5 ms·

I don't think it's the opposite—there are many who "can" who can't teach. (I say this based in part on seven years of taking physics courses at Harvard and Calt

by mhartl 15y ago

I don't think it's the opposite—there are many who "can" who can't teach. (I say this based in part on seven years of taking physics courses at Harvard and Caltech. Trust me: some of the most brilliant physicists absolutely suck in the classroom.) That said, Jim and Joe are clearly exceptional in both respects—guys who can do, and who definitely can teach as well.

archgoon 15y ago
Do you think it was because they were uninterested in teaching, or were earnest but inept at communicating concepts that were already firmly established in their minds? (My pardon, I meant to upvote you, but clicked wrong. :( )
- mhartl 15y ago
  While apathy certainly explains many mediocre instructors, I know for a fact that some outstanding scientists desperately want to be good at teaching but just don't have the magic touch. As a mathematician might put it, knowing the material is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for being able to explain it.
  - squasher 15y ago
    It's not a magic touch, it's a learnable skill. A skill that's damn hard to learn and takes years of dedication, introspection, and humility, but learnable nonetheless.
    - mhartl 15y ago
      So is playing basketball, but we can't all be Earvin Johnson.