Keith asked a few weeks ago about whether teaching reasoning skills meets
with resistance.  I am certain it does, since most students will dislike
uncertainty, departures from the norm, and having to actually think and
analyze when they are only trained to memorize and recall recipe-book
style.  If one is concerned about popularity and ratings, I wouldn't
experiment with higher order thinking skills.  Again, it may come down to
doing what one thinks is right versus what is expedient.  Sorry, if that
sounds fatalistic, but I think it is realistic.
 
I've always been interested in how we only look at the shopping list of law
topics when we grant advance credit for a course, for study taken at
another institution.  We have no idea whether the student actually learned
anything meaningful in that list, and it perpetuates the notion that
content is more important than thinking skill.  One might be as interested
in "how" one learned, as we are in "what" one learned.
 
Finally, we sure seem to emphasize coming up with solutions, and never seem
to get around to developing astute question-asking ability in students.  I
am disappointed at how people cannot spot issues and frame questions.  How
many come up with really good questions for their research papers on their
own?  Do many come up with their own examples to illustrate a concept?
 
Cheers,
 
Peter Bowal
University of Calgary