Direct instruction

Revision as of 18:24, 11 December 2019 by Woz (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Direct instruction means explicit teaching, for example, where a teacher delivers a lecture in front of a class. Direct instruction is highly inefficient unless voluntarily chosen by the student (with the guidance of the learn drive). Proponents of direct instruction use bogus benchmarks such as PISA tests to claim that direct instruction works. Others use misconstrued evolution to claim direct instruction is indispensable. In reality, direct instruction stands in violation of the Fundamental law of learning. As such it suppresses the learn drive, creativity, innovation, and problem solving capacity. It contributes to the hate of school. To contrast direct instruction with his constructionism, education pioneer Seymour Papert used a somewhat derogatory term instructionism. He emphasized that in free learning, children naturally gravitate towards constructionism (i.e. learning semantically in a dendritic manner).

This glossary entry is used to explain "I would never send my kids to school" (2017-2024) by Piotr Wozniak

For more see:

Exponential acceleration in free learning
Exponential acceleration in free learning

Figure: Exponential acceleration in free learning: The illusive superiority of direct instruction underlies the Prussian model of schooling. The immediately observable advantage in achieving set goals is wrongly translated to a strategy for achieving long-term goals, such as well-rounded education. Explosive accelerations are a norm in free learning, unschooling or in democratic schools. The main reason why this explosive educational property is marginalized is the lack of human control over the accomplished goals. The problem is most pronounced in societies with poor emphasis on freedom, and high emphasis on discipline, homogeneity, social order, and the like