ChaseDream
搜索
12345下一页
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 4638|回复: 41

[阅读小分队] 【Native Speaker每日综合训练—40系列】【40-11】文史哲

[复制链接]
发表于 2014-8-17 07:55:19 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
内容:枣糕兔 编辑:AceJ

公益申请名额,每月一名(链接:http://forum.chasedream.com/thread-884226-1-1.html)


Stay tuned for our latest post! Follow us here ---> http://weibo.com/u/3476904471






Part I: Speaker

Learning to Act

Richard: It’s 6:30 a.m. on Saturday morning. Why are you banging those pots and pans?
Elizabeth: I have an audition coming up and I’m rehearsing.
Richard: By banging pots and pans?
Elizabeth: I’m up for a part as a 1950s housewife. I need to learn my lines and be prepared to improvise. That’s why I’m cooking you a 10-course breakfast. I want to practice staying in character.
Richard: I don’t really want a 10-course breakfast, but if it helps you with your audition...
Elizabeth: It will. I have to stretch my acting chops and really get into the head of the character.
Richard: Right. Whatever you say.
Elizabeth: “Yes, dear. Your breakfast will be ready and waiting when you want it.” Did I project enough? Did I emote enough?
Richard: You were great. What kind of acting job is this?
Elizabeth: It’s a small one.
Richard: In a film?
Elizabeth: No.
Richard: In a TV show?
Elizabeth: Not exactly.
Richard: What is it?
Elizabeth: It’s a commercial. It’s only a bit part, but you know what they say: There are no small parts, only small actors!

Source: ESLpod
http://www.eslpod.com/website/show_podcast.php?issue_id=15491396

[Rephrase 1, 19’26]

本帖子中包含更多资源

您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看,没有帐号?立即注册

x
 楼主| 发表于 2014-8-17 07:55:20 | 显示全部楼层
Part II: Speed




A teacher’s job is to lead forth the powers that lie asleep within his students.
(Photo courtesy of Shutterstock)

Spirit Guides
——Students crave emotional mentorship from their teachers that their parents can’t give them. There’s nothing wrong with that.
William Deresiewicz

This article is excerpted from Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite and The Way to a Meaningful Life by William Deresiewicz. Out Aug. 19, from Free Press.

[Time 2]
If you want a good education, you need to have good teachers. It seems ridiculous to have to say as much, but such is the state that matters have reached, both in academia and in the public conver­sation that surrounds it, that apparently we do. Between the long-term trend toward the use of adjuncts and other part-time faculty and the recent rush to online instruction, we seem to be deciding that we can do without teachers in college altogether, at least in any meaningful sense. But the kind of learning that college is for is sim­ply not possible without them.

Teaching is not an engineering problem. It isn’t a question of transferring a certain quantity of information from one brain to another. “Educate” means “lead forth.” A teacher’s job is to lead forth the powers that lie asleep within her students. To put it in the language of computers, you can download all the data you want, but it won’t be any good to you unless you have the software to make use of it. That software, the ability to operate on information—to understand it, to synthe­size it into new combinations, to discover and create with it—is what college is meant to “install.” But here the analogy breaks down, for unlike actual software, the installation isn’t quick and easy, and it certainly isn’t passive.

Thinking is a skill—or rather, a large and complex set of skills. In terms of what they take to learn, they aren’t any different than man­ual ones—than hitting a ball or throwing a pot. You do not learn them from a book or video or website. You learn them directly from another person. You learn them through incessant repetition and incremental variation and extension under the close supervision of an experienced practitioner. You learn them in classes that are small enough to allow for individual attention, supplemented by one-on­-one instruction tailored to your own specific aptitudes and needs. If you’re learning how to play guitar, the teacher will place your hands exactly where they need to go (and do it again and again until you get it right). The mind has “hands,” as well, and an endless variety of things you can do with them.
[373 words]

[Time 3]
In class, you do not spend your time transcribing information. The proponents of distance learning are not incorrect to believe that lectures are usually an inferior form of instruction. That is why a significant portion of classes, at least, should be small enough to run as seminars. The purpose of a seminar is to enable your professor to model and shape the mental skills she’s trying to instill. She conducts a discussion about the material, but she doesn’t simply let you talk. She keeps the conversation focused. She challenges asser­tions, poses follow-up questions, forces students to elaborate their one-word answers or clarify their vague ones. She draws out the timid and humbles (gently) the self-assured. She welcomes and en­courages, but she also guides and pushes. She isn’t there to “answer questions,” at least not for the most part; she’s there to ask them.

