3 ms·
Somehow related to this: I think that the linear way of teaching, first week you teach a, second week b.. it's inferior to showing everything to the student, in
by RobertoG 7y ago
Somehow related to this: I think that the linear way of teaching, first week you teach a, second week b.. it's inferior to showing everything to the student, in a very shallow way, the sooner the better, and then keep adding deepness.
In the same way that muscle need to rest to grow, knowledge need to rest to stay with you. Even if subjectively seems that nothing has been learned the first time that you are in contact with a subject, that is hardly ever truth. Even if only the name of the concepts are familiar that's some progress from where it's possible to build solid knowledge.
- HeWhoLurksLate 7y agoBasically me in AP Calc the whole year long.
- Arun2009 7y agoI too am a huge believer in breadth-first learning rather than depth-first, and my reasoning is the same: in my experience, ideas need to stay with you for a while before they take root in your mind and you get used to them. The big ideas in any Mathematics subject are usually very few. They can be covered at a high-level in a few classes before going into them in detail. This also gives you a broader context for you to place the details as you come across them.
- xemdetia 7y agoOn this linear schedule the most annoying thing for me is when the thing you actually need down the road kept getting bumped from teaching schedules along the way.
- _0ffh 7y agoYeah, I think breadth-first is also better for student engagement. No more "what do I even need this for"-"two months pass"-"oh, that's what I need this for" cycles.