I am trying to understand whether a person who did not attend the courses in math and science, should be able to teach such topics to the extend that she/he would know how to prepare the students.
While the teaching methodologies might help, math and science are still logical, therefore, the links made at brain level will be located in different areas than those made for history, religion etc. knowledge.
Here is a study done : https://www.cifar.ca/cifarnews/2018/08/28/where-does-the-brain-do-math
" These areas weren’t activated by non-math problems, and were not activated in the non-mathematicians who treated complex mathematical statements as gibberish. What’s more, processing mathematical problems used little or none of the brain that is associated with sentence processing. For professional mathematicians, math really does seem to use a different part of the brain than language. "
Hello I agree with professor should know what they teach. If i am a philosopher how can I transmit knowledge from math orchemistry I don't understand this question?
But there are countries with a doctor medical carrer in 3 years and nothing happened
Ingrid
There is a school of thought that says that if someone has the appropriate pedagogical skills to deliver a set of knowledge then, providing that they have enough time to assimilate new knowledge they should be able to deliver that also (to a standard dictated by the level of the 'new' knowledge that they have just learned).
This partly addresses this idea:
http://www.oecd.org/education/ceri/Background_document_to_Symposium_ITEL-FINAL.pdf
Dear David Wooff
Yet, a teacher is required to have those Cognitive abilities. Those teachers that have a highly developed cortex went through certain education and background as it is written in the article that you kindly shared with us.
The technologies should be developed such that the knowledge can be properly delivered at an individual level. Having group discussion on solving math problems becomes a group knowledge under the "guidance" of a teacher who does not know math. Again math in particular is not a "language" that someone can learn it after a certain age. Its construct require time and effort. So then, why don't we see a better approach to math through OECD? Who gains and who loses?
Dear all,
I have the link to this article that was posted in Ont./Canada because it proves how the politicians interfere with knowledge, therefore, increase the level of "wonder" in math leading to less knowledge but increase costs over long time period.
https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/exclusive-new-math-curriculum-goes-back-to-the-basics
Again, the reason a person studies a topic is because it meets that desire for knowledge. The fact that someone does not like that topic it simply means that s/he shall never teach it.
Teaching and learning is about establishing that communion (relationship) of knowledge between "teacher" and "student" that many times is not even "seen" or "perceived" correctly, but it can be easily measured as an outcome.
When the outcome (grades, quality of knowledge etc.) that characterizes certain "teaching hrs." are decreasing, it simply implies that the approach is wrong, therefore, changes are needed to be implemented fast.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Teaching