Some of those questions should be ones she doesn’t know the answer to herself. Discussion in a seminar should be collaborative and open-ended, alive with serendipity and the energy of immi­nent discovery—a model, too, of how to think together. A student at Pomona praised his professors to me for granting students the “necessary illusion of discussing a book as a peer.” Yet it isn’t alto­gether an illusion. One of the rewards of being a professor is the chance to learn from fresh young minds as well as teach them. In Jeffrey Eugenides’ novel The Marriage Plot, the class that changes Mitchell’s life concerns the fate of Christianity in modern culture, whether belief remains a viable option. “Richter asked the students questions and listened to their answers as if it might happen here today: in Room 112 of Richardson Hall, Dee Michaels, who played the Marilyn Monroe part in a campus production of Bus Stop, might throw a rope lad­der across the void.” I myself became a decent teacher only when I started to relinquish some control over the classroom—stopped worrying so much about “getting my points across” and recognized that those moments of disorder that would sometimes occur, those spontaneous outbreaks of intelligence, were the most interesting parts of the class, for both my students and myself. We were going somewhere new, and we were going there together.
[373 words]

[Time 4]
College teaching, like any other kind, is a slow, painstaking, difficult process. (It is also, when properly done and adequately supported, an intensely gratifying one.) It is itself a complex craft that can’t be scaled or automated. You have to get to know your students as individuals—get to know their minds, I mean—and you have to believe completely, as a fellow student wrote about my own professor, Karl Kroeber, in each one’s absolute uniqueness. (It was Karl who said that a genuine teacher teaches students, not courses.)

My years in the classroom, as well as my conversations with young people about their college experience, have convinced me there are two things, above all, that students want from their pro­fessors. Not, as people commonly believe, to entertain them in class and hand out easy A’s. That’s what they retreat to, once they see that nothing better is on offer. What they really want is that their teach­ers challenge them and that they care about them. They don’t want fun and games; they want the real thing.

What they want, in other words, is mentorship. I remember just how starved I was for that myself in college. I saw how starved my students were: for validation, for connection—for (let’s not be shy of saying it) parental figures other than their parents. Not only is there nothing wrong with that desire, it is a necessary part of growing up. Other cultures—Jewish, Indian, East Asian—with their veneration of the teacher, recognize as much. In South Korea, so I’m told, par­ents warn their children that if they don’t stop misbehaving, they’ll tell their teachers. But in America, we’re not so sure. We are posses­sive of our kids, jealous of other influences upon them. But in The Path to Purpose, William Damon talks about the critical importance of outside adults in helping young people find their way. And Mark Edmundson remarks, while acknowledging the inevitable sadness for the parents who are left behind, that “it almost seems the natural order of things that children will leave their families and strive to put themselves under the influence of other guides ... more attuned to their rising hopes.”
[365 words]

[Time 5]
I heard a colleague give a presentation once on how to keep your office hour meetings under seven minutes. Sessions should be coming in. So far, so good: Instructors certainly need to manage their time. But then she said, “Anything beside their work, I don’t talk to them about. I don’t offer psychological advice for the same reason that I wouldn’t let a therapist grade their papers.”

It was a clever line, but it bespoke a common misconception about the kind of guidance that a mentor gives. You do not talk to your students; you listen to them. You do not tell them what to do; you help them hear what they themselves are saying. You ask the kinds of questions that Lara Galinsky talks about as being im­portant at times of decision—those “why” questions that help peo­ple connect with what they care about. Most advisors just tell you what courses to take, a student at Brown remarked to me, but the best ones “help you to think in a different way about the choice.” As Harry R. Lewis suggests, a mentor looks for the questions behind the questions their advisees ask. “The most important job of the advisor,” he writes, “is to help students understand themselves, to face and take responsibility for their decisions, and to support and to free them to make choices that are at odds with the expectations others have for them.” Students look to mentors—figures “more at­tuned to their rising hopes”—to give them what their parents won’t or can’t: the permission to go their own way and the reassurance that their path is valid.

