct active independent or collaborative engagements to develop their skills

->

Students compile evidence of their learning

->

Students take ownership to have their skills assessed

I have adopted these teaching practices. My students, who did not drop the course, likewise have adopted these learning practices.

However, not all of my students were enthusiastic to conduct active learning engagements. Many still are still used to memorization. Likewise, many teachers likewise believe in huge contents as a measure of successful teaching and learning.

Does this 21st initiative regard students as customers? Or as products? How about the failure of education in the 20th century? Does the failure imply students as customers or as products? Contexts are sensitive factors to these questions and most likely answers vary as to contexts. At least, through this discourse, we start to gain certain awareness to the questions and not necessarily to the answers.

As long as academic staff regard themselves as the font of all knowledge, then student will remain as vessels to be filled up. In such a case the student will be subordinated down the structures along with the leaning process.

As Mark Twain suggested - do not let your sons schooling interfere with his education.

Seamus

@Seamus Cowman - I like your conception of students as vessels to be filled up.

However, I have encountered students who either put their hands on top of the vessels. Other students have vessels that are always full. They refuse to empty them to accommodate new knowledge. Although I am supposed to inspire them to engage in their learning, however they refuse, walk out my class, and drop the course. I wanted them to conduct deep approach to learning. However, they wanted surface approach to learning, which is memorizing.

In context of higher education, how do I subordinate them down the structures along with the learning process?

Teachers at any level of teaching are mature and in most cases than none are themselves filled in the sense that they have definite opinion about certain subjects, ideas, concepts etc. and go to the class to teach not to learn. But, my experience teaching graduate, undergraduate students and my children at home I have experienced that they are more imaginative than me and may point out dimensions or raise questions which I found to answer difficult. To take even not school going children as empty vessels to me is wrong, it is another thing we cannot make sense of them given our own ideas. My teaching experience everyday is a learning experience. I get a few fresh drops of knowledge from my students or points to ponder over.

@John Voris - The educators and “outsiders” in United States are attempting to modify the current education standards with the Framework for 21st Century Learning. Gardner (2009) enumerates five minds for the future, namely: (1) disciplined mind, (2) synthesizing mind, (3) creative mind, (4) respectful mind, and (5) ethical mind. Murray Gell-Mann (Nobel laureate in physics) emphasizes interdisciplinary knowledge and considers the synthesizing mind (that which can explore a wide range of a priori as well as a posteriori knowledge and empirical facts, filter out noises, and put together information that makes sense). Personally my emphasis is on ethical mind. A person is simply inviting chaos, sooner or later, if he or she is unethical. This, probably, is due to my Chinese mindset that the role of teachers is to teach their students to be humane (or to be an ethical person).

These five minds infer the importance of multiple intelligences. But then, if these five minds are important in the future, how do we assess them, individually or collectively? What images will you associate these students, who have all or some of these minds?

 Are they still [multiple-intelligent] imprisoned political pawns?

Reference

Gardner, H. (2009). Five minds for the future. Retrieved 15 Sept 2012, from http://www.uknow.gse.harvard.edu/teaching/video-teachTC106-607-uk_hg_hu_mind.html

@ Mohammad Firoz Khan and Seamus Cowman - You are right against the image of vessels. In my prior discussion, I have commented about the preference of open empty vessels. Nevertheless, the conception of students as vessels is a good one too, at least for discussion. Also, we might not be familiar with the context of Seamus.

The education (teaching and learning) process for the 21st Century belongs to teachers and students who regard themselves as co-teachers and co-learners and who individually and collectively engage in their learning in a community of practice.

@ John Voris - Please clarify your last paragraph ("these factors seem to be far too narrow to matter on any level.) and "pop-psychology." I want to learn more.

The students, being the base of our future society, are "the direct beneficiary and practically the owners" of the Schools and Universities.

The teachers / professors are employed to serve the student's education need.

please see also:

https://www.researchgate.net/post/International_Student_and_Teacher_Exchange_Programs_a_solid_way_to_build_and_assure_a_sustainable_healthy_political_climate#share

and:

https://www.researchgate.net/post/The_Importance_of_Creating_Audio-Visual_Documentation_of_all_of_your_Research_it_includes_Masters_PhD_thesis_and_make_it_public#share

Regards,

Adrian TW.

