The Relative Wisdom of Tough Love Pedagogy

I tried posting something similar this yesterday morning and it did not work; forgive me if this ends up posted twice--

Walker’s comments reminded me of a conversation I had,

An uppeclassman friend recommended that I take this class. She is, as the hypo describes, Ivy League, through and through. She is also a self-described corporate sell-out, and was before she got here. She took this class in a previous year, and, as Anja would predict, is now heading off to an “important” law firm, unshaken from the role she brought with her to law school.

We, like drunks with lamp-posts, may use this class for support as well as illumination. Most of us are firmly ensconced in our own roles, and only looking for evidence that we are playing our roles well. However, those who are in a transition between roles – questioning their prior values, as in the hypo – are probably vulnerable and feel they are far out a limb. Tough pedagogy might be bad for them.

I do not think that is who the tough-love education is for, however. The “tough love pedagogy” might be directed at shaking us hard enough that the limb looks a little better. I think tough love as a pedagogical style probably becomes dangerous only when a professor cannot discern whether she is dealing with a student hanging to a lamp-post or out on a limb. If for no other reason, this makes me glad we are proceeding with our third paper as we began.

-- AndrewMcCormick - 09 Apr 2009