Lewis speaks of professors in their formal roles as academic advisors, but regardless of whose office they’re supposed to go to, students gravitate toward teachers with whom they have forged a connection. Learning is an emotional experience, and mentorship is rooted in the intimacy of intellectual exchange. Something important passes between you, something almost sacred. Socrates remarks that the bond between a teacher and a student lasts a lifetime, even once the two have parted company. And so indeed it is. Student follows student, and professors know that even those with whom they’re closest now will soon decline to names in an address book, then at last just distant memories. But the feelings that we have for the teachers or the students who have meant the most to us, like those for long-lost friends, can never go away. They are part of us, and the briefest thought revives them, and we know that in some heaven we will meet again.
[434 words]

[Time 6]
For all the skill that teaching involves, you ultimately only have a single tool: your entire life as you have lived it up until the moment you walk into class. “The teacher, that professional amateur,” said the critic Leslie Fiedler, “teaches not so much his subject as himself.” He provides a model, he went on, “of one in whom what seemed dead, mere print on the page, becomes living, a way of life.” I developed a rule of thumb in graduate school. If a professor didn’t mention something personal at least a single time—a reference to a child, an anecdote about a colleague—then it was a pretty good bet that I had nothing to learn from him. It’s not that I needed my teachers to be confessional; I just needed them to be present. “Mortimer Adler had much to tell us about Aristotle’s Ethics,” Saul Bellow wrote about the University of Chicago eminence, “but I had only to look at him to see that he had nothing useful to offer on the conduct of life.”

Students want you to be honest, not least about yourself. They want you to be yourself. You need to step outside the role a bit, regard it with a little irony, if only to acknowledge the dissonance between the institution and the spirit. It often feels that there are certain things you cannot say inside a classroom—the most serious things that you want to say, the most genuine things. You want to say that life is tragic, that we are dangling above a void, that what’s at stake, when you read a book, is nothing less than life itself. But you feel your institutional surroundings holding you as if between quotation marks. You fear that your words will fall to the ground with an audible clink. That is where a little distance from the situ­ation is of service. Just because I say this stuff in class, I used to tell my students, doesn’t mean I don’t believe it.
[336 words]

[The Rest]
There are two things that kids invariably tell you about their favorite professors. The first one is “she teaches about everything.” That’s never literally true, of course, so what does it actually mean? Great teachers, as Andrew Hacker and Claudia Dreifus remark, are not bound by disciplinary ideas of what they’re allowed to say. They connect the material at hand, in a way that feels spacious and free, with anything to which it might be relevant. They connect it to ex­perience, and so they shed light on experience—on your experience. Just as great art gives you the feeling of being about “life”—about all of it at once—so does great teaching. The boundaries come down, and somehow you are thinking about yourself and the world at the same time, thinking and feeling at the same time, and instead of seeing things as separate parts, you see them as a whole. It doesn’t matter what the subject is. A student put it to me this way, about a professor in an oceanic studies program: “He made marine ecology reflect universal truths.”

You know great teaching the moment you encounter it. Yes, you feel, this is it—this is what I came for. It reaches deep inside you. It satisfies desires that you didn’t know you had. It makes the world feel newly large and meaningful—exactly, again, like art. The other thing that students say about their favorite teachers is “he changed my life.”
[245 words]

Sourse: Slate
http://www.slate.com/articles/life/education/2014/08/the_best_teachers_and_professors_resemble_parental_figures_they_provide.single.html

本帖子中包含更多资源

您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看,没有帐号?立即注册

x
 楼主| 发表于 2014-8-17 07:55:21 | 显示全部楼层
Part III: Obstacle




Photograph by Ferdinand Schmutzer/Agency Anzenberger/Austrian National Library.

