One of basic assumptions of college edu cation is that students will help each other. Obvi ously, it is more economical to teach students in groups rather than one at a time, but another reason for having students study in classes is that they will be in a position to be mutually helpful. It seems, however, that this opportunity is largely missed by many students. They come to be competitors rather than cooperators. Our grad ing and honor point system tends to make lone wolves of students. Indeed, heavy penalties are often threatened if students undertake to be helpful to each other. There is much evidence, on other hand, that college students have more than their share of basic human impulse to be helpful in mat ters of mutual concern. In any class, regardless of measures to encourage or to discourage coopera tion, small groups or pairs of students will be observed to ply each other earnestly with ques tions and advice. Most of us will grant that bull sessions at soda fountain, in students' rooms, or in casual meetings on campus did as much to advance our education as many college classes were able to do. A good deal has been written lately concerning phenomenon commonly labeled dynam ics. The principles have been widely applied, particularly to group situations in which changes of attitude and realization of new concepts are among chief objectives. The so-called shop plan relies on development of a high standard of cooperation among members of group, and this approach has recently become very widely adopted in teacher education and in-service work with teachers. Kelley (5, p. 77) in describing workshop way of learning says that two way communica (in contrast to traditional one way lecture) is in keeping with democratic ideal, which recognizes, not only worth of each indi vidual, but also fact that each individual in a group knows something that no one else knows and can contribute something no one else can contribute. The workshop helps to reduce barriers between members of group and to build up confidence, each in himself and in his associates in group. Thus communication becomes natural and free. Rasey in This Is Teaching (8, p. 5) says: Teachers do not educate. They are bystanders. It is experience that educates. We facilitate learner's experiencing so that he becomes more skilled in living and learning. At least it must seem to student that such a skilled leader as Dr. Rasey has given way as center of interest in class in favor of students and their real concerns. The great skill required of one who is to be such a bystander successfully can be ap preciated only by those who have tried to teach in workshop way. The objectives and ideals of method are pretty well accepted. It is art of doing it that we need to learn. Whitehead (9, p. 139) speaks of function of a university in preserving the connection be tween knowledge and zest of life, by uniting young and old in imaginative considera tion of learning. I should think that conclud ing phrase of that quotation is key. There would be very little use in uniting youth and age in a way that would deny this potential of coop eratively stimulated imagination. Perhaps one of basic implications of an attempt to stimulate greater cooperation among students in process of their own education is that heavily dominant personality of teacher shall give way to a teacher-inspired self respect and personal dignity on part of individual students. Cantor (1, p. 252) declares that college students do not like to be spoon-fed : If they are sincerely respected, with all their indi vidual differences, they will become self-respecting. If each one is made to feel that he or she counts, an effort to justify such confidence will be made. The positive constructive self of student, often deeply hidden behind timidity, inadequacy, or ag gressiveness, should have chance to show itself.
Read full abstract