在學期開始時我都會向學生強調要盡量閱讀指定的讀物,並且仔細地讀 ,因為光來聽我講書是不足夠的 --- 他們讀哲學不是要同意我的看法,假如認為我講得不對,可以反駁或批評我說的;如果沒讀過我講解的讀物,便很難判斷我講的是對還是錯了。從我的角度看,我很容易知道學生是否已讀了我在講解的讀物,假如大部份學生都沒讀過,我會教得格外吃力;間中有些學生沒看過讀物便隨意在堂上胡謅,便更令我感到煩厭了。
雖然我指定的讀物不多,但總有些學生懶惰,二十篇論文可能看不到四、五篇。幾年前我想到一個方法迫學生閱讀,就是不用他們寫 mid-term
paper,而代之以十篇論文撮要。每篇論文撮要是八百至一千字,十篇就是八千至一萬字了,一個學期只有十五個星期,因此,有時連續兩星期都要寫撮要,不少學生都覺得辛苦;偷懶不做嗎?不交功課就沒分數,而且我還規定欠交超過三篇撮要者會被罰,最後的成績會受影響,所以大部份學生至少交八篇撮要,交足十篇的亦不少。
寫撮要前要先閱讀指定的讀物,撮要馬虎便得低分,就這樣,(懶惰的)學生被我迫得要仔細閱讀約一半的指定讀物。相信會有些學生埋怨我,但每個學期總有兩三個學生在學期末多謝我這樣迫他們,令他們得益不淺。
一小時可以看十頁論文,每星期要看兩篇,也只是四十多頁,才不過四小時,這樣學生也要偷懶?
回覆刪除有些學生同時修五、六課,太辛苦,能偷懶的便偷懶。
刪除Ha.. I was one of those students who took liberal art courses only to fulfill technical degree requirement. In fact, I avoided taking philosophy at cal knowing it would be tough with a lot of work and attended a summer course at a community college. I think both professors and students are suffering from this system of mandatory breath requirement.
回覆刪除I don't think the breadth is broad enough or the breadth requirement is tough; it just takes a lot of time which can be spent on one's major. But one can take (and pass) some AP tests before college to reduce the burden, especially if one attends high school in the USA. Or one can take some summer courses in college. Another way: If one goes for double majors (or degrees) the breadth requirement, after averaging, becomes much lighter.
刪除-zpdrmn
To top post: Cal student huh?
刪除Prof.: How about sharing with us your required reading list? I wanted to check it out. :)
-49er
//I think both professors and students are suffering from this system of mandatory breath requirement.//
刪除- I do think breadth is important. Besides, I enjoy teaching GE classes like Introduction to Philosophy.
//How about sharing with us your required reading list?//
刪除OK. Here it is:
Edmund Gettier, “Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?”
Richard Feldman, “An Alleged Defect in Getter Counterexamples”
Robert Fogelin, “Gettier Problems” (from Pyrrhonian Reflections on Knowledge and Justification)
Earl Conee, “The Truth Connection”
Earl Conee & Richard Feldman, “Evidence”
Richard Feldman, “Having Evidence”
William K. Clifford, “The Ethics of Belief”
William James, “The Will to Belief”
Peter van Inwagen, “It is wrong, everywhere, always, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence”
Nishi Shah, “How Truth Governs Belief”
D. M. Armstrong, "Perception and Belief" (from A Materialist Theory of the Mind)
Fred Dretske, “Sensation and Perception” (from Knowledge and the Flow of Information)
A. J.Ayer, "The Argument from Illusion" (from The Foundations of Empirical Knowledge)
J. L. Austin, Sense and Sensibilia, Chapters III & V
Rene Descartes, “First Meditation”
Barry Stroud, “The Problem of the External World” (from The Significance of Philosophical Scepticism)
Anthony Brueckner, “The Structure of the Skepcial Argument”
Robert Nozick, “Knowledge and Skepticism” (from Philosophical Explanations)
"J. L. Austin, Sense and Sensibilia, Chapters III & V"
刪除In your opinion, which movie abduction is the best? :D
Thanks for the list. I will start by rereading S&S, since on the surface it is the non-philosophical work. I wonder why you had included it.
-49er
That's J. L. Austin, not Jane Austen, and the book is Sense and Sensibilia, not Sense and Sensibility.
刪除Prof., I was teasing, sorry. ;)
刪除-49er
That's all right.
刪除樓上
回覆刪除If my degree of study isn't philosophy, I would probably spend the time on my main subject instead or get some sleep, especially after many all nighters in the lab for other subject.
So you don't think you could be interested in things other than your major subject?
刪除Wong,
回覆刪除I don't want to be your student because of the writing requirement.
If I promise I will read 30 papers, can I be exempted 80% of the writing? You want your students to read anyway. I can record my staring at those papers on videos and hand them in. --zpdrmn.