The Freud We Wish For
Joshua Rothman   |   June 19, 2014

[Paraphrase 7]
“Becoming Freud,” by the British psychoanalyst Adam Phillips, is short for a biography—less than two hundred pages—and it contains no startling revelations. But, in its own way, it’s an audacious book. It’s a revisionist history of Freud and his enterprise; its implicit goal, never stated but always clear, is to help us salvage the best parts of Freud’s work while leaving behind the rest—the outmoded theories and unwieldy jargon that make Freud a caricature rather than an intriguing thinker. (Whether that’s a worthy goal is an open question.)

Phillips is probably today’s most famous psychoanalyst, and a quietly controversial figure. For seven years, he was the principal child psychologist at Charing Cross Hospital, in London. (He’s now in private practice.) Famously, he spends most of the week with his analysands and writes only on Wednesdays; somehow, on that schedule, he’s produced eighteen books. Phillips is obviously brilliant—John Banville has called him “an Emerson of our time”—and yet it’s never quite clear how seriously you should take his writing. Like Emerson, he seems to regard much of it as exploratory or performative. (“When I write something and it sounds good, I leave it in, even if there’s doubt about it,” he has said, because he’s curious to see what readers will think.) He’s the editor of Penguin’s new series of Freud translations, even though he doesn’t speak German; last year, reviewing one of his books for this magazine, Joan Acocella wrote that “Phillips loves Freud. He cites him again and again. But his Freud sometimes doesn’t look much like the Freud we thought we knew. He looks more like Adam Phillips.” How much that bothers you depends on how seriously you take Freud. There are some people who would rather have Phillips.

It’s especially easy for the Freud of “Becoming Freud” to look like Phillips, because, in the book, the facts of Freud’s life are largely absent. “One of the first casualties of psychoanalysis, once the facts of our lives are seen as complicated in the Freudian way, is the traditional biography,” Phillips writes. Phillips doesn’t trust in the ability of a conventional “life story,” with its procession of names, dates, and places, to tell us what anyone, least of all Freud, was really about. Anyway, he thinks, the most important story about Freud’s life is psychoanalysis—that’s the story Freud himself chose to tell the rest of us about our lives and his. And because, as Freud knew, “whatever story we are telling, we are always also telling the story of our own wanting … at any moment in Freud’s life we can ask, encouraged and legitimated by his own work, what is Freud wanting from psychoanalysis? What is the pleasure he seeks? What is he doing it for and what is it doing to him? What about himself is he seeking to sustain and enjoy, and what would he prefer to ignore?” By starting with the flower, in short, you might get an idea of the root.

Phillips sees psychoanalysis as the invention of a deeply ambivalent person. As a Viennese Jew, Freud coveted respectability but enjoyed being an outsider. As a father, he identified with the unfiltered lawlessness of his children—if only he could want, and demand, so freely! As a striver, he valued ambition above all (“If you put wishing at the heart of human development, you make extravagant ambition your theme,” Phillips writes); at the same time, he empathized with people who lose everything. (He was drawn to the question of “what has to be lost for the individual to survive … whether the individual can survive his losses, and at what cost?”)

Freud was a scientist with an artistic temperament; he became a doctor who envied his patients, a “double agent” who suffered from “what psychoanalysts would eventually call a split identification.” Phillips writes that, as a young man, in the eighteen-eighties, watching Jean-Martin Charcot work with his hysterical patients at the Salpêtrière, Freud “identified with the hysterics as the discarded, the thwarted, and the misunderstood, people with baffled desires and stalled ambition; people who, not unlike Jews, made others inordinately suspicious,” while, at the same time, “he identified with Charcot as a man he would like to become … the educated, cultured doctor who took hysterics seriously and engaged with their confounding and confounded predicament.” Freud’s genius, Phillips thinks, lay in the way he valued his own ambivalent feelings. He didn’t see them as a contradiction to resolve; instead, he proposed a new kind of person, the psychoanalyst, “who has to be both on the side of the patient’s safety and security, and on the side of her disruptive desires.”

