SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the fixing-the-teachers-should-help dept.
Active problem-solving confers a deeper understanding of science than does a standard lecture. But some university lecturers are reluctant to change tack.
Outbreak alert: six students at the Chicago State Polytechnic University in Illinois have been hospitalized with severe vomiting, diarrhea and stomach pain, as well as wheezing and difficulty in breathing. Some are in a critical condition. And the university's health centre is fielding dozens of calls from students with similar symptoms.
This was the scenario that 17 third- and fourth-year undergraduates dealt with as part of an innovative virology course led by biologist Tammy Tobin at Susquehanna University in Selinsgrove, Pennsylvania. The students took on the role of federal public-health officials, and were tasked with identifying the pathogen, tracking how it spreads and figuring out how to contain and treat it — all by the end of the semester.
In the end, the students pinpointed the virus, but they also made mistakes: six people died, for example, in part because the students did not pay enough attention to treatment. However, says Tobin, "that doesn't affect their grade so long as they present what they did, how it worked or didn't work, and how they'd do it differently". What matters is that the students got totally wrapped up in the problem, remembered what they learned and got a handle on a range of disciplines. "We looked at the intersection of politics, sociology, biology, even some economics," she says.
Tobin's approach is just one of a diverse range of methods that have been sweeping through the world's undergraduate science classes. Some are complex, immersive exercises similar to Tobin's. But there are also team-based exercises on smaller problems, as well as simple, carefully tailored questions that students in a crowded lecture hall might respond to through hand-held 'clicker' devices. What the methods share is an outcome confirmed in hundreds of empirical studies: students gain a much deeper understanding of science when they actively grapple with questions than when they passively listen to answers.
http://www.nature.com/news/why-we-are-teaching-science-wrong-and-how-to-make-it-right-1.17963
Original Submission
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Alfred on Thursday July 16 2015, @03:04PM
Math, Literature, Grammar, Government, Music, History, Wood Shop, whatever; they have all gone down hill. Each of the parties involved have brought the whole apparatus lower. You cannot blame any one group (students, teachers, curriculum developers, parents) you have to blame them all. Sending your kid to public school is consigning them to the worker class that doesn't need to be anything but repetitive.
I push my kids harder than their school does. I will give them books to read and things to learn. I will put down my video games to help my children be fast at arithmetic. I will invest in objects and experiences to improve them and make them smarter. I will give them an advantage so maybe their kids can go to private schools. I will change the 1.5 things I can change because this is my duty as a parent. Because no one else will do it for me or my children.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 16 2015, @04:03PM
Math, Literature, Grammar, Government, Music, History, Wood Shop, whatever; they have all gone down hill.
They were always awful. It was designed from the beginning to create factory workers and obedient people.
I will put down my video games to help my children be fast at arithmetic.
I would think having a deep, academic understanding of why the math works would be far more important than merely being able to perform calculations quickly. I suppose it could be useful, but even as a mathematician, I'm not too concerned about it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 17 2015, @12:52AM
Yes, "having a deep, academic understanding of why" is the most important. But, first, the student really needs a basic grasp of the "how" part. It's the laying of that "how" foundation which gives the student a basis for appreciating the "why". For example, I have spent countless hours trying to tutor people in algebra only to discover that the real problem the student is having is that they really haven't yet mastered the basics of how to add, subtract, multiply, and divide! Until the student learns that basic arithmetic, algebra will be mere gibberish. And please don't give me a finger-wagging lecture that I was not teaching them in a thoughtful or engaging way. I have tried countless times to appeal to the student's intuition in order to help their understandimng. So far, it has all been to no avail. At least that has been my experience.
(Score: 2) by Alfred on Friday July 17 2015, @02:05PM
Very Yes. Most people don't realize that. Schools are not for the direct benefit of the attendees.
That set of statements was built on the principle of my sacrifice for their gain.
As far as that exact arithmetic example. I don't want them to be some sort of addition Olympics champion, I want them to have reasonably quick subroutines at their disposal. I want them to be able to quickly work the coefficients in a big equation without losing their train of thought on the big picture instead of getting lost because they had to look at their fingers to count. In that way I want them to be able to explore the advanced concepts without being bogged down in the rudimentary.