Seven laws of Teaching

["Bruce Cattanach" <bcattanach@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dale,

Great Laws of teaching!  I think you make a good point:

|| Constructivism might be OK for learning how to program a computer where
errors are part of the game possibly even providing learning experiences.
Learning how to program a computer in a language you do not expect to earn a
living with or use to program your Mother's new webpage. ||

That is exactly what I do.  And with a class of 9 - 12 years old it might be
valid.  No one uses Logo or for that matter PASCAL to make a living, however
both can be valuable for learning computger concepts and problem solving.  

John Gregory has it on track.  The only discussion point it raises for me is
whether the teacher needs to be the "fountain head of knowledge" all the
time.

I have printed out your laws of teaching and will be presenting it to our
Curriculum Director.  Might be a refreshing view from the 'brain based' and
the 'differentiated instruction' we seem to be awash in now. 

Regards,

Bruce Cattanach

-----Original Message-----
From: mwforum-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:mwforum-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dale Reed
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 12:34 AM
To: mwforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Looking for ideas from teachers of MicroWorlds EX


> In order to teach well, we must understand the mental models that 
> students
use to perceive the world and the assumptions they make to support those
models.

> Instead, it promotes using curricula customized to the students' prior
knowledge.

> Under the theory of constructivism, educators focus on making 
> connections
between facts and fostering new understanding in students.

Implies that the teacher is brighter and more knowledgeable than his
student.  That the teacher knows more about what is in the student's mind
than the student does.  That the teacher knows the Real Reason that the
student is taking the class.  For each of the students in the class.

I taught(Teaching Assistance) Engineering for three years while working on
my Masters in Electrical Engineering.  I did not have any trouble showing a
student how *I* worked the problem that I had assigned.  But seldom was I
able to understand the student's thought processes and determine the
critical assumptions that were influencing his work.  Maybe if I had more
time and experience teaching I could of done a better job for the average
students but never for future Bill Gates and Isaac Newtons.   The students
who in the future would make the world go around.

This Constructivism Thingy might be OK for learning how to program a
computer where errors are part of the game possibly even providing learning
experiences.   Learning how to program a computer in a language you do not
expect to earn a living with or use to program your Mother's new webpage.

But if the student wants to learn facts(Geology for example), or
skills(prepare himself to earn a living playing a violin), or learn how to
fill out his Income Tax I advise him to find a teacher that knows the
correct answers and tells him what the facts are.  The teacher must repeat
the lessons many different times, and in many different ways, until the
student demonstrates that he has learned what the teacher knows he needs to
know.

And it does not take a teacher who is brighter than the student to do this.
Dale
---
$ dale-reed@xxxxxxx    Seattle, Washington USA $