|Syntactic Confectionery Delight|
I don't presume to know what is good for people - I've not been trained as a High School teacher :-)
ROFL! Most teachers I know wouldn't presume to know what's better for people. Politicians, OTOH ... 8-)
That's another good point. People coming here with questions are (by definition) seeking answers. Some may be interested in learning, but first they want the damn thing to work!
Replying to posts is (generally speaking), for me, an act of self-indulgence.
That's interesting. A lot of people I read answers from may be like that -- they have speciailized knowledge others don't, and reading their answers is itself a form of education. I come here to learn, because my skills are more ground-level. You make me realize that some people post precisely for people like me.
I also find it particularly annoying when I get a "teacher reply" to questions that I've asked. In fact, I usually interpret such responses as smug, smartarse "I'm better than you cos I know something you don't" responses.
Another reason to principly provide answers. This forum is a great resource, and it'd be a crime to drive away someone who could really need it.
By some strange coincidence, I happened to read this article by Maryann Wolf in Saturday's (Melbourne) Herald Sun newspaper.
The teacher in my life got a hoot from the article. She said the researcher in the artticle didn't get into the classroom much. It's not a question of "Might it be true students don't learn" to "How many don't learn."
In the U.S., with the No Child Left Behind Act, schools now teach how to pass the test. They no longer teach the material the test would have been on.