The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
Western education advocates motivational education, but Eastern education, by contrast, is more critical. So which is the more effective way of education? Although motivational education has its merits, we cannot ignore its negative effects and its irrationalities.
We should certainly acknowledge that one of the important aspects of motivational education is that it enables the learner to repeat previous positive behaviours, thus forming good habits. A hypothetical example might be a child who is not very talkative and who takes the initiative to speak in class. The teacher's encouragement can make the child realize that it is a worthwhile thing to do, even if the content of the speech is not entirely correct. Let's extend from this point: another value of encouraging education is that the recipient gains self-confidence - by regularly getting positive feedback on behavior, the child will have confidence in his or her own abilities and will be more likely to make decisions. Conversely, supporters of encouraging education would argue that critical education undermines the child's character and makes him or her vulnerable to depression.
However, the problem with encouraging education is also obvious: ignoring mistakes prevents wrongdoing from being pointed out, especially when serious shortcomings are likely to be retained or even amplified. Along with confidence, encouraging education is likely to result in the child becoming extremely arrogant and unable to recognize his or her own shortcomings.
In addition, the modern education system tends to believe that self-confidence is an excellent quality. But in fact, the correlation between self-confidence and success has never been proven. For example, statistics on good business managers show that there is almost no correlation between confident managers and business success. Extreme confidence to the point of arrogance, and excessive low self-esteem and even depression are both things we want to avoid. But there is no clear superiority or inferiority between normal ranges of confidence and lack of confidence. More self-confidence means a greater propensity to take risks and so a greater deviation from failure and success; in contrast, lack of self-confidence leads to more cautious behavior and less susceptibility to making huge mistakes and breakthroughs. Our society has always been an environment where two personalities coexist, so there is no need to have to highlight the advantages of one over the other and ignore the reality that disadvantages also exist. An indirect piece of evidence is that there is a steady stream of creative artists in the United States, but the demand for engineers and scientists is far from being met, and there is also a need to bring in large numbers from East and Southeast Asia.
Thus, based on the available evidence, it is difficult to argue that encouraging education is always superior to critical education, and vice versa. But what we can say with certainty is that we want to avoid serious negative behaviors and, at the same time, to maintain very good qualities. Therefore, encouraging positive behavior and criticizing negative behavior may seem to be more appropriate at the moment.
In short, encouraging positive behaviors makes it possible for good behaviors to be perpetuated. Encouraging positive behaviors also gives the child confidence. Ignoring negative behaviors can result in mistakes that cannot be corrected. Therefore, encouragement is the main focus, but it is important to correct critical errors.