Does Spoon-feeding Impede Independent Learning?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spoon-feeding is a common term which literally means feeding one with a spoon or metaphorically means giving no opportunity for one to think or act for himself. It can also refer to behavioural treatment given to someone that so pampers and compromises self–development. Pedagogically, this behavioural setback may impede independent learning and can deter creativity and innovativeness among the learners in general, and undergraduates in particular. On the other hand, with the advent of on-line learning materials taking centre stage in tertiary education, the ever ready materials at the click of the key serves like manna from heaven for many students at present. Providing learning materials on-line or in class may save time, cost and effort for both facilitators and learners. However, such provision may result in the inhibition of the development of independent thinking and learning. From several literature, educators have varying views about spoon-feeding and this is what the paper attempts to explore. Being educators for more than two decades, the authors believe that independent learning should be proposed via creative teaching and learning and this too will be explored in the paper through weekly teaching-learning activities conducted throughout the semester. Although this act of spoon-feeding in learning has been a choice in providing lecture notes and learning materials to the students, undergraduates can be trained to generate their own learning materials using technology and innovation through creative and committed teaching by the facilitators themselves. Keywords: spoon-feed; independent learning; creative teaching; learning materials Resume: L’alimentation a la cuillere est un terme qui signifie litteralement une alimentation avec une cuillere ou d'une metaphore qui signifie donner aucune occasion a quelqu’un de penser ou d’agir par lui-meme. Il peut egalement se referer a des traitements comportementaux donnes a quelqu'un qui pourraient compromettre le developpement autonome de la personne. Pedagogiquement, ce comportement pouvait entraver l'apprentissage autonome et decourager l'innovation et la creativite chez les apprenants en general, et les etudiants en particulier. D'autre part, avec l'avenement des materiels de l'apprentissage en ligne dans l'enseignement superieur, il suffit de cliquer sur le clavier pour que le materiel tout pret apparaisse comme la manne tombee du ciel pour de nombreux eleves a l'heure actuelle. Fournir des materiels d'apprentissage en ligne ou en classe pouvait gagner du temps, reduire le cout et epargner les efforts a la fois pour les enseignants et les apprenants. Pourtant, une telle disposition pouvait conduire a l'inhibition du developpement de la pensee et de l'apprentissage. Dans plusieurs ouvrages, les educateurs ont deja exprime leurs vues diverses sur la l’alimentation a la cuiller et c'est ce que le document vise a explorer. En tant qu’enseignants depuis plus de deux decennies, les auteurs sont convaincus que l'autonomie d'apprentissage devrait etre proposee par l'enseignement creatif et l'apprentissage creatif et cela aussi sera etudie dans cet article en faisant des analyses sur les activites hebdomadaires de l’enseignement-apprentissage menees tout au long du semestre. Bien que cet acte de l’alimentation a la cuillere dans l'apprentissage a ete un choix de fournir des notes de cours et de materiels d'apprentissage pour les eleves, les enseignants eux-memes pouvaient former les etudiants a creer leurs propres materiels d'apprentissage en utilisant la technologie et l'innovation a travers un enseignement creatif et engage. Mots-Cles: alimentation a la cuillere; apprentissage independant; enseignement creatif; materiels de l’apprentissage
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".