Rocket Science and other Misconceptions

This MSN article entitled Is Teaching Easier than Rocket Science? (there's been other versions of this available in the past) raised some insightful dialogue in several places, particularly on the math-learn discussion list.

I particularly like this comment from John Clement. The idea about understanding student misconceptions is woefully lacking in most of our teacher preparation programs, and is a reason why even well-meaning induction and support programs can't be very successful without some focus on content.

Actually "good" teaching is harder than rocket science, and rocket scientists do not generally make good teachers. In science, engineers often make very poor teachers because they do not understand inquiry. So they teach by didactic methods only, and as a result the students never resolve their misconceptions.

Teachers need to actually have more than content specialists. They also need to know some practical psychology, have a grasp of pedagogy, and also understand student misconceptions. Teachers have to be experts in both the subject and in teaching. Unfortunately schools do not seem to understand this. They will assign teachers to subjects they have never studied, and give them types of students that they were not trained to handle.

Harvard's Science Education Reform

The Harvard committee charged with setting priorities to improve science education there has issued their preliminary report. It calls for lots of construction, but also more hands-on learning and authentic undergraduate research. Funny that the challenges of Harvard are pretty similar to us in the K-12 sector.

About

Search

Notification

  • Join the announcement email list and receive an email message when this page is updated, roughly once a week.

    Email address are never shared with anyone. Privacy policy.

Recent Posts

Interests

Advertisements

  • Local Public Schools

Copyright