Learning and Teaching and Learning
This week, the Minister published a new announcement through the media. The headline: “Hekia Parata – Let’s make learning better.”
For whatever reason, this completely grated with all sense and sensibility within me. Something just didn’t ring right grammatically.
I’ve heard “Let’s make teaching better” before (all the time) as the powers that be whip and flog teachers who are already doing their darndest to keep a level head, and keep it above surface level (at least once in a while so they can take a breath).
But I don’t think you can just switch the verb to learning and it make sense. Someone with
The term switch
Learning is defined by Merriam-Webster as “the activity or process of gaining knowledge or skill by studying, practicing, being taught, or experiencing something : the activity of someone who learns.”
Teaching is defined as “the job or profession of a teacher, and something that is taught : the ideas and beliefs that are taught by a person…”
Learning is therefore the acquisition of knowledge, while Teaching is the imparting of knowledge. The two are direct opposites and so when used in a sentence such as “Let’s make learning better”, we start to question what is actually meant by that.
How on earth?
How do we make the acquisition of knowledge better? Sure – imparting knowledge in different ways is possible, but to change how knowledge or experiences is acquired – is that even possible? Are we not, as humans, limited to how we can gain knowledge, through our 5 senses? Touch, Hear, Sight, Smell, Taste? Is this not the extent of how we can learn? And how does one make this better? Obviously, vision and hearing impaired students have glasses and hearing aids to assist with these learning facets we have.
Is the Minister asking for schools to increase the rate of so-called evolution so that we can learn better?
Or have we now resorted to student bashing instead of teacher bashing?
Is the emphasis shift all part of making the student at the centre?
Is ‘ako’ to blame for this?
For decades now, the way to make what you have to say more authentic and culturally sensitive, it has become custom to translate certain words from English into Māori. Whilst that may be a very cynical view of things, and possibly the initial use of such terms was genuine, we have built a series of terms that we now use in common New Zealand speak. Terms such as whanau, mana, and in education, akonga and ako.
Ako itself means “teaching and learning”, and educationalists around the country jumped on it and spread it amongst the myriads of documents. It was one of the first Māori terms introduced in our university papers when learning about teaching and education.
Does this mean that teaching and learning are synonymous?
Not at all. Whilst the Māori use the same term for both, the context in which they do is what provides the meaning (as it does for other terms as well – for example puku can mean secret or silent, as well as, fasting, to swell, or to intensify a quality such as pukuriri which means “furious” – riri means angry.) There are terms in English as well that we know to mean different things.
No. Teaching and Learning are not interchangeable just to sound smart. They are opposites. Like inhaling and exhaling. Up and Down, Square and Circle.
The minister and others should stop trying to sound smart and stop confusing the matter.