Enrollment and learning
“Why are you taking this class?”
That seems like a fair question. After tenth grade or so, it’s a choice, after all.
One honest answer is, “I have to get a good grade to get to where I want to go.” That means certification, compliance, regurgitation. It means enrollment in the outcome, not the process. When this happens, we’re seeing a failure of the system we call education. Because that’s not learning.
One answer is, “Because I’m curious.” This is a great reason to take a class, and the instructor’s job isn’t merely to satisfy the curiosity; it’s to amplify it and turn it into a habit and the practice of the autodidact.
For many professional settings, the answer might be, “To learn how to use these tools and this insight to make a change in the world after I graduate.”
That sort of enrollment becomes a productive bargain. It gives the student agency–you don’t have to like everything the instructor has to say, you don’t have to use it when you leave, but the standard is: Is it helpful to imagine having this tool in your kit, and does this course prepare you to use the tool effectively?
Teaching is expensive, so is learning. Active enrollment on both sides is part of the bargain. Students are free to reject the pedagogy, the tools, even the aims of the current practitioners of a craft. But they’re on the hook to do that after they’ve absorbed what the instructor has to offer.
Take what you need and leave the rest.