@ Gail Thompson - I have been to the Dr. Lodge website. Inspiring students to make videos to teach science and math is an approach to “authentic learning.” Making video in "authentic situations" is a means for students to commit themselves to independent active learning engagements. Learning becomes more effective especially if students know before hand a written set of standards by which their learning will be assessed. The teaching and learning activities, by inspiring students to make videos, effectively is teaching lesser in contents but learning more in skills and knowledge. (The "teach less learn more" is a framework currently adopted in Singapore, where I interpret it to emphasize learning of skills and knowledge. This is in contrast to the Philippine scenario where you can see elementary students in private school carrying very heavy school bags filled with books and notebooks where the emphasis seems to be in knowledge contents and students use memorization to cope with examinations).

Because teachers teach less but students learn more, I thereby, realize what you have said in elementary and middle school context, “students are neither products nor vessels.”

I like the idea of your conception of students: "Students are neither products nor vessels, they're people just like teachers." However, in context of higher education, the adult students, especially the Executive MBAs, could be overbearing and imposing to a point that a teacher with a right mindset should not be affected nor be manipulated to lower the quality of learning...

@ Gail Thompson - I have decided to edit my previous comment and elaborated parts that in my opinion were not clear.

@ Adrian Toader-Williams - (I have mistakenly put this comment in another discussion. So I am putting it in the right place.) I am happy to get another image of students from you, that of “the direct beneficiary and practically the owners” of the schools and universities.

I agree that teachers are means to serve the student’s education need. However, I wonder: if by serving the needs and in varied (elementary, middle, or higher educational) contexts, could the teachers respect the students’ needs and yet do not treat the students as their customers to the extend of pampering to their needs? I reflected on this issue in context of higher education where at times, mature students, especially those working MBA students who overloaded themselves, who expected to be spoon-fed, and who refused to engage themselves in learning.

To get back to Francisco's original question:

To the Fees Office the student is the customer.

To the Lecturer, the purpose is to create a

product in whom lifelong, useful learning

has been maximised.

The Fees Office does not and cannot dictate

or even speak to the lecturer. It is up to the

lecturer to freely decide (in best conscience) what

to actually teach today, what to emphasize, how to

teach and what to examine. Students may

complain about getting 47%, or not getting

enough printed notes, but they never

complain about some topic required for

the profession not being in the syllabus!

Nevertheless, I am shocked to find out what

the Fees Office is charging the student today, and

I am sure there are way of preventing wastage

(eg. 'Dead wood' admin staff and electricity wastage)

on campus and holding fees down.

In the prime of Ms Jean Brodie it was claimed - the proclivity of academics to lecture is reflected in the popular stereotype of the born teacher who seizes every opportunity to teach regardless of the circumstances.

This in my opinion continues to the major challenge - the extent to which we see the learner as an equal and not something to be lectured at. In practice there has never been a great culture of academics taking feedback from students:

I would just refer you to paper I wrote a few years ago on the significance of the student in the learning process.

Cowman S. (1996) Student Evaluation: A performance Indicator of Quality in Nurse Education. Journal of Advanced Nursing 24, 625-632.

@Seamus: I agree. I remember once a "customer" (student) had filled in the evaluation form on me as follows: "His glasses are too old-fashioned"! See my profile picture and judge for yoursel! Is this damning with faint praise or what? As your cited paper says: "The results (of student feedback) can never be more than a guide to making decisions". The feedback from the other equally important stakeholders, the alumni, and the practicing professionals is just as important. Furthermore, to balance the aging stakeholders, current research also has to be tracked and even predicted to inform the curriculum development. My rule is to throw away 10% of the syllabus and add in a new 10% each year.

Along time ago when I was teaching Government and Politics in a large ambitious FE college, we were eagerly awaiting our OFSTED inspection. We were asked to a preinpsection meeting with a "Quality manager" who asked us simply to "teach your best lesson- it doesn't matter if it is one which you have delivered before". I decided to say nothing and thought to myself what does that mean best for who him or the learners ?. My restless bunch of 17 year olds would not have coped with or provided the same response to an old lesson. We always try to teach our best lesson - who did he think he was suggesting this !

We are all involved in teaching and learning, in FE - the Cinderella sector- we give emotionally- in terms of labour and committment - to our learners we buy into their experiences.This can't be measured easily in terms of exam results but life succcess, what happens afterwards to the students and how we empower them for what life opportunties. Ask the students 5 years on about their experiences this will tell you more than student Feedback after a lesson where they have been set challenging homestudy.