If there’s a big idea in “Becoming Freud,” it’s that psychoanalysis is about communication—about what Phillips calls “sociability”—more than it’s about a cure. It’s a way of helping people speak for themselves (or of helping them figure out how they are already speaking). There’s a sense in which, for Phillips, Freud’s work was a kind of rebellion—against medicine, against society, against one’s own false sense of orderliness. (Freud sought “to account for—something starkly pertinent for the Jews of Freud’s generation—what one makes of what one is forced by.”) But Freud’s rebellion differed from that of the modernist artists he was surrounded by. It was more like the subtle, ambivalent rebellion of the translator or the critic. Freud’s discovery, Phillips writes, was just how ingenious and disturbing modern people had become as the unconscious artists of their own lives. It was their capacities for representation—for finding ways and means for making their desires known in however disguised or self-defeating forms; as dreams, or slips, or perverse and neurotic symptoms—that had impressed Freud … His patients, Freud realized, were working on and at their psychic survival, but like artists not like scientists; and their material was their personal history encoded in their sexuality. They were not empiricists, or only fleetingly; they were fantasists. Their adaptations were ingeniously imaginative, however painful; but they were stuck. Their symptoms were the equivalent of writer’s block, or rather, speaker’s block. Indeed, Freud was becoming their new kind of good listener, and their champion; someone who could get, who could make something of, their strange ways of speaking. Someone who, like a good parent, or a good art critic, could appreciate what they were up to, what they could make, and make a case for it.

Phillips writes with such aphoristic assurance that this conclusion seems obvious. Actually, it’s a very particular interpretation of Freud. Phillips leaves out Freud the scientist, who aimed to discover laws about the self; Freud the clinician, who aimed to cure; and (for the most part) Freud the provocateur and kook. Perhaps because “Becoming Freud” began as a series of lectures at Cambridge, he rarely quotes from Freud’s books, which makes it easy to forget their bizarre, slightly unhinged specificity.

And yet my own sense is that Phillips is right. He’s put his finger on the best part of Freud’s thinking. In fact, in Phillips’s view, the story of psychoanalysis has a tragic end. He thinks Freud was a victim of his own success. In the beginning, like a good critic, Freud let his patients own their mysteries. But, as psychoanalysis became an institution unto itself and developed its own rules and dogmas, analysts began to talk over their patients. “Once Freud had discovered what he called the unconscious it was never clear how unconscious the unconscious would be allowed to be (at least by the owners of psychoanalysis). What would it be to be an expert or a specialist of the unconscious?” Phillips writes. “Do psychoanalysts know what people are talking about or just know how to let people speak for themselves?” An enterprise that was characterized, at first, by uncertainty became too certain. Although Phillips discusses Freud’s later books throughout “Becoming Freud”—books like “Civilization and Its Discontents” and “Beyond the Pleasure Principle”—the narration itself stops, rather abruptly, when Freud is fifty. That, he seems to say, is when the psychoanalytic enterprise began to grow claustrophobic and controlling. It’s as though Phillips has to look away.

I suppose it says something about our era that the Freud we want is Freud the translator, rather than Freud the doctor—the conversational, empathetic, curious Freud, rather than the incisive, perverse, and confident one. (Perhaps, in a period when we are communicating more than ever, the difficulties of communication are growing more obvious.) And I can’t help feeling that there’s something a little irresponsible about writing a “biography” of Freud that is, in its way, so partial and polemical. Still, as Phillips writes: “Our vision, Freud showed us, what we are able to see, is sponsored by our blind spots; what we are determined not to know frees us and forces us to know something else.” Phillips doesn’t give us the whole Freud, but, if Freud is to be believed, you can never see the whole person anyway. We see what we need to see.
[1515 words]

Source: The New Yorker
http://www.newyorker.com/books/joshua-rothman/the-freud-we-wish-for

