On Teaching and Learning: The use of Leis Intimatus as a Practical Recommendation for

a Better Learning Experience

Our lives are spent in an educational setting. Most of us go through elementary

school, junior high school, high school, and for some university or college. For those who

go to university, some get their bachelor’s degree while some go on to complete their

Masters and Ph.D. in whatever field of their own choosing. Through each level of

education, the individuals are exposed to teachers and teaching styles. Others may not

have the opportunity to have a formal education and go directly to the labour force to

gain a living. Even in this informal setting, the individual is still exposed to the teaching

of the people around them who are in positions of authority. As well, teaching can take

place in the absence of authority figures. Our friends and our family often are our best

teachers. Through these various diverse examples, we can see the glaring and obvious

truth that teaching is something that happens on a daily basis, either voluntarily or

involuntarily.

Maybe it is because we have a sense of familiarity with teaching that causes us to

underestimate its importance. There is a notion that teaching is easy, that it is an exercise

that anyone with an area of expertise can do. However, this notion is so far from the truth.

Experience alone shows us that this is a lie. Four years of attending university classes

tells us that even if the professor may be an expert in their chosen field, it does not

necessarily mean that they are good teachers. A lot of professors are rather inept at

communicating and conveying ideas to their students. So clearly, the degree of expertise

has no effect on an individual’s teaching skills.

 Or does it? Can an individual be of any help to someone who is trying to learn a

chosen field without that individual being an expert of that chosen field? Can a person

who has no expertise in physics be able to help a student trying to learn physics? Does

the individual need to have at least some working knowledge of the material or is there

truly no expertise or even background knowledge needed to be able to teach something to

someone else? What is needed to teach something to someone?

Theoretically, any individual is capable of teaching any material to anyone

without having expertise or having previous knowledge of the specific material. The

reason I say this is because of the Socratic method of teaching. In my mentorship

experience, I find that this type of teaching is one that brings results and benefits both

parties. The teacher learns from the student and the student learns from the teacher. Even

if the teacher may not be completely well-versed in the subject matter, questions have a

way of provoking the students into a better understanding of the material. Practically, it

would be of benefit if the teacher would at least have some background knowledge of the

subject matter so that the teacher would be capable of asking the right questions that

would provoke the student into deeper insights concerning the subject matter. However,

expertise is not needed in helping the student gain insights about the problem space that

they may encounter. This type of teaching is more beneficial because it goes beyond

surface understanding of the subject matter. It delves deeper into the reasoning of how

things work and how things can be applied. It makes the student obtain an intrinsic

knowledge of the subject material.

If no expertise is needed to be able to teach something to someone, what then is

involved in what is starting to look like a nebulous concept of teaching? First, the teacher
must emphasize the fact that in order to learn something, the student must exhibit

motivation in learning the material. This fact is completely glossed over by most

teachers. The students may have no desire or motivation to learn. The challenge is then to

create an environment wherein learning can take place; the teacher must motivate their

students to learn. In order to do this, the teacher must make the subject matter relevant to

the student. Learning will not take place in an environment where the subject matter is

not made relevant to the student. There is no initiative in learning it if it is irrelevant to

the individual’s life. The teacher must somehow make the subject material important in

the student’s mind, the student’s mind will be piqued with curiousity, making the student

interested enough to pay attention to the teacher.

In the mentorship exercises that we engaged in, the topic of motivation did not

pose itself as a problem since most of the people that we engaged in a mentorship activity

with were motivated, or had the desire, to learn about whatever the subject matter is. In

my case, I mentored a group of male individuals concerning various aspects of

Christianity. We discussed various topics and issues that were related to Christianity. I

encouraged participation and expressed the need for a dynamic approach in learning.

Everyone was involved and participated in the discussions that led to lively discussions. I

also prefaced the meeting with my views on teaching. I expressed the inefficiency of the

bucket theory in teaching and that I believed in taking a learner-driven approach to

teaching. Of course, in hindsight, I realize that by presenting the learner-driven approach,

I’ve already gone “bucket” on them. Sometimes, however, going bucket is unavoidable.

The only caveat that should be emphasized when going bucket is that teachers must

realize that there are limitations of going bucket.

 As a mentee in statistics, my mentor and I talked about things that for me did not

relate to statistics. However, as the sessions went by, I saw the relevance of those that we

spoke about. Of course, I had to ask what the relevance of it all was and my mentor spoke

about how it was all related. There were lots of times in the sessions when I grew

frustrated because I could not understand the questions or the material. Because I have

taken statistics before, I tried to remember all the terms and equations that were used and

somehow apply them haphazardly. Since I only have a surface knowledge of the material,

I did not fully understand statistics and what it meant and how it was relevant. Going

through the sessions helped me to learn the relevance of statistics and impressed upon me

the genius of the numbering system. I cannot claim to fully understand statistics but it did

help me know more about it. All of these realizations were brought about through

constant questioning that led me to various insights concerning statistics.

