3 ms·
I too find the "dante's inferno method" (i just made that up) effective, in which you start with a high level explanation then progress through deeper details i
by inanutshellus 2y ago
I too find the "dante's inferno method" (i just made that up) effective, in which you start with a high level explanation then progress through deeper details iteratively.
* Hearts is a card game
* Hearts is a card game with tricks
* In Hearts, winning tricks is bad, you want others to win tricks.
* In Hearts, you win tricks by...
Often it's really hard to see yourself in the newbie's eyes.
(e.g. turns out I don't know what a trick is, so while you're explaining the nuance of tricks and going into more ad more detail, I'm waiting for you to explain what a trick is getting more confused and frustrated.).
You aren't aware of what concepts are confusing, or how many weird words/concepts you can pile on before someone just disconnects.
- Buttons840 2y agoI like the name. :) I've often thought multiple passes over a topic, beginning with a short pass, and giving more details in each subsequent pass, is a good teaching method. I haven't done it much myself though, and I haven't seen it done by others very often. I wonder if it really is a good teaching method in practice?
- inanutshellus 2y agoUnquestioningly a "good" practice, but it takes more time and effort on the part of the teacher, who has to take the audience into account when creating his layers of Hell--err, explanation.