Properly learned vs. properly taught : What's the difference ?

[m19834]

Of course, the title suggests that there is a difference.  I think it's very possible to be improperly taught, but despite that, it is possible to properly learn in the very same circumstances.  Also, it is possible to be "properly taught" but not have the lesson properly learned, in the very same circumstances.  And, I think the difference between approaching a subject with a desire to learn vs. approaching a subject with the desire of being taught is at first subtle, but at last, paramount. 


What do you think about that ?

[Bob]

Mostly wording. 

Just being taught doesn't mean you got it though.

[m19834]

Well, actually I think it's a very "deep" issue and not just wording; it's a very big difference in concept for a teacher as well as for a student.  I know people whom have actually properly learned subjects but they don't recognize it, because they intellectually know that they were never properly "taught."  That's HUGE, actually. 

This sense of being improperly taught can bring insecurities in places where they shouldn't be, since the lessons have actually been properly learned (but are unrecognized because of a difference in concept), and these insecurities can be terribly inhibiting -- when there is no need for them !

The ability to recognize when something has been properly learned, independently of whether or not it was properly taught, is paramount in a musician's dependence on one's own ability and relationship with music.

Also, for a student to approach a subject/lesson with a desire to learn, vs. a desire to be taught (though they may not recognize the difference at the time), gives an entirely different emphasis to the process.  There is also a difference in emphasis for the teacher working with the individual student.

[Bob]

Ok, ok.  You should be teaching college.

[keypeg]

I don't have time to work this thorugh on paper.  First thought is - Can it happen that a student has the right idea, but then doubts himself and unlearns it, because it was improperly taught?  Can it happen that a student's instinct leads to the right place, he verbalizes it wrong, or doesn't understand the teacher, and then gets caught in an internal conflict by trying to force himself what is wrong - becuase now he believes this wrong is right?

[m19834]

Can it happen that a student has the right idea, but then doubts himself and unlearns it, because it was improperly taught?

In some respect I actually don't believe in "teaching" -- I think there is only presentation and learning.  A teacher is basically there to present information, to plant seeds, and help/support the germination and sprouting process as the student learns.  The student, however, is the host of the presented information, and that says a lot !  I wonder what are the bees that carry a pollen from one person to another ?  There's actually something magic there that is not truly within the control of either teacher nor student. 

But in any case, once something is learned, it is learned (the idea has matured).  However, during the germination and sprouting process, doubt can enter in and if these stages were improperly supported, then yes, the right idea can go dormant... until the right circumstances find it again and bring it back to life.

Can it happen that a student's instinct leads to the right place, he verbalizes it wrong, or doesn't understand the teacher, and then gets caught in an internal conflict by trying to force himself what is wrong - becuase now he believes this wrong is right?

Yes, sure.  But in this case, the right thing is not learned yet -- however, there are a number of things that can happen in that scenario.  A seed may be planted, it may even germinate, but it finds rocky soil just above and the sprouting process is delayed.  I believe that if something has truly been planted, has truly germinated, it will eventually force its way through -- if not one way, then through another.  So, eventually the inner conflict, the rocky soil, it will become too great for the idea to stay in the same place.  Sometimes this means that a student changes teachers, sometimes it means they go out on their own ... it could mean a lot of things. 

But, it is these planted ideas, trying to take form, trying to sprout, that may lead a student into other grounds.  In this case, even if the concept was poorly presented (and poorly supported) -- the lesson will eventually be properly learned.  If the idea's host is in earnest and seeks to find answers, well, that is some kind of search for food and water.  The host will probably walk through deserts to find it, and during that process, that which was unhelpful, or improperly presented, it will fall by the wayside -- because, let's face it, it's quite a journey to be lugging around bags of garbage !

Ideas can be poorly presented, but the fabric that makes the idea valuable will survive and may even be carried by an invisible, magic bee to the learner, despite the poor presentation.

[keypeg]

Supposing that what the student did was correct, or what the student was about to do was correct, but that student is misled.  The student fights his own impulses that would lead to the correctness, because of the overriding belief that what was taught (wrongly) or misunderstood wrongly and followed, was right.  Nothing can germinate as long as that belief is held.

[m19834]

Supposing that what the student did was correct, or what the student was about to do was correct, but that student is misled.  The student fights his own impulses that would lead to the correctness, because of the overriding belief that what was taught (wrongly) or misunderstood wrongly and followed, was right.  Nothing can germinate as long as that belief is held.