The idea of students as customers or consumers asumes that they are buying or consuming a product . This assumes that knowldge is static and an an object which requires packaging and delivered. Surely Higher Education is more than the packaging of knowldge. Universities should be about seeking new knowldge and helping students to challenge static concepts.

Students are human beings ,,, our brothers & sisters ,, sons & daughters , friends who need guidance , advice , help and care ,,, we all have been pupils then students ,,, we should treat students as such not as customers nor consumers ,,, best & most successful t teachers in all stages are those who make their students love them and take from them ,, learn because they have understanding ,, communication ,, influence and thus the teaching- learning process succeed and have the best results ,,this is how I treat my students as younger friends or siblings ,, once students love & respect their teachers they will accept everything said or taught ,,, a teacher should never be a warden ,, he/she should be the best ideal or example and unless he/she has the personality , character , knowledge , intelligence , experience and qualification beside compassion and wisdom ,,,he/she fails to be a real teacher ,,,

They are all three, education nowadays is a service industry supplying a service to a client. If this service is of a good quality then the students are products of this service but are also products of their own processes and learning stratergies.

I can see why graduates are so inept in English writing If the grammar in the content above is any indication of what students are exposed to. Even many MBAs I've interviewed for jobs cannot compose a cogent letter, memo or report. Careless or ignorant or both?

@James, don't forget that a lot of these contributions are by second language speakers and my second language - Spanish - is both ungrammatical and, as you say, inept! Graduates tend, in my experience, to be poor in written English unless thay have spent a great deal of time writing and this entails a lot of correction and time expended for seemingly little immediate benefit and I am afraid that this extends to UK as well as foreign students at all levels. An MBA student, unless they have put in the work will also be just as incoherent on paper as any other.

However, this does in a way relate to the question asked. Students who are looking to improve their skills at any level do not necessarily see the need to learn to write clearly and cogently. In fact one of my many previous jobs was to screen papers submitted to an International Business conference held , and organised by a public Unniversity, in Spain and I regret to say I excluded rather a lot on the basis of poor written English. Thus, if students do not see that they are getting a material result as a customer, then they will not buy into the whole learning process needed to write, study and learn.

I certainly understand the challenge if one has been raised in an environment other than English. For more than 50 years (some 12 businesses, teaching at the grad level, instructing pilots for airlines/business, and many volunteer orgs) I have consistently experienced grads who cannot write/compose (often cannot speak). That lack of such a basic skill has cost me/my companies a great deal of money/time. Most CEOs I have come across have complained to "local" schools to no avail. Then they just filter out the really bad employees and try to work with those willing to learn. All of that effort tends to take away from actually running the business.

Right on the money from my experience while teaching in business, in pilot training, and in a grad school setting. Our local school system has incorporated a good deal of interactive processes K-12. They view the student as a customer, education as the product, content as features, participation/grades/work as components of the contract between the provider and customer, and learning as the benefit. Under those circumstances if the customer does not benefit both parties are at fault.

I have consumed the content of many books on leadership; a few on servant leadership. It is a concept I apply actively. I also appreciate the writings of Warren Bennis. A fun read is Cigars, Whiskey & Winning: Leadership Lessons from General Grant by Al Kaltman. Enjoy the weekend.

@Justina - surely the great instructor does all 4?

@ Justina Higgins and @ Mark Smythers

Justina, thiank you for enlightening us with this quote from William Arthur Ward. I do agree with you that Great instructor inspires. However, students still have to commit themselves to learning and being a life long learner. Also, before the Great instructor can inspire, there is need for him or her to tell and to explain (i.e., instructionism or five percent effective learning through lecture). Although there is less in demonstration in traditional teaching and learning, nevertheless it is still a common method that superior instructor can use.

I like the quote. There is more to assess learning and to evaluate teaching. The bottom line is: Have we successfully inspire at least one or few students to transform into ethical citizens with positive perspectives to contribute to the well-being of mankind?

Mark, thank you also for reminding us that great instructor does all four.

Students should be treated with as much respect as a service provider would treat a customer. What we get from these customers is much more than what money can pay: Pride to be part of someone's success, making a difference in someone's life, getting fresh ideas, knowing that one is liked and respected etc etc. I strongly recommend that you read "Dr. Hudson's Secret Journal" http://www.amazon.com/Doctor-Hudsons-Secret-Journal-Douglas/dp/0899669441. You gain so much by helping a student through mentoring and teaching !!!

If we are public institutions then students are not our customers- the societies that pay for them are the customers. Education enriches everyone, that's why it receives public money in most countries. And knowledge is the product, not students, though students are among the constructors of and vectors for the spread of that knowledge.

