父母大人们，你们是不是不喜欢孩子在得到答案以后还想知道“为什么”？老师大人们，前排孩子层出不穷的问题是不是快把你们逼疯了，因为你们还要赶着完成州府规定的当日教学计划。如果是这样，你们大概不会喜欢保罗•哈里斯倍受争议的新书《耳听为实》（Trusting What You're Told）。在书中，这位来自哈佛大学（Harvard）的教育学教授向认知发展理论的传统观念发起了挑战。曾几何时，人们认为孩子是“摇篮里的科学家”，通过观察来学习，而哈里斯则认为孩子们是小小的人类学家，他们向“可靠”的“信息提供者”学习，而且这种学习的效果最佳。举个例子，正是通过这种方式我们才认识到地球是圆的。哈里斯的研究结论在很大程度上不同于当代课堂教学的模式。恰恰相反，哈里斯要求的是口齿伶俐的老师——有人也许会想到罗杰斯先生（美国儿童电视之父），认为他就是教师的典范——和充满耐心的父母。《财富》杂志（Fortune）撰稿人戴维•卡普兰最近对哈里斯进行了专访，他们讨论的话题是，倾听是否比动手学习更加重要。
So, Mom and Dad, you don't like your kids demanding to know "why" after every answer? And, teachers, do those relentless questions from the front row drive you crazy as you attempt to cover today's state-mandated lesson plan? You'll hate Paul Harris' controversial new book, Trusting What You're Told. In it, the Harvard professor of education challenges entrenched notions of cognitive development. Rather than seeing children as "scientists in the crib" who learn through observation, Harris argues that they're nascent anthropologists who learn best from the "testimony" of "informants." That's how we find out the world is round, for example. Harris' research cuts against much of what happens in today's classrooms; instead, it demands verbally acute teachers -- one might imagine Mister Rogers as the paragon -- as well as patient parents.Fortune contributor David A. Kaplan recently spoke to Harris about how listening to others can be more important than hands-on learning.
I thought a key part of education is getting children to read -- to get them to be little researchers.
The portrait of cognitive development I'm trying to undermine is not that of the child as a kind of scholar or bibliophile, but the image you get from people like Rousseau or Piaget or Montessori, where the child is a hands-on experimenter. That vision is too narrow.
Most early grades prize the hands-on, right?
If you think about the Montessori classroom, the child is given some bricks to assemble, and the child sees the bricks can be placed in some kind of serial order from shortest to tallest. While that strategy may well work for observable regularities in the world, it's not a strategy when evidence isn't readily available.
Where do children get their information?
Teachers, parents, experts. They'll learn to trust some more than others. But I'm not just offering a portrait of young children. We're all stuck with the fact that the amount of knowledge we can gather for ourselves is minuscule compared with the amount we gain by listening to experts, whether it's how to invest or what to do if we have a cancer.
Why is it important to distinguish how children learn?
In preschool there's not very much emphasis on choosing teachers who are good at having a dialogue with children. At school, you see a sharp decline in the quality of dialogue. At home, children ask more questions. They have more sustained exchanges with a parent.
Isn't that out of necessity -- at home it's a lower "student-teacher" ratio?
Of course in some sense it's dictated by practicalities. But teachers are mostly selected for their ability to be "nurturers" rather than for verbal or intellectual abilities.
Does questioning become less important?
No. It extends to elementary school and even high school. I don't know about your children, but mine complain that often when they've asked questions in school, there's not been time to deal with them. It's the curriculum that dictates the pace of learning.