Re: What's in a name?

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 97-08-15 20:03:54 EDT, anarvaez@umd5.umd.edu writes:

<< On Fri, 15 Aug 1997 Dinogeorge@aol.com wrote:
  
 > Some people imagine that this process lowers the children's self-esteem,
and
 > we all know that having self-esteem is >far< more important than knowing
 > anything...
 
 Reading between the lines, one might think that DinoGeorge believes that
 promoting self-esteem contributes to lower SAT scores. A good teacher can
 promote good self-esteem and still prepare students for any career from
 film-making to astrophysics.>>

I'd say this the other way around: A good teacher can prepare students for
any career from film-making to astrophysics and still promote good
self-esteem.

<< Knowledge and self-esteem are not mutually exclusive.>>

Knowledge and accomplishment BREED self-esteem. This is not the kind of
"self-esteem" (note quote marks here) I was referring to in my previous post,
of course.

<< If we took all of the students out of our schools who don't
 want to be there (as happens in some cultures), then no doubt the SAT
 scores would go up. The crime rate would probably go up, too, but that's
 beside the point. >>

The point is to make the students WANT to be in school, to make them WANT to
learn stuff. And I'm not advocating the "teacher as entertainer" paradigm
that is so prevalent now. (Hey, kids! Watch >this< experiment! Wow!)