Would you describe the communication in your seminars as scientific or as pedagogic or as something in between? With "scientific" I mean that communication focuses on the difference between valid and invalid arguments/observations on the complexity level of the actual discourse. The educational setting of this scientific communication would of course allow introduction, explanation, moderation and generally a deceleration of processes.
With "pedagogic" I refer to communication that focuses on the questions, how a certain topic could be conveyed, what could be learned from it, how it corresponds with other curricular topics and maybe most importantly: whether it is "suitable" for the learners.
Though I appreciate the increased didactic awareness and competence in academic contexts, I am afraid that we tend to deny university students the "imposition" of scientific communication – we all learned to deal with.
Dear prof. Franz, if its use in adult or university its suppose to be andragogy as pedagogy is for school student. If you say pedagogy as it cover sharing knowledge as part of it in seminar i would say yes.
Communication is part of didactic that concern more on filing up soft skill that we lecturer suppose to encourage and put in our syllabus of teaching where they ask, parcipate answer or present subject that we give. Isn't also a scientific communication in the corridor of teaching learning.
Teaching and learnig of course going to andragogy,didactic and skill enhancement to students prior knowledge and also a tool to make a lecturer better teacher, content deliverer and researcher.
Dear Franz Kasper Krönig !
Working with students in teaching various disciplines, I use both approaches. But at different stages they are related in different ways - at the beginning of the course it’s rather a “pedagogical” approach, a “mid-way” (including practical classes) is “mixed”, in the final part it’s more “scientific”. It is quite possible, by the way, to develop a model that demonstrates such an approach, for example, on the basis of Markov chains, and to show (evaluate) the effectiveness of such an approach in simulation options with different correlation indicators ("transition probabilities"). Perhaps even a good article would turn out, Viktor D Gogunsky ? ;)
I work to make the communication scientific.This is an article on this topic - "Distribution of project team members’ roles based on their psychotypes when using heuristic methods". http://cejsh.icm.edu.pl/cejsh/element/bwmeta1.element.desklight-f76a46c2-52d3-4832-acdd-9faa6c67de70
Abstract
The relationships between psychotypes of the individual in accordance with the MBTI when using heuristic methods are considered. We have developed heuristic method – generalized method of activation of creative activity. This method includes heuristics used in a specific sequence: brainstorming; separated in time advancing ideas and criticism; the use of random associations; the use of four types of analogies; preparation of the matrix; the use of expert evaluations. During brainstorming potential «moderators» ENTJ, ESTJ and «critics» ISTP, INTP, INTJ set goals and discuss constraints. It is important to choose a moderator and brainstorming group of project team of three to nine people. Brainstorming on choosing two classes of features should be made. Group of critics includes from three to five people with psychotypes: ESTJ, ENTP, ENTJ, ISTP, INTP, and INTJ. Part of the brainstorming group must necessarily be among the group of «critics», but among critics should be some members of the project team who haven’t participated in the discussion. The final decision on the choice of two classes of features take the «experts», mainly from the psychotypes ISTJ, ENFP and also ENTJ, ESTJ. The proposed new ideas are selected using the technique of expert evaluation, which is implemented in the first place, the team members with psychotypes ISTJ, ENFP and also ESTJ, which tend to have strategic vision of problems. When searching for a new solution an effective technique is using matrices. For example, in columns of matrix are properties of the machine, and in row of matrix are machine units. Drafting of the matrix should be entrusted with ISTJ and INTP. All selected combinations are divided into four types: existing solutions implemented for this type of task; unrealizable solutions; the existing solutions, but that have not been implemented; solutions that are possible in principle, but to implement them it’s necessary to solve more complex problem than our tasks. Combinations of the third group for further consideration are selected. Combinations, for which it was possible to obtain a solution, are compared, and final decision is taken with the help of the expert assessments technique. Combinations for which it is possible to obtain a solution, comparing, and final decision is taken using the reception of expert evaluation. This task should be entrusted with INTP and ENTP, which have a good logical thinking, and also “closer” ISTJ.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Higher Education
- Universities