| 1 |
On 24 May 2016 at 11:19, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov <gentoo@×××.name> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> As a father of 3 kids, I'd say: if you'll teach while feeding, he would say |
| 4 |
> "yes, I understand", but will not really study anything, and would *claim* you |
| 5 |
> to feed him again next time... |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Sure, that is a risk, but its kinda different with kids. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
A smart person knows the benefit of knowing how to do a thing themselves. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
If they ignore your teaching, and they don't learn the first time, |
| 13 |
then its on them the second. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Sure, when "Teaching only" you have the advantage that they need to |
| 16 |
participate in order to get their fish. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
But a manipulative lazy learner could exploit the learning exercise to |
| 19 |
get a fish, and then not actually learn anything, and still come back |
| 20 |
to you the next time. ;) |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Its a matter of knowing when you're being played, and then giving |
| 23 |
restrictions in response to that. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Instead of .... assuming everyone to be lazy / uncaring / manipulative |
| 27 |
before they've even had a chance. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
And there's no way anybody can be commanded to provide this service, |
| 30 |
its volunteer effort after all. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Just like there's no requirement anybody respond and teach them. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
( And some people you can waste a lot of time on, trying to show them |
| 35 |
the way, and they will still disappoint you, and some will promptly |
| 36 |
forget after they get it right the first time, and require |
| 37 |
re-educating a second .... while others, they require doing the thing |
| 38 |
themselves at least once in order to learn ) |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
-- |
| 41 |
Kent |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
KENTNL - https://metacpan.org/author/KENTNL |
Archives