Well, yes and no.  Theoretically speaking, I would agree but practically speaking, I would disagree.  We are actually misled every day of our entire lives -- we are constantly being told what will make us happy, how we should live and what we should like.  Yet, we actually have to find that out for ourselves, as it turns out.  We each have to come to terms with life and what it is and there is nothing in the universe that will spare us this.  We are misled, yet those who are seeking truth still seek it, despite being misled.  So, what is within us that makes us search despite our inability to clearly see ?  Something has already taken place for us to know desire.  I think, in a sense, desire is the germination taking place despite what the circumstances are prescribing for us.

However, I think that our "growth" as we experience it, is basically trading one belief for another -- one after another -- each belief will be outgrown by the next.  There is a need to give up the old and take on the new, but there is something inside of us that causes this to actually happen.

[keypeg]

A day or so you posted a statement in a thread that had a larger story around it, too complex to put into a post. That is the case in my post here.  I am no longer writing generally.  This affair is no longer as straightforward when teachers and students are involved.  Inherent is the need for the student to trust the teacher's judgement more than his own, and in that context the scenario I described is not so easy.

[m19834]

And what, exactly, is easy about any of this ?  And what has what you have posted have anything at all to do with anything I have posted ?

[keypeg]

There is nothing easy about any of this.  [edit] For # 2 I was trying to explain my thoughts by relating to something you had written elsewhere.  But that won't work - never mind.

I find I cannot express myself because the subject has triggered some experiences.  I could write a book which would be incoherent, or I can't write.  So I'm stuck with the latter until I have words.

[m19834]

Well, what I realized is that some people do indeed wish to learn, but they do not wish to be taught.  Do you suppose there to be an inherent discrepancy between those desires ?

[Essyne]

Well, what I realized is that some people do indeed wish to learn, but they do not wish to be taught.  Do you suppose there to be an inherent discrepancy between those desires ?

Yes.

If you truly desire to LEARN, then you will suck it up, eliminate your gigantic ego, and LEARN to be coachable.

[keypeg]

Provided that the teaching is correct and not harmful -  i.e. choose your teacher with care.  There is a companion thread to this one on "loyalty".

[m19834]

Provided that the teaching is correct and not harmful -  i.e. choose your teacher with care.  There is a companion thread to this one on "loyalty".

Well, just for the record, I actually have not intended for these threads that you mention to be related, though for you they may be (and of course, there is some connection with it all anyway).  But, I personally did not intend to have them be "companion" threads and would have specified as such if that's what I had intended.

As a matter of fact, my take in this thread is more about the false idea of "teaching" in general, and my thoughts on preferring to emphasize the learning aspect of teacher/student interaction, rather than the "teaching" aspect.  And, I have actually already posted about my "take" on what a teacher's role is.  Obviously that can be interpreted in whatever ways it will be, but so far I wouldn't say that my idea of this is the same as Essyne's, for example.

[keypeg]

You are right, Karli. The connection is a personal one that exists in my mind becuase of my personal experiences and how differing things came together for me.  I realized yesterday that I am still much too deeply involved in whatever is happening and cannot post with a clear mind yet.  If I end up posting jumbled thoughts I had better wait for them to unjumble.

[pianodan]

To me it boils down to this - you can "teach" a student something (ie piece, scale, etc) and the result can be very good for that individual "thing". On the other hand you can teach a "process", "formula", etc and get very good results not only for that individual "thing" but also, by transferring these skills, you can achieve great results for other "things" as well. It also builds a student's trust in you if they can see how "things" are put together - if they trust in the "'process" then they can understand how it is possible for two performers to arrive at different interpretations for the same piece (and have the tools to critique these differing performances). They also have more confidence in their own work. If you are just taught to play each piece one particular way because it is the "right" way you are being seriously short-changed in your lessons. Don't learn the piece - learn how to learn!!!!   

[dan101]

Students who are eager will hopefully emulate a good teacher's study habits. When a teacher shares how he/she practices, students pick up on these things. If the preaching has a solid foundation, then the students have a better chance of becoming efficient learners.

Of course, much depends on how well the student listens. This is not always easy to predict as proper listening skills have variables that may be beyond a teacher's control (medical, home circumstances, etc.).