Another way of looking at it, given that in many countries students are the ones that pay for their own education, is that students are paying to be members of a club where the object is to create knowledge. It's a bit like being a member of a sports club, say squash or golf or badminton: the club provides the facilities, maybe a bit of assistance with the process, and makes it easy for people to get together to play, but the members have to play hard with one another in order to make it worthwhile.

@ Fatih Uckun - A conception of the "pride to be part of someone's success" is called psychic reward. Good insight. :-)

@ James Ronay - "They view the student as a customer, education as the product, content as features, participation/grades/work as components of the contract between the provider and customer, and [co-teaching and co-] learning as the benefit. Under those circumstances if the customer does not benefit both parties are at fault. "

I like your many conceptions (images) of student, education, content, and learning. I have liberally interpreted learning as co-teaching and co-learning.

As a teacher, I assume a contractual obligation to bridge the gap between "what my students can learn on their own" and "what I bring" so that they can learn even better. In that sense, I view my students as some kind of "my" customers. It does not however mean that I do not learn with them, in fact, I do. I value their feedback as a means of improving what I do and bring to class---(many of which provide interesting insights while others are just absurd

With regards to student evaluations of faculty. I suppose that traditional conceptions of learning and evaluation still pervade in educational systems. Perhaps better assessment frameworks are needed: such as this one proposed by professors in Stanford University:

http://edpolicy.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/creating-comprehensive-system-evaluating-and-supporting-effective-teaching.pdf

Are students our customers? is where this debate commenced and most respondents believe they are or should be. Many important issues have been raised . As an active academic engaging in the teaching of students I have observed one of the main weaknesses to be student feedback. Student feedback encourages student independence and empowers students to manage their learning. Communication with customers is essential and what better way to do it than in an individualised response. Good quality student feedback is written as well as verbal and should be contractual. Verbal feedback is important but written feedback raises the quality of the exchange to another level. As Sam Goldwyn said - 'a verbal contract in not worth the paper it is written on'.

In fact, the Student is the customer. The student is buying the curriculum for the educational experience. The student will then use the purchased curriculum to improve his/her life, his/her family, his/her country. As I have said before, the Instructor is no more nor less than a tool the student uses to gain the sought after skill/knowledge. Now, it is true that Great Instructors realize that all educational experiences must be student centered. That is, they focus their energy on meeting or exceeding student needs. They are not there to be the Great Dictator, trying to build students in their own image. Students do learn best by doing, they also learn best when they are the focus of the education, not the Instructor.

First, my context for thinking about this topic is grounded in teaching public high school students in the U.S. My students, for the most part, are not shopping as at the mall. Compulsory attendance, attendance zone rules, proscribed credit requirements, school-generated class schedules, etc. undermine considering their experience to be one of consumers.

I think of them as the guided--to be better thinkers, more socially aware, more self-disciplined--who pass through my classroom and continue on with their lives. Another way I think of the work I do is that while my salary certainly comes from the state and district via public money, I think that I am working for my students and by extension, then, society rather than my superintendent.

Sometimes, I do allow for a thought or two about abolishing all public education and going the free market approach. There now, imagine that consumer base and the forces that would develop to sell them a product called education.

Sorry, more worms out of the can.

Scott, Regardless of the conditions under which the students attend education classes, they are still (or at least their parents are) customers. Tax money funds the school system as you have noted. While it is true that public funds are pretty much stolen from the public (money taken without regard of the individuals desire to give or not), that money is still the property of the public. They pay for education services, therefore, they are indeed the customer.

By and large, public education is strongly moving toward a consumer based process. As more and more Private Schools start operations. I do like very much your thoughts on abolishing the Public Educaton system. What a world we might have if teachers were held to Performance Specs, Parents really started taking a serious interest in their childrens education, students were challenged everyday in every classroom to solve, resolve, think, create, imagine and report on the various topics they study.

Don't worry about worms, it is just a discussion. In any discussion, there are many rabbit trails that should be followed.

