Re: [OPE-L] marx's conception of labour

From: Dogan Goecmen (Dogangoecmen@AOL.COM)
Date: Fri Nov 17 2006 - 12:53:02 EST

In einer eMail vom 17.11.2006 15:06:06 Westeuropäische Normalzeit schreibt  

I don't.  I have lecture notes for my classes but I don't plan  my
lectures step by step before putting them into practice.  To  begin
with, I like to have a certain flexibility in the classroom.  Often  
my (incomplete) plan is changed to accommodate the interests of
students and the unpredictable dynamic of  discussion in the 
classroom. I don't expect that the class will proceed in an 
entirely planned and predictable manner.  I don't think that  the
implementation of a lecture plan in a step-by-step sequence is  a particularly
progressive forms of learning either.  Furthermore, it doesn't  take
into account the 'learning by doing' process whereby one
learns about teaching through the praxis of teaching and the
interaction with students.   One has to also recognize that  contemporary 
events outside of the classroom can change the 'lesson plan'.    Too 
much planning of lectures  and -- worse yet -- a rigid application  of the 
lecture plan makes for dull classes, imo.  Unplanned  'digressions' can 
also enliven a classroom: e.g. if students are having a good time,  engaged,
and laughing then they are much more likely to be attentive and  learn.

Jerry, I agree with you that to much planing can prove to be unproductive.  
Plans are there to be changed permanently while putting into practice. But the  
fact that you have some lecture notes shows that you have some rough idea or 
a  frame  frameworke of your lecture that your are going to deliver.  How  
much planing is needed depends on the nature of the work in question. If you are  
going to make a public speach, say, on the Iraque war before the white house 
you  can hardly do that just by taking some notes. Or take a pilot preparing a 
 flight. Can he/she say I have some rough idea of my destination and leave 
the  rest to chance or has he/she to prepare everything very accurately?

I guess I must be  non-systematically dialectical.  
The dialectic approach, as it is  applied to theory, must
take into account some  contradictory realities associated
with presenting theory.  To  begin with, regardless of the
conception that one has about how  it all fits together, 
the actual process of writing and  exposition often leads to a
modification of the original  theoretical conception.  Also,
the process of research is an  ongoing process and this affects
the presentation of theory.   For instance, when one is writing 
one learns about more sources and  empirical data and this
can lead one to alter the final  'architecture' of the theoretical

But before you started doing a research you had some rough idea of what you  
want to research. I know one finds his/her way trough often in the process of  
research. But if you want to read, say, on the debate about global justice  
would you go out and spend hours and hours on reading, say, about the  surface 
of a planent or something like that?
Thank you for your comments

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 30 2006 - 00:00:06 EST