Hello Attia et al.: I think that at one time, our students ask:

'How do I do this?'

'How do I calculate this?'

'How do I get the right results?'

'How can I get high scores?'

By doing this (asking HOW) we are getting 'technicians', although they may be highly skilled technicians. BUT we are moving to WHY. When we ask WHY, we are getting the bigger picture and our understanding expands. Do you all agree?

Not all educational researchers and policymakers are united on the value of progressive education and "why"-style instruction

Unfortunately its true. But there is some progress. Hopefully things will change over the next decade or so.

Hello Attia et al.: I think that at one time, our students ask:

'How do I do this?'

'How do I calculate this?'

'How do I get the right results?'

'How can I get high scores?'

By doing this (asking HOW) we are getting 'technicians', although they may be highly skilled technicians. BUT we are moving to WHY. When we ask WHY, we are getting the bigger picture and our understanding expands. Do you all agree?

Thank you Attia for asking such a pertinent question.. I am not sure if this is simply eastern and western education styles that are different.. it may also be dependant on the educational philosophy being followed...

in an ideal world, the strategies to teach and assess are determined by the outcomes of a program.. so if our outcomes are to make our students critical thinkers (asking why!) we will have to incorporate this concept not only in the way we teach, but also how we assess these students...

its a big change that actually has to start at smallscale, and no doubt quite difficult to implement... any suggestions as to how we can bring this change in the current educational set-up concentrating on how?

regards, raza

Iteresting question, but I am not sure that you are right for all areas of education. For example at medical universities in my country we as educators are always criticized from our students that they study much more “why” instead of “how” compared to the “western” world. And remember that you also are “western” for the part of the world to the east of you.

My experience tells my students are focused in Why than or in How. I can see the remains of industrial revolution still in the education of my country. i feel it is product of adapting "other's education system", to create managers/ clerks to run the business even not for us, for them. I find the students searching answer of why to get educated rather than how. i feel they are product oriented than the process.

As a country of Indian subcontinent, i find the colonizing effect of westerners still in the education of my country. Moving forward, society observes "education" as a tool to get employment nothing more than that. Society is engineered in such a way that if you get college degree, then you will get job. So teachers, students and society do not need anything to focus on HOW as a process.

I agree with Maxim Kotsemir. I was at a leadership training this past Thursday and we discussed this from a psychological and teaching perspective. It was mentioned that Eastern students are taught to gather new information using their pre-frontal cortex and storing that information into their basal ganglia to retrieve it during tests. Western students are more critical thinkers. As a result, Western student become inventors while Eastern students perfect the invention. Now, it seems both education systems are switching. Western education wants to focus on testing while Eastern education focuses on critical thinking. Which is correct? There is a happy middle!

What makes one of the various reasons is the relationship between students and professors:

In our study "Learning Culture" (I have several papers linked here in Researchgate) where we investigated students' attitudes and behavior in Higher Education in South Korea and Germany, we fund out that the way how students in South Korea understand the role of the professor is significantly different to how the German understand it.

As for the Korean students, 75 % stated that the professor is an unfailing person while almost 70 % of the German students were of the exactly opposite opinion.

In my own experiences (in both countries), South Korean students primarily get taught solutions that perfectly fit to a particular problem. They learn step by step how to use this method and will always have a good-very good solution. The general concept of education is process-oriented: The result anyways will be perfect if you use a particular method. In contrast, the German students receive a lot of different methods during their study (in terms of a toolset) and then, are confronted with the task to to solve a selected problem by choosing a suitable method from the "tool box". However, non of these taught methods will perfectly fit and thus needs to be modified by the students. In this context, the German students must explain why they chose the particular method and why they modified the method in the way they did (and why this modification is appropriate). Here, the general concept of education is target-oriented: A certain problem has to be solved, the way to get there is unclear, and the students must find it.

Coming back to the students' understanding of the professors' role ... if a professor can not fail in teaching perfectly working methods, it would be highly inappropriate if the students start to modify the method: This is the same as to criticize the professor which is understood as showing a lack of respect. The German students, in contrast, are taught not to believe anything but instead, to put everything into question: in this context, respect for the professor is not necessarily related to his/her position, role, and reputation but much more to his/her actions.

Further indicators for the correctness of my statement are the results from the study's question block on when teaching particular contents is motivating. Over 81 % of the Korean students stated that learning is motivating if the taught contents are directly related to the exams and still the majority of the students said that the demand of the professor to learn a particular aspect is enough to motivate. The German students, in contrast, did not agree with either of those statements (whereas the demand from the professor explicitly was rejected as a motivating factor) but said that for them, learning is motivating when they can choose aspects themselves which actually are interesting for them (82 %; this opportunity just 66 % of the Korean students found motivating).

However, there is a development in South Korea towards a more target-oriented (there could be a discussion on which approach is target and which process oriented - it depends on the perspective which is introduced above) approach. Many professors (who studied and taught abroad) said that they are trying to change the current state of the art but there are some odds to overcome: Firstly, the more traditional thinking professors would like to keep everything as it is, because a change would also mean more work and less respect basing on the position (respect would have to be earned, again and again). Also at least many students seem to like the current system since it makes learning for examinations quite easy: Students know exactly hat the have to learn and can memorize the contents. This would change if they had to have a more competence-oriented education (instead of knowledge/ability-oriented).

As a rough overview on the "Learning Culture" study, my article in EURODL could be recommended (open access journal): http://www.eurodl.org/index.php?article=460

I am still looking for partners worldwide (also for countries where studies already have taken place) who are able and willed to distribute the online survey amongst their students. For this purpose, just an e-Mail would have to be sent to the university's students (if possible, involving all students; else we have no representative data!) which contains the link to the questionnaire. For every university, an own instancy of the questionnaire is set up in the national language.

As for now, there are language versions available in German, English, French, Korean, Russian, Bulgarian, Greek, Japanese, and the translation to Portuguese is almost finalized (the list reflects the schedule of translation). Further translations are planned, but also here, support is required.

So, if someone is willed and able to support the study, I would highly welcome any kind of initiative and invite you to contact me. Particularly countries that are culturally not homogenous (e.g., different languages are spoken in different parts, such as, Cameroon), are still needed for determining limitations (the scope of the study's results).

Of course, I am willed to share, present, and discuss the results with any partners.

All my best,

Thomas