What does the research say or are we getting too opinionated

Maritha

I found this to be interesting:

http://web.stlawu.edu/ir/sites/stlawu.edu.ir/crseval/studentratingmythscarnegiemellon.pdf

I would like to expand a little on my earlier comment regarding taking pride in a student's success. If we (as academic citizens) consider the formation of an intellectual network of scientists and researchers characterized by a dynamic equilibrium (as opposed to a rigid hierarchial pyramide structure of scholars who are replicas of their former mentors) and a genuine commitment to collective "wisdom" at a global scale as desirable, then it is imperative that we as teachers do not try to impose our views and thoughts on our student, but rather encourage and facilitate the development of the unique strengths and talents of each student. In that context, the student (as a customer) will "shop" around at various stages of his/her career and collect the necessary seeds and ingredients that are needed for his/her academic development. The reward for this mentoring is the pride prompted by their success and the knowledge that we (in a small way) made a positive difference in the life of a fellow scientist who now has the foundation to and likely will touch many lives in the years to come. I would argue that we could not hope for a better academic legacy.

Supervisors / mentors / advisors must grow their students not as manufactured clones, but as new hybrids growing from the freshly watered and well-tended, fertile soils.

Fatih Uckun - Yes, yes and a triple yes! Creating an environment where students are free to conduct their own research in whatever topic is being presented and then to challenge existing theories, facts amd processes will create the individual who moves ever forward in adding to the collective global understanding. When I teach, I want, I encourage and at times I will force my students to challenge me and the knowledge and or skill I am presenting. We never know when the next great thinker or CEO or problem solver is siting in our classroom. I, as a teacher, can learn from my students and can improve upon my own body of knowledge if I encourage open and free debate, Human progress, through the ages, was not based upon doing the same thing over and over, it was based upon those individuals who broke with historical facts and processes and brought us an ever increasing body of knowledge/skill/processes.

Dear Donald

Rest assured you will always be loved and remembered by each and every one of your students. and your genuine efforts are very worthwile

very best

fatih

If we assume the students are our customers, we must provide the highest quality of the service in accordance to "docere movere delectare" principle. We have to teach them and stimulate their curiosity, to makem of them aware and mature engineers, scientists, R&D employee.

Yes .. definitely... so we have to provide the best service..

@ Tobias Rausch - You have touched an important concept in pedagogy, which is teachers and students form a community of inquiry, where they all are co-teachers and co-learners.

Teachers "facilitate." They do not teach (theoretically). If they do, they teach in a way that should not result to spoon feeding but teaching them how to fish instead. On the other hand, students should conduct active learning engagement independently alone but preferably in group.

Here lies the problem. Some teachers are used to the traditional "teaching" methodology using instructionism (such as the one-directional lecturing). Students learn about 5% of the knowledge content, probably with 95% yawning, seating there and listening. But the teachers, without knowing, learn back the 95%.

Many students do not want to engage. There is about 66% of them who refuse to engage themselves unless they have been forced to do so. This segment tend to give bad evaluations to teachers whom the administrators rely to manage their teachers and to show to others that they are doing something.

Only about half of the 33% are really keen to engage in active learning and the other half can be motivated to engage. I am saying all these, based on the literature from the Diffusion of Innovations theory and from my personal experience.

Therefore, for teachers to facilitate and for students to engage in a community, then there are two antecedents to good teaching and good learning. One is the curriculum must be designed in a way that opportunities for students to engage are there. Said curriculum cannot be a one-size-fits-all-students. If the curriculum has an image of something wearable, then the cloth must be a magic one capable fitting itself to a thin or fat student. A second condition is that the teachers must be creative, must have the time, and must be willing to create and maintain good learning environments.

I have encountered a country where its local instructors are loaded 24 units of teaching (that is, 8 subjects of 3 hours a week). These instructors are supermen and superwomen. They can teach the 24 hours in one university and then move on to another university for additional loads of teaching. Given this type of culture means that the teacher themselves treat their students as customers or as products of their one way teaching?

Thus, you are right to conceive teachers to co-producers of teaching and learning. But in this country that I mentioned, what is their conception of teaching and learning? I wonder. :-) By the way, my discussions here are in context of adult learning (higher education).

@ Gail Thompson - The answer should be context sensitive. Thus, when I reply it, I immediately added a last sentence (in context of higher education and in context of the location).

my country belongs to a third world.Definitely students are customers because of finance and corruption challenges.That makes teaching and learning difficult,creating a gap in student/teacher relationship and defeats one of the primary aims of education which is self development.

Ewululm, you are right. Education is the tool for self-development. Whether it is reading a book, taking a course, serving as an apprentice or simply tinkering around with objects. Structured Education has an objective that is met when a student can perform the stated objective, no matter what that objective might be, knowledge based or performance based. Even in many of the so called third world countries I have visited, the student viewed as the customer, simply because the future of the country, not just the students family is at stake. In so called first world countries, it seems as if the lack of need for development has rope and tied students to the thought that "I do not need to learn anything, I will always be taken care of". This is the drum beat of decay which I am afraid my country started to hear many years ago.