本帖子中包含更多资源

您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看,没有帐号?立即注册

x
发表于 2014-8-17 08:36:15 | 显示全部楼层
沙发么。。。。。。。。。。。。。
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Speaker: Learning to act
         pots and pans: things that someone used to cook
         to bang: make a lot noise about
         audition: tryout
         rehearse: to practice
         part: a character in a movie
         up for: have a chance of getting it
         housewife: women who stay at home and take care of children
         lines: words you have to say in a movie
         improvise: act or perform without having a script improvisation
         10-course breakfast: course: part of a meal
         be in character: acting like the person
         acting chops: acting abilities
         stretch: to improve
         get into the head: really understand
         project: to speak loudly and clearly
         emote: show emotion when you act
发表于 2014-8-17 08:38:38 | 显示全部楼层
感谢楼主~
Speaker:    Learning to act
banging make a lot of noises those pots and pans (use to cook).
audition:tryout is go in front of the director of a play and you act a little bit of the part of some dialogue, to show you could be the actor.
rehearse:means to practice speech performance
to be up for:to be consideration for
lines:words you have to say in movies.
improvise is to act wighout having prepared
strech expand chops abilities
project speak loudly emote show the feeling
There are no small parts, only small actors!
Time-2
good education=good teacher is ridiculous
teaching is not a engineering problem.
thinking is a skill.
Time-3
A significant portion of classes should be small enough to run as seminars.
A professor can learn from fresh young minds when he teach the youngs. And the outbreaks of intelligence were the most interesting parts of the class.
Time-4
College teaching is a slow difficult process.Teachers have to know the students' minds.
Students want the real thing, in other words, is mentorship.
Time-5
The most important job for teachers is to help students understand themselves, to do their decisions and to support them to make choices.
Although teachers and stundents can't always be toghther, but they will be a important part in each other's life.
Time-6
Teachers should not only teacch students the dead knowlege, but also their own thoughts about the present.
Students want teachers to be honest.
Obstacle
Adam want to show a different Freud to people.
Phillips have written a lot of books and he is curious to see reader's reflection.
The facts of Freud's life are absent.
发表于 2014-8-17 08:41:38 | 显示全部楼层

谢谢楼主~占了个地板~

Speaker:
Pots andpans
Boilwater in pot
Cook eggsin pan

Bang:make a lot noise
Audition:try out
Do in anaudition: act a little part
Show theperson if you can act
Go on anaudition: rehearse: practice speech

I'm apart of
Be upfor: under the consideration of
Housewife:a woman who stay at home and take care of families.
Lines:memory the word you have to say
Improvise:act or perform  as :make sth. that goalong
Ten-coursebreakfast: part of a meal
Stay incharacter: continue moving like the actor in moives

Actingchops:
Strech:make sth. Longer
              expand or improve them
Get into the head:understand someone think
Speed的文章超棒,给我的雅思作文提供了素材~

Time 2: 00:05:05.49
Whether it is possible that teachers are subsitituded by other teaching methods? The answer is no.
Time 3:        00:04:43.29
Lecture is inferior teaching method.and teachers control the discussions of students.
Time 4:        00:03:52.82
- college teachers know each of the student's mind. College students need the real things instead of entertainment.        
- Difference between Asisa parents' attidutes to teachers and that of the USA.
Time 5:        00:05:36.46        
Connect between T & S after School.
Time 6:        00:02:35.92        
        

发表于 2014-8-17 09:36:51 | 显示全部楼层
占占占~~~

TIMER 2:[2'21]
  Good education ->good teachers.
  teaching->transfer information from one brain to another brain.
  teachers' jobs(specific imformation)
  thinking

TIMER 3:[2'31]
  small amount of students in class ->for teacher better focus on students.
  questions.

TIMER 4:[2'23]
  teaching in college->complex.
  author's experience in college teaching ->unlike high school or anything else, students want real things.
  American different from South korea, teachers can not  force their students to believe them but just give them an introduce.

TIMER 5:[2'37]
  an example: no limit.
  teachers' job: help, listen.
  academic advisor.

TIMER 6:[2'05]
  don't involve teachers' lifes in classroom, different people have different experience.
  be yourself in classroom.