To come up with a theory of learning, various aspects that make up “good

teaching” should be incorporated in it. By trying to see the various aspects needed to be a

good teacher, these helped in my construction of a theory of learning which I shall call

leis intimatus. The term comes “from the Indo-European leis, a noun meaning "track" or

"furrow." To "learn" came to mean gaining experience by following a track-- presumably

for a lifetime. The word "intimacy" stems from the Latin intimatus, to make something

known to someone else. In its original meaning, intimacy did not mean emotional

closeness, but the willingness to pass on honest information”

(http://www.solonline.org/organizational_overview/lexicon/). This for me is what

learning should be: the passing on of honest opinion to someone who is willing to follow.
There are four steps that are addressed in the process of leis intimatus:

i) Learn about the student

ii) Examine the student’s goals

iii) Implement the student’s goals

iv) Surpass the student’s goals

Learn about the student

One of the key aspects in good teaching is being able to meet the learner where they’re at.

This means that the teacher must have an idea of the learner’s level of understanding

concerning the subject matter. This is the key to being a good teacher because there is a

basic assumption that takes place in most teachers’ minds as to the level of the student’s

comprehension. Most of the time, they assume that the students have the same level of

comprehension as that of theirs. This is what often happens in the university setting. The

teacher proceeds at a pace that the student cannot keep up with not because they are slow

or stupid, but simply because they do not have the same depth of understanding as their

teacher’s. This means that teachers must be able to gauge their student’s level of

expertise. This is not easy in a large class simply because of time restraints. The teacher

cannot individually customize their lessons for each individual. To ameliorate this

problem, a smaller class size is suggested so that the teachers can be able to better

monitor the student’s progress and help the students to learn. Another suggested

procedure would be to have a standardized test concerning a subject matter and

administer it to the class. The class would then be divided according to the students’
scores on the test. Extra caution should be put in place to make sure that no

discrimination will take place among the different levels. The purpose of the test is not to

segregate the students into the intelligent and the stupid, but its purpose is to help the

teacher properly teach the students according to their level of understanding. A person

who may have received a lower score on the test may indicate the fact that for that

particular student, the teacher may have to reiterate key concepts and ideas. The person

who received a high score may be completely bored if the teacher continues to reiterate

key concepts and ideas because they may have already understood that part of the lesson.

By dividing the class into the various levels of students’ understanding, the teacher may

be able to properly customize the lesson plan to fit the student.

Examine the student’s goals

If the teacher knows the level of understanding that the student has concerning a

specific subject matter, the teacher can then ask the student how they would like to

improve in that subject matter. This is an aspect of learning that is rarely used, if ever,

within the formal educational setting. The purpose of this exercise is to make the student

an active participant in the learning process. If the learner has a specific goal in mind in

terms of the level of proficiency or understanding they want to achieve, the learner would

be more motivated to act and be intrinsically motivated to do various exercises that may

need to be done to achieve their own specific goal. There is often a resistance and

difficulty in making the student define their own goal concerning learning simply because

most students take a passive interest in the area of learning. They learn what they need to

learn to pass their exam, get a high GPA, get their diploma, etc. Each of these reasons is
based on extrinsic rewards. The benefit of adding this component in the learning process

is that it creates an opportunity for the student to engage in a dynamic educational setting

wherein he or she is forced to create a qualifiable and/or quantifiable goal for her learning

experience. A qualifiable goal would be a descriptive goal made by the student (i.e. I

want to learn more about neuroscience.) A quantifiable goal would be a goal that can be

quantified by the student concerning her learning of a specific subject matter (i.e. I want

to get 80% on my neuroscience mid-term.) Both of these goals propel the student to

participate in the learning process because they have a personal stake in it. There are

times however that a goal may not be quantifiable so a qualifiable goal may be sufficient

enough. It would be a good practice, however, to have a quantifiable goal to the learning

process so that the student can have a tangible result of their learning process. The

student will learn better in an environment in which he or she is mobilized to learn

because they are reaching for a personal goal.

Implement the student’s goals

Once the matter of deciding on what the student’s goal is accomplished, the

teacher must devise a plan in which the student will be able to achieve the desired goal he

or she has set for himself or herself. The teacher must take various factors in mind to

properly implement the student’s desired goal. One of these factors is the feasibility of

the student’s goal. The student may have a long-term goal in mind but to achieve that

long-term goal, the teacher may have to dissect it into numerous short-term goals that

together will help the student achieve the long-term desired goal. If the student wants to

be a neuroscientist and do not have a basic understanding of neuroscience, then the

teacher’s plan of action must be to give the student a basic overview and understanding

of what neuroscience is all about. The teacher cannot engage in making the student into a

neuroscientist if some basic pre-requisites for achieving the desired goal are not met. By

dividing it into manageable chunks, the teacher minimizes the risk of boredom taking

place in the student because the student will be learning something new and exciting

everyday in a prolonged fashion. This method of learning does not give the student

enough time to be bored about the subject matter. The consistent accumulation of

knowledge in a timely fashion creates a willingness and eagerness in the student to learn

more about the subject matter. Likewise, to ensure that the student is learning the new

information, the teacher can devise various situations in which the student has to deal

with exposition of the information received that pertains to the subject matter. By

expounding on the information, the student gains a deeper and wider understanding of the

subject matter instead of the surface level understanding that most students demonstrate.

