Note: No pretty words or platitudes here. Maybe one day I will get around to sugar-coating it, but for now this is simply a few bare "facts" about education as I see it. The bottom line is that everyone has to learn things for themselves, there are no shortcuts, and it is hard work. Moreover, everybody learns in different ways and at different times and rates. This means that "teaching" is very difficult!
Teaching is a misnomer; no one can "teach" anyone anything!
Individuals learn and all that anyone else can do is provide a, hopefully, conducive environment for this to happen in.
Learning takes time, one reason why we have schools and universities. A reasonably pleasant environment also helps, but is not absolutely necessary. Someone who is cold and hungry may not quickly grasp the intricacies of nuclear physics, but they will very soon learn how to keep warm and find food. As the old adage says, "Necessity is the mother of invention!"
Learning also requires background, motivation, confidence and skills.
It is impossible to learn something without having the necessary background knowledge and/or skills for it. No one runs before walking, or walks before crawling (unless, like some animals, they are genetically programmed to do so.) Similarly, no one can understand complex numbers without understanding normal numbers, or negative numbers without understanding positive integers, etc. Since this is something individual, determined largely by the physical/social environment to which they are exposed and, perhaps, to a lesser extent their biological makeup, people of the same age will not necessarily be at the same level. Learners thus vary greatly in their ability to learn particular subjects/skills. This is natural and must be respected.
Motivation is a prime factor in how well and how quickly something is learnt. "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink." Learners need a reason to learn, preferably beyond the classical "in order to pass this course and get a good job," sort of response. Clearly, if the course content is not seen as relevant to their future (beyond the need to pass the course) then there is little motivation to learn it. Schools and universities thus need to continually reexamine their curriculum in order to ensure that it is meaningful. Subjects like calculus and computer programming need justifying and might be better left as options for more advanced learners, the time being more profitably spent studying philosophical and political thought, states and morals! Real learning, moreover, demands an understanding of why the things being learnt, are as they are. In other words, the subject matter must be put in context. As far as possible, students should be helped to discover the ideas and principles themselves. Clearly, there is a problem of time here, so that a sort of "guided discovery" which provides the rationale for what is being learnt is perhaps the best we can hope for.
Having the confidence that one can learn is also vital. Continual failure can easily kill motivation and mean that students don't even attempt to learn new things in the future. On the other hand, without failures, nothing is learnt! It is thus essential to provide an environment in which students experience continual small failures, but can find help and support to correct and learn from them, so that they acheive their longer term goals successfully.
Finally, successful and continued learning requires that certain "learning" abilities be acquired. These include such things as time management, concentration, thinking and communication skills. I believe that such skills only come with time and practice.
Formal education should thus not concentrate so much on the actual knowledge the student is being "taught," as on the learning skills he/she is acquiring. Unfortunately, this is difficult to determine and is certainly difficulty to measure quantitatively; one reason perhaps, why the focus has traditionally been on testing for knowledge of facts and figures. The overall ability of a student is then extrapolated by looking at their performance across a wide range of subjects. This being so, it is important to remember that the subject material is secondary and that what really matters is the student's ability to learn. We really need to look for ways in which education can move on in this regard.
Democracy demands citizens who are responsible, thinking and persistent (although there is a lot to be said for having a bunch of sheep!) Education/Teaching ought to aim to provide an environment in which learners naturally develop these ideals.
Pet Hates: Students who are not interested in anything. Students who after, four years at university, are frightened to take projects they view as too complicated. Students who don't try, or who seem unable or unwilling to think for themselves.
Random thoughts to work into the above...
Theory: Only one person really learns in a a normal lecture setting; the teacher!
Misc: Discipline (in thought & behaviour), attitude, knowing that asking is ok (both questions in order to learn and for help in case of difficulty), being critical, knowing what questions to ask, organisation, {many of these we expect students to pick up by chance, rather than explicitly "teaching" them them!) Creativity requires time to think. Students need to be actively involved in learning for it to be successful beyond exam-time. Who said "Education is what remains after what has been taught is forgotten."? Training is another matter. Animals and people can be trained to do almost anything (except, perhaps, to think & be responsible), but this is not awfully democratic; but then, why should we care?