4 ms·
It actually is a pretty reasonable expectation for someone not completely clueless about education. Many people in fields like mathematics or CS (and sadly also
by bildung 5y ago
It actually is a pretty reasonable expectation for someone not completely clueless about education. Many people in fields like mathematics or CS (and sadly also in the respective teaching positions) have only very rudementary concepts of the inner workings of the human mind, and e.g. equate the content with the mode of delivery.
> to someone of moderate learning/intelligence.
It's mostly about the learning, not the intelligence, i.e. current state of research shows only loose correlation to intelligence (g factor) and favors models that use a domain-specific skill to explain maths competency. Intelligence will certainly help, but its effect is quite overvalued.
- zepto 5y ago> It actually is a pretty reasonable expectation for someone not completely clueless about education. No it isn’t. It is an extreme claim that advanced mathematics can easily be explained to someone regardless of their intelligence. The evidence for this claim would be the presence educational programs that can easily educate almost anyone in advanced mathematics. These do not exist.
- pbhjpbhj 5y agoI made no such claim, it's very hard to explain complex topics, much harder than 'just' understanding them. Certainly impossible in some cases. But a shallower explanation is the essence of what encyclopedias are all about, IMO.
- zepto 5y ago> But a shallower explanation is the essence of what encyclopedias are all about, IMO I think that’s due to encyclopedias having been sets of books with limited space.