Michael Albert's autobio mentioned radical teachers who'd simply give you an A. One student successfully brought pressure against Michael because the student argued that the practice made it harder to competitively stand out.
When Michael proctored an econ test, he repeated that the students could ask him any questions. To illustrate the point, he read out one of the test questions, answered it, and explained the answer. That finally got their attention, and they apparently had an interesting learning experience that day. (Not the least because the normal prof was notoriously bad.)
Right now I'm taking Dutch classes, though not with the sane people I would've preferred to teach us. The teacher reproduces the "benevolent dictatorship" that I've often observed in the Netherlands, where underneath the pretense of egalitarianism, teachers and bosses explicitly point out their authority. On the first day, this was mentioned:
"I may say 'Will you please...?' but it's really... what is the
word..."
"A command?"
"Yeah, that's pretty much it."
Regressive and unimaginative. This style leads to disinterest and boredom. I believe people in charge of the direction of their learning tend to be more successful, if they have a motivation to learn the subject.
In fact, the teacher refused to teach one of my coworkers, a very pleasant and friendly Italian, because he made clear what he had no interest in learning. Apparently he'd "poison" the classroom atmosphere.
> BTW, I have come to hate the word "globalization." What does it mean?
I like the different meanings of that word. Hitler was certainly pro-globalization. (Not for the kind of globalization that you or I would favor, but a form of globalization nonetheless.)
Tayssir