I’m a Physics grad student who’s also taking Teaching Cert. classes. A recent reading assignment made the point that knowing the answer is a passive kind of knowing that is often overemphasized in classrooms. The state of not-knowing can be used to encourage students to actively learn and come to understand new ideas. It’s easy to undervalue this process as a teacher and as a student because students get rewarded MUCH more for knowing the answer than for not knowing the answer - I can’t think of many tests that gave students points for not knowing the answer. In the class I TA, the quizzes/homework sets are machine graded. My students don’t get partial credit for gettting close to the answer - this is class where knowing the answer is really everything.
So in theory, not-knowing-the-answer is a great thing and it’s a big part of what real learning is about. But in practice, it’s hard to teach people how to appreciate this because to make the grade - the rule is often to get rid of ignornace as quickly as possible rather than exploit it for real learning.
So how we do this? Any one have any CONCRETE ideas? Has anyone had any positive (or even negative) experiences with teaching students how to overcome ignorance in a creative way? Has anyone had any teachers who were good at this? If you have any good stories to tell, please tell.
Hmm, let’s see. First you say that “knowing the answer is a passive kind of knowing that is often overemphasized in classrooms.” Then you passively sit back and wait for our answers! Apparently you missed the point of the reading.
Yup… apparently. I realized that after I posted that… but I’d still like to hear stories if anyone has them.
Fortunately, this evening provided me with a more active way to approach the assignment. I just spent 4 and half hours tutoring people one on one in varied topics and when I could I tried to let them meet me more than halfway on the answer. It was difficult, but I think it was worth the effort. It’s easy to try out this kind of stuff in one-on-one situations - but much more difficult in the classroom. I’m not sure how to translate this to a class with 30+ students. I have 3 chances to try it out tomorrow but I’m reluctant to spend too much of my class time. I have less time and more stuff to get across.
I think “not knowing” is kind of neutral. It takes on value depending on how we respond to it.
I think that “not knowing” is stigmatized enough that it’s often tempting to try to come up with the quickest way to know the answer - even if that way doesn’t involve much understanding or appreciating. It’s unfortunate.
You’re describing the process of critical thinking.
First, you as the educator, have to be able to think in critical paths yourself. You have to be passionate enough about the subject to make the class curious about the subject.
You can’t just hand over information in a linear fashion, instead you have to drop breadcrumbs for them to follow into the heart of the subject.
In a way, you have to make the subject mysterious, a puzzle, of sorts, so once they’ve gathered a few pieces, they will be equipped to figure out the next step.
Your’re teaching them to use common sense.
Its not easy, and in my opinion can never truly be taught. But you can offer up the right tools.
The rewards have to come from within the journey. Conventional testing is at odds with the whole concept. If you’re tied to the existing testing process, find a way to minimize its impact.
I’m not sure if I’ve been clear.
When they asked a past Jeopardy winner how he won, he answered that, some were stuff he knew, some were stuff that popped in his head that he must have learned but forgot until then, and some were stuff that he reasoned and made his best guess. :rolleyes: :smack:
Knowing facts is of little real use, and with easy access to Wickipedia etc. becoming even less useful. The real useful skills are how to find and judge the validity of facts (even judging those you allready ‘know’). How to understand methods and how to apply and or modify an existing tested method to a new problem. How to when you have a problem, break it down into solvable parts, and work with each part both on its own and with respect to the whole of the problem. Knowing how to use time productively and how to check what you are doing is still relivent to a problem, and check for errors in work as you do it.
I am pretty sure that a small percentage of the facts that you know, are in fact wrong, either due to memory malfunction, or being taught an error or over simplification. The ability to double check your facts is vital when a problem you need to solve requires the correct facts.
That should really say memorizing the facts is of little real use. You of course need at some stage to know the facts, but ‘knowing’ them out from memory is a risky strategy since human memory can often be mistaken/mislead.