I think this question opens two lines of thought:

The first one (which I believe is most important) the teaching / learning process, where we can not forget that the teacher is responsible for the formation of the first student and this form can not strengthen the maxim "the customer is always right", because in the teaching / learning the actions that enable reflection and further understanding of the student must be initiated by the teacher.

2 the second (the customer) that in my opinion should be respected with good lessons and good teaching routing process because in many cases the investment is not small and the expectation of success is very high.

I think as the process of learning is intangible not many students engage in learning because they can not "see / play" the content and knowledge available in the classroom. So the teaching / learning process depends on the teacher's action effectively. I hope I have contributed to the discussion. Sincerely.

@ Moacir Matos Junior - a good feedback (the "two lines of thought"). I agree that not only is the teacher responsible to the teaching and learning (two sides of a coin), the Dean, the Department Head, the Vice Chancellor, and even the Chancellor are responsible to the effective teaching and learning process. However, the teacher has many constraints. Not every leaders, teachers, students, and parents agree to the image of teaching less and learning more. Not every one of them has the cognitive presence to realize that loading knowledge contents is not good education if the approach to learning is surface learning. Not every one have the awareness of teaching less and learning more. The mindset of traditional learning has been embedded into our culture in such, as you said, "the investment [in education] is not small," it is not small not because the costs are high but because of the expectation of good profit, particularly if teachers can be mandated to teach more units and the class size is huge. Take the situation of a country in the Far East, the lecturers have a 24 units load (that is, 24 hours of teaching in a week). Many of them engage in "moonlighting." Very likely, these types of teachers and the leaders who tolerate these practices DO NOT RESPECT WHAT EDUCATION IS. Likely, they know what MONEY IS and what MONEY CAN BRING TO THEM.

When you mention the conception of education as "play," I remember someone in the ResearchGate mentioned teaching and learning as playing fields. Your conception and that conception overlap.

Thank you for your feedback.

Just like all of us:

They are customers if they have a choice of what to 'buy' and where to buy.

They are products (after graduation!), if they are transformed.

They are citizens if they contribute to society; they are parasites if they don't.

They are slaves if they obliged to do what they are told.

They are masters if they can oblige others to do what they want.

They are natural if they are curious and they are inhibited if they are not.

They are sensitive if they care; they are insensitive if they don't.

They are victims if we abuse them; they are bullies if they abuse.

They are good when we praise them, they are bad when we punish them.

(not the other way round - think murderer/soldier or freedom-fighter/terrorist)

They are delightful when we love them and a pain in the neck when we don't.

All these labels do is inform us of the kind of relationships that we perceive between people and their environment. They serve as pigeon-holes so that we don't have to confront the reality which is an infinitely large and seemingly incomprehensible web. Labels won't help us understand the situation better, they will only give us the impression that we do, whilst they create endless problems when reality does not conform to our mentally constructed structures.

But there is a way out of this dilemma. Let's ask ourselves, "What is [or do I want to be] MY specific relationship with this particular human being at this point in time?" Then you are free to choose without preconceptions or wondering what others think the relationship 'should' be.

I suggest that if we focus on our desired outcome, the teaching and learning will look after themselves, irrespective of whether we call them customers or products or anything else.

Francisco, the teacher can not possibly be responsible for "Learning". Learning is internal to each student. We all "Learn" in different ways and combinations. Only when the informatioin provided by the teacher is internalized by the student can we say "Learning" might have taken place. The Teacher can then measure the amount of "Learning" that occured within the student. After all, "Learning" is really "Change". Was I able, as the Teacher, to change the students concept, motor skills, knowledge base, etc.? To what degree was I able to affect this "Change" is all I can measure.

Bijan, yes, focusing on the desired outcome (amount of change "Learning") is the target. If I have my objective (desired outcome), than I can develop the required information into various strategies and delivery methods to get my message to the student in a form and manner that the student might internalize (accept) and act upon.

Let's say that without students, no teachers and no institute. Therefore, the students are both customers and products of the teacher and institute. If the student is high in both quantity and quality, therefore, it reflects the quality of teachers and institute. We have to regard the student as a picture of teacher and institute, in my openion, there is no age related difference in this case.