At my 4-year university, I often muse on how I could access the building plans for the classrooms, because I am sure each classroom door has a special field built into it that causes the students' minds to be wiped of all their classroom experience when they exit the room. Here is a classic example. At one time, I was teaching a series of 3 x 10-week information security classes, one right after the other, and had the same small cohort of students in each. The students were at the 300-level of instruction, so presumably they had mastered study and… >>>

The overlying assumption in this sort of topic, which is something familiar to me over long standing, is that somehow the material needs to be adapted to the students, so their intelligence types and learning styles are maximized. Of course, in a lot of cases, this is exactly what should happen. Not in all, however. It seems to me incredible that someone who is not verbal/linguistic could be successful in the practice of law, since that is the core of the profession. Which in turn means that trying to 'juice' law studies up by appealing to other intellectual styles is… >>>

I have been teaching in the nontraditional adult education environment for over a decade, and I think some things have changed: * The idea of "career change" is less attractive than it once was, particularly in the context of a 'package' of easily-learned classes which will enable the student to start on a high-paying career [IT was the model for this]. * "Adult" comfort with technology has increased greatly -- most people who come to university now have experience with computers and the InterNet. * The development of portable devices enabling instant and constant contact, supported by social networking software,… >>>