6 ms·
I understand the article, but the best teacher I ever had was an expert in his field, and taught by the Socratic method. Only teacher I've ever had that had en
by ep103 10y ago
I understand the article, but the best teacher I ever had was an expert in his field, and taught by the Socratic method. Only teacher I've ever had that had enough knowledge of a topic that he could both truly answer any question we asked via the method, _and_ answer in such a way as to direct the lesson. Miss that guy.
- iandanforth 10y agoEveryone who thinks they understand a topic should try to conduct a lecture with this method. It's so hard to not fall back on "because that's the way it is" or make declarations of truth. The effort involved in getting your audience to think though a subject often reveals how little careful thought we've put in ourselves.
- sitkack 10y agoI have often fallen into a trap where 1. I really like a subject, I jive on it for awhile 2. I try and teach it to people 3. They immediately reach the bounds of my knowledge and I cannot answer their questions To adequately teach a subject, the gap between the what you are teaching the student and your own knowledge needs to be adequately large because concepts will have "stringers" that exit that beginner sphere, loop around and re-enter. You can't teach to the limits of your own knowledge.
- Nadya 10y agoI've done this - but I also find for a limited group of subjects it's fine! I know my music theory and I know how to play piano [0]. I gifted a close friend a keyboard and taught her everything I knew about piano and music theory. Within 3 months she was a better pianist than I was - and two years later she was playing for the school choir and talent show. But that is a subject in which "You learn the basics - and the rest comes with hours and hours and hours of practice." Another example is language (can be iffy if your pronunciation/grammar isn't already near-fluent, even if your vocabulary or niche knowledge (eg: idioms) isn't fluent). You can teach someone the pronunciation, some basic grammar/vocabulary, and guide them towards becoming fluent themselves. A large part is being able to guide people towards resources so that after you've taught them all you know - they can teach themselves from there. [0] Not very well, but just well enough to play this with only a few mistakes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNajh166DBc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNajh166DBc
- sitkack 10y agoI think what you are describing is boot-strapping your peers. This is often the case when there is a mix of advanced-beginners and total neophytes. Like one student explaining IDE configuration, or how to debug a problem by looking at log files. The teacher in this case often learns as much as the student.
- Nadya 10y agoI guess that is one way to describe it! I bootstrap people to help them become self-directed learners. I get them past the hardest part of learning something new: not knowing where or how to start.
- sitkack 10y agoI would never want to hamper the flow of information, or bootstrapping people into a new subject. But bootstrapping is somewhat different than having the deep knowledge that is required for really teaching a subject. If the skill or area of knowledge lends itself to constructivism, then this style of pedagogy is a perfect match. Boots on!