This is also a crucial part of the learning process. Because the teacher made the student

identify their desired goal, the teacher must then do his or her best so that they would be

able to help the student achieve their desired goal. It is of no use to make the student

identify their goal if the teacher would not be able to help the student achieve their

desired goal. By devising a plan to achieve the student’s goal, the student also gains

experience in learning from their teacher’s actions in devising a plan that would meet

their needs. By looking at their teacher’s course of action in implementing the desired

goal, they can then use what they have learned from their teacher in another context in

which they themselves become the teacher to another individual. During the

implementation stage, the student is actively and wholly participating in the learning
process. The teacher can then engage the student in numerous discourses that will enable

the student to achieve the student’s goal à propos the quality of learning they wish to

achieve. If the student wants to become a neuroscientist, it may be the case that at this

stage the student is involved in learning the various chemical reactions that take place in

the brain when a person ingests drugs like cocaine and heroine. The teacher is then

actively involved in helping the student achieve their desired goal to be a neuroscientist.

Surpass the student’s goal

It is not enough for the teacher to be happy that the student has achieved their

desired goal. The teacher must continually challenge the student to go further and further

than what they have achieved in the past. If the student’s goal is short of the potential that

the teacher sees in the student, then the teacher must help the student to achieve their goal

but also show them that they can go further than what they have decided as their previous

goal. It is important to note the importance of helping the student achieve their goal, first

and foremost, because it is only when the student achieves their desired goal that they can

build the confidence they need to go further than they have thought to be possible. To

assess the teacher’s success in teaching, the main criteria I propose is to look at how far

the student surpasses their master in their knowledge and abilities. A good teacher can be

judged by the quality of the students they have. A good student, most often than not, had

a good teacher. A good teacher instills everything they have learned from their previous

teachers and the things that they have learned on their own to their student. Thus, the

student becomes a recipient of a vast amount of knowledge, to which they can add their

own insights and revelations, making them more powerful and revealing. Each student
builds upon the knowledge of those before them. An important part in the teaching

process is when the student can teach their teacher. This act ensures that learning has

taken place in the mind of the student. It also ensures the continuance of the teaching

process. Now, the student teaches the teacher and the teacher becomes a student once

again.

This theory of learning has basic pre-suppositions that need to be addressed. Most

of the learning that takes place under this system is based on learner-driven teaching

style. As well, the Socratic method is used in the teaching process. It is through the

process of questioning and refuting that learning can take place. Our experiences and

previous knowledge affect the speed and the quality of our learning. By being exposed to

a vast amount of experience, the student can gain a better understanding of the world

around him or her. The previous knowledge that the individual possesses may quicken

the student’s ability in learning other things. Most of the time, if one has learned a certain

subject matter, the process of learning that they endured can be generalized to another

subject matter. So, if the student has learned a previous subject matter, that student can

then apply the process by which they have learned it and apply it to another situation. The

Socratic method of teaching also enables the teacher to challenge and teach a student, and

provoke that person to learn, even if the teacher may not have an expertise in the subject

matter. The Socratic method can also be used to empower the student and build

confidence in the student. It does this by asking the right questions that can provoke the

student to achieve great insights about the problem that he or she encounters. It is only

through overcoming problems that one can learn and so learning becomes a life-long

process, enduring till the end. Teaching a student is also a humbling opportunity in
learning that you are infinitely ignorant. This is the main reason why the bucket theory is

not effective in the teaching process. It elevates the teacher to a lofty position and

denigrates the student to a lower position. It is only by engaging in an active learning

environment that teaching and learning can take place. The teachers are there to speed up

the process of learning so that the process becomes shorter for the student to achieve the

same insight that may have taken the teacher years to learn. Of course, there are times

that a teacher may resort to going bucket, but as long as the teacher realizes that there are

limitations in engaging in such an action, the bucket way can be used in a teaching

situation. The process of leis intimatus can be used as a guideline in understanding the

learning process that takes place. As the name leis intimatus indicates, the process of

teaching and learning is, at its very essence, the willingness to pass on honest

information. If there are men and women who are willing to pass on honest information,

the cycle is never broken. The cycle continues.