OBSTACLE:[9'37]
  Freud caricature->intrigous thinker
  P most famous psy
  P love to translate F but he dislike put F's life in it.
  brief introduction about P.
  F:scientists with artist
  becoming f->communication(big problem)
  author-> agree with P


发表于 2014-8-17 10:02:05 | 显示全部楼层
Dmyzywy 发表于 2014-8-17 09:36
占占占~~~

A good teacher is necessary if you want to have a good education. And teaching is not an engineer problem. Teachers should not just transfer a lot of information from one brain to another, but lead forth the power that lie asleep within their students. In that process, thinking is extremely important.
2m28

Seminar is important and effective because it helps professors model and shape the mental skills of students and forces the students to think and discuss. And the second paragraph gives us an example to further illustrate the importance of the seminar.
2m35

College teaching is a hard work because the students want their professors to challenge and care about them but not entertain them. Exactly, what the students want is mentorship. Even though other cultures around the world, such as Indian, East Asia, recognize such desire very much, that is not the case in America. However, guides other than parents are critical for children, and it is seemingly a natural order that children will eventually leave their parents and strive to put themselves under the influence of other guides.
2m9s

Mentor's job is not to tell students what to do, but to guide students to think about why to do.ravita. And the bond between a student and his mentor lasts a lifetime, even though they may be parted for thousands of miles.
2m37s

A teacher should be himself and say some genuine things, otherwise students would find nothing useful from the class.
2m38s
很多句子的结构看的很混乱,没怎么看懂

The first thing that a kid describes his favorite professor will be "she teaches about everything", by which means that she can extend the knowledge from the material in hand to anything that is relevant by using her own experience. The second is "he changed my life.
1m9s

In the beginning, the author introduces the book, Becoming Freud, and Phillips, the author of this book. And then, the author begins to show the uniqueness of this book. Phillips' veiws of Freud and psychoanalysis are different from ordinary people. In the last, the author agrees with Phillips about some aspects of Freud, and he also states that even though Phillips doesn't give us the whole Freud, we still can know Freud as what we need to know.
9m.16s
发表于 2014-8-17 10:18:30 | 显示全部楼层
Time2 1'32''
Teachers are necessary in college studying and they play a "lead forth" role while educating students.
Thinking is a skill that you should make what teachers instruct you into your own needs.

Time3 2'36''
The point teachers deliver a seminar is not answer questions but ask questions and lead students to discuss and think

Time4 2'29''
What a genuie teacher teaches is not courses but students.
What students really need is the mentorship,that means the people who guide you and real things that can guide you in your future lives.

Time5 2'38''
A misconception of mentorship is that mentors talk to sutdents,not let think what are they really need.
Relationship between professor and student  is last-life

Time6 2'38''
Professsor himeself is an good case to teach to students.
Sometimes it is difficult for professor to express his real spirit in classes.

Obstacle: 8'01''
Psychoanalyst Phillips wrote a short biography of Freud who is not a real or specific person and he described Freud and psychoanalysis in an audacious way
“Becoming Freud” is what psychoanalysis is about communication
..........
发表于 2014-8-17 11:18:28 | 显示全部楼层
2:3
teachers are important in education
what teaching and education means.
thinking is a complex skill. It is learnt by guidance of teachers.

3:2'54
What teacher is for? she is not only there to answer questions but also ask questions and push the students to explore more.
Teacher may not have answer to questions. She is there to learn together with students. classroom should be small enough for every student to get attention from teacher.

4:3'05
teacher should get to know every student as individual. Teacher should be able to see the uniqueness of each students.
two things students want from teachers: challenge them and care for them.
It means they need mentor-ship from teacher. let another adults (besides parents)to guide young adults.

5:3'15
a professor gave a presentation on how to keep office hour 7 minutes short.
author said yes we do not talk to student but we listen to them. we ask questions behind their question. we help students to find themselves. we assure their path is valid.
teacher forge long term connection with students.

6:2'25
if a teacher does not mention single thing about his personal life, we can conclude that student has nothing to learn form him.
students want teacher to be honest to himself and be himself.
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-3-28 16:40
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部