仲有人揀你呢科嘅?
回覆刪除唔係揀,係一定要修;我教嘅知識論同形上學係哲學系學生必修科。
刪除必修牙,咁就無修lor. --zpdrmn
刪除你呢個方法在而家的港大文學院﹐一定行不通
刪除人家2nd yr先揀major﹐如果大家知哲學系有科必修個教授要人寫10篇1千字讀後感﹐肯定無人揀哲學系讀。
雖然香港的事實本來就是...無咩人會揀哲學讀(爆)
Summary 唔同讀後感呀!好彩你唔係我學生,唔係就俾你激死。
刪除無論係summary定讀後感﹐結果都係無人報
刪除之後會唔會比人cut經費呢﹖我就唔知啦。(爆)
仲有﹐你大可以放心
如果我有機會讀大學的話﹐肯定唔會讀哲學lor
你話啦﹐讀哲學有咩前途可言呢﹖(哀)
的確係冇乜前途,至於你,有冇前途你都唔應該讀,因為你嘅哲學資質唔高(唔等如話你智力唔高或唔夠聰明)。
刪除你只係憑同我網上傾下閒偈﹐你就知我哲學資質唔高
刪除做教授果然唔同D﹐簡直仲勁過風水佬
我想﹐你大概又會瞎扯甚麼文如其人的觀點吧...
學你話齋:不用言說,只能領會。
刪除我睇學生資質真係仲勁過風水佬咖!
資質喎,點睇咖?
刪除//資質喎,點睇咖?// This is how I see it. 資=money. 資質=money is essence. 文少 probably agrees. BTW, 風水佬 only wants your money. --zpdrmn
刪除Yan,
刪除遲些寫篇短文講一講。
唔會係虛心受教 理解力強
刪除新諗頭多 個d衰野啊=.=??
記得寫完篇野提一句
"唔好因為自己符合上文哲學資質條件而自滿
咁樣 你又會變成唔適合讀哲學既人"
警惕大家同自己都好
係 提多句
刪除"就算冇天份 都唔好灰心 你依然可以享受哲學既樂趣"
//Summary 唔同讀後感呀!// Would writing a 900 word 讀後感 be more difficult than writing a summary? --zpdrmn
刪除洗乜玩神秘啊﹖
刪除一個覺得哲學無用﹑覺得教哲學不過是一群熱愛自吹自擂混飯吃的人﹐點會適合讀哲學﹖
仲有﹐而家你唔係睇一個學生的資質﹐係睇緊一個網友﹐一個素未謀面的人﹐請問你點斷定我實際如何﹖
你唔比我查實係你同行﹐我之前講的一切都是老作﹖
//This is how I see it. 資=money. 資質=money is essence.//
刪除哦﹐你發現了一個真理
李嘉誠沒讀過大學﹐一樣拿榮譽社會科學博士同榮譽法學博士
你話啦﹐要做哲學博士﹐洗乜讀書叻先得㗎﹖
呢個世界﹐只有窮鬼先要讀書先做到博士
有錢佬﹐唔讀書都做博士﹐仲要突登搞個頒獎禮來隆重其事~~(爆)
//Would writing a 900 word 讀後感 be more difficult than writing a summary?//
刪除- I don't think so.
//你唔比我查實係你同行﹐我之前講的一切都是老作﹖//
刪除- 如果係咁,我咪判斷錯誤囉。
//你話啦﹐要做哲學博士﹐洗乜讀書叻先得?//
刪除- 做哲學博士仍然要讀書,做榮譽個隻先唔使。
//如果係咁,我咪判斷錯誤囉。//
刪除我成日同你講﹐
甚麼文如其人﹐只有用真名發明的才算準
網上的﹐不可玩這套
不信﹐你看看曹捷早期在左派文藝雜誌寫的文
你都不敢相信這是出自現在化名陶傑的曹捷之手。
//做哲學博士仍然要讀書,做榮譽個隻先唔使。//
刪除這正是香港這個金錢世界弔詭之處
要讀書得來的哲學博士﹐沒甚麼榮譽可言﹐讀的東西很多時被人視作冷知識﹐讀書人被人視作書呆子
不用讀書得來的榮譽博士﹐卻有權有勢﹐視作成功人士﹐大學還要為頒發這些榮譽學位而隆重其事﹐但頒獎禮的開銷﹐卻是由我們貧苦大眾的稅金比的。
我有兩個留這消失了,被丟進垃圾桶?
回覆刪除應該唔係
刪除只係要等一陣先見返個留言
好的方法會有事半功倍的效用,相信王Sir的這個方法比起那些//要學生修一課便讀三、四本巨著,動輒千多頁,很多學生吃不消,...//的方法,更能夠使學生得到事半功倍的效用,對於學生來講,絕對是值回學費和光陰!
回覆刪除貴精不貴多。
刪除