How
and what methods should be used to feed the minds of young learners has been a
matter of research and discussion for many. This, for years, has given rise to
an unceasing debate of choosing between practical and theoretical knowledge, especially
when some European nations have begun imparting practical expertise to the
students before or at the time of entering into their teenage. The arguments
exploring both the aspects and my view are discussed in the ensuing paragraphs.
A
child at a tender age grasps teaching easily if accompanied with a realistic
approach. Scientific findings, textbooks and personal experiences evidence that
a picture or a real apple shown to a child makes him learn A for Apple in a
better way than just repeating the word. It also stays in the memory for a
longer time compared to what is just read.
On the same hand, some complex theories or working of an instrument or
gadget by default needs a firsthand experience. For instance, operating a
computer demands using it and not just knowing how it functions through books
or manual.
However,
with a vague knowledge of a topic, putting it into practice can turn out to be
dangerous. More, when it is done at a comparatively younger age. An eleven year
student is not much mature to undertake experiments of Chemistry and Biology as
he or she lacks the basic understanding of the subject; its safety, use and
precautions. As a result, recruiting such immature pupil proves to be a risk at
job.
To
cap it all, I believe that both the approaches of teaching have their own
benefits and should be provided keeping in mind not only the easiness of
getting a work in the future but also the age and the level of a child.
No comments:
Post a Comment