Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » Education » math-teach

Topic: True STEM Preparation?
Replies: 8   Last Post: Sep 18, 2012 10:54 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Dave L. Renfro

Posts: 4,546
Registered: 12/3/04
Re: True STEM Preparation?
Posted: Sep 17, 2012 2:54 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Kirby Urner wrote (in part):

http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=7891650

> However, I do think television is important for education,
> has been since its inception but the changes were
> exponential. The world is different now.


It's interesting (to me) seeing this today, as just this
morning on the way to work I stopped by a photocopy store
to make some copies of math papers from a few journals
I had checked out and looked through this weekend, and one
of the papers I made a copy of was the following:

Martin F. Fritz and John A. Greenlee, "Training TV teachers",
Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Science 60 (1953), 510-513.

Volume 60 contains the proceedings of the 65th meeting of the
Iowa Academy of Science, held at Cornell College (Mt. Vernon,
Iowa), on 17-18 April 1953.

Of course, this is not a math paper. It just looked like
something useful to file away with my chronologically ordered
"cultural items" I have in some loose leaf notebooks, which
I use to get a better perspective of the various eras
involved in some of my historical-math pursuits. (On the
extreme off-chance that someone one day might come across
this post and wonder what I was mainly after in this journal,
it was some research reports by Henry P. Thielman, Buchanan
Cargal, Newton B. Smith, and perhaps some others, that relate
to work done by Henry Blumberg.)

Below are some excerpts from the paper that I offer for
math-teach reader amusement.

- -------- from bottom p. 510 to top p. 511 ----------

It needs to be emphasized that knowledge of materials to be
taught remains important and there is not the slightest
evidence that television in any way reduces the need for
mastery of a subject-matter field. In fact, TV places a
premium upon mastery of information because there must be
less verbal fumbling or trial-and-error explanation than
would be tolerated in a classroom.

It is now clear that a memorized script is not necessary.
A subject-matter specialist with teaching "know how" can
talk informally with great effectiveness. The very fact
of informality enables the viewer to empathize with the
speaker and serves to increase the feeling of immediacy.

- ---------------------- [snip] ----------------------

Rate of speaking should be deliberate and unlike radio
it is not necessary to keep up a continuous stream of
"chatter". When demonstrations are being presented, it
is possible to have long periods of silence and still
maintain a high degree of effectiveness.

- --------------- from middle of p. 512 ---------------

One justifiable criticism frequently made of television
is that much of the material could just as well be
transmitted by the more economical medium of radio.
The rule for television is: maximize the visual!

New TV teachers should always be instructed to hold
the end of a pointer (or pencil when it is used) against
a chart, blackboard, or object. Unless this is done
there will be a distracting waver. Also, the pointer
must be held on a particular spot much longer than
is ordinarily realized.

- ----------------------------------------------------

Dave L. Renfro

------- End of Forwarded Message



Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.