Robert Hansen (RH) posted Oct 9, 2012 4:48 AM: > > It's the same issue. Consider... > > Be able to poke holes. > Be able to scrape. > Be able to pry. > Be able to twist. > > I am describing what a screwdriver can do. If I > wanted to teach you about screwdrivers I would start > with a screwdriver, not its use cases. Likewise, to > teach you arithmetic I would start by teaching you > arithmetic, not its use cases. I think I am going to > clean that up and call it the fundamental rule of > teaching. > > That is the problem with designing a curriculum > around a list of standards. If teachers would just > teach arithmetic first, and well, most of the use > cases will follow. The rest will follow as you start > applying arithmetic to problems. What is the point of > teaching students the multiplication facts, and at > the same time, the distributive property? What are > they going to distribute? Every topic of this series > is approached in this manner. Garbled with half a > dozen use cases of something that hasn't even been > fully taught yet. > > Bob Hansen > I once had a chemistry teacher who informed us very true and necessary things like:
- -- This is a test-tube - -- This is a beaker... +++ - -- This is air - -- This is nitrogen (Much to everyone's surprise - but not our teacher's - they both looked the same!) +++ ... ... (and so on). [That's a bit of an exaggeration - but only slightly so].
I'm afraid none of us learned much chemistry.
Suggestion: The better way to enable learning would be to provide an instance of the 'thing' in question AND to demonstrate its properties/uses/use cases.
To me, the above seems obvious and utterly commonsensical. Above all, instead of going by RIGID rules, let the rules be made by the learner's needs, his/her curiosity.
What that chemistry teacher did was ALL WRONG! (As is what RH is suggesting).
GSC ("Still Shoveling Away!" - with apologies if due to Barry Garelick for any tedium caused; and a humble suggestion that all such tedium would be avoided by simply not looking at any message that is purported to be from GSC)