Betsy Corcoran, formerly the CEO of EdSurge, in the comments of my last post about the limitations of teaching as entertaining: I have long thought that there's a difference between educators who are fundamentally fascinated by the subject versus the
Great article. We definitely need both. I wonder if we might extend this thought to ‘we need to love math, students and TEACHING?’ Feel like I have seen those that love math & students but it often isn’t powerful enough without a good understanding of pedagogy? Of course it is easier to acquire this swiftly if you love the math and the kids :)
"Students are not a blank screen onto which teachers can project and trace out their own knowledge. Meaning is made by the student. It isn’t transferred by the teacher. " -DMeyer.
Such a powerful point -- great teachers need to cultivate a love of the subject and love of math. And what I particularly appreciate about this point is the sense of time. We start something -- a project or even our life's work -- for one reason. And over time, it grows and morphs and other reasons come into play. Recognizing that we're all on trajectories would help us swat away alot of those "gotcha!" arguments that seem to happen so frequently.
But I digress: I also wanted to underscore the point that I quoted from Dan's intro: Meaning is made by the learners. We're not just dumping information into their brains. I'd love to hear thoughts from others about how AI tutors support that insight. I think many of us worry that much of the "tutoring" that is going on treats students' minds like one of those old "paint by numbers" exercises.
Or perhaps we should be okay with that? Because bridging the love for the student and love for the subject may be the exquisitely most human part of teaching?
What do you think of “love of learning” as a motivation? I’m not a teacher but seriously considered it. Me, I love that “aha” moment when something clicks and want to help others feel it too. Is that a sustainable energy source for teaching? (I still debate if adjunct professor is something I should try as a “retirement career.”)
I wonder if it’s helpful to have a definition of teaching, or the definition of a teacher. It might be that because of the fuzziness of this situation, that we are forever backing our heads against the different versions, and what passes for teaching. One problem I have thought present is that pedagogy is not regarded As a separate endeavor to pursue, whether artfully or scientifically. It is this lack of regard that I believe renders teaching the second class citizen the world over, second to the subject matter.
Really thought provoking. Writing and literature are my things rather than math, and I certainly started with a love (or rather fascination) with reading and writing, but once I started teaching I became hugely interested in the "problem" of teaching, how to best help students learn the skills, attitudes, knowledge and habits of of mind that help them engage in what I call a "shared inquiry into the subject at hand," or in other words, the course. Teaching then became a continuous experiment with real-life stakes where students could be collaborators in the experiment. That experiment is ultimately what I'm most fascinated by, but the fascination with the underlying subjects seems to be necessary fuel as well.
Hi Dan! When you get back from Spring Break, can you tell us more about how this book is different from the original. I would have preferred that you were more transparent about the original 5 Practices in your letter to us.
I love this article and it fits perfectly with some teacher reflection I am leading this spring. The second link to the Smith and Stein information took me to the same page for the book you wrote the forward to. I would appreciate getting the correct link and seeing the resources you mentioned if possible.
Thanks for always sending your thoughtful articles that often seems to land in my inbox on the perfect day with a message I need to hear!
Great article. We definitely need both. I wonder if we might extend this thought to ‘we need to love math, students and TEACHING?’ Feel like I have seen those that love math & students but it often isn’t powerful enough without a good understanding of pedagogy? Of course it is easier to acquire this swiftly if you love the math and the kids :)
"Students are not a blank screen onto which teachers can project and trace out their own knowledge. Meaning is made by the student. It isn’t transferred by the teacher. " -DMeyer.
Such a powerful point -- great teachers need to cultivate a love of the subject and love of math. And what I particularly appreciate about this point is the sense of time. We start something -- a project or even our life's work -- for one reason. And over time, it grows and morphs and other reasons come into play. Recognizing that we're all on trajectories would help us swat away alot of those "gotcha!" arguments that seem to happen so frequently.
But I digress: I also wanted to underscore the point that I quoted from Dan's intro: Meaning is made by the learners. We're not just dumping information into their brains. I'd love to hear thoughts from others about how AI tutors support that insight. I think many of us worry that much of the "tutoring" that is going on treats students' minds like one of those old "paint by numbers" exercises.
Or perhaps we should be okay with that? Because bridging the love for the student and love for the subject may be the exquisitely most human part of teaching?
What do you think of “love of learning” as a motivation? I’m not a teacher but seriously considered it. Me, I love that “aha” moment when something clicks and want to help others feel it too. Is that a sustainable energy source for teaching? (I still debate if adjunct professor is something I should try as a “retirement career.”)
I love this book! I did my PhD with it! Thank you for remembering it to me!
I wonder if it’s helpful to have a definition of teaching, or the definition of a teacher. It might be that because of the fuzziness of this situation, that we are forever backing our heads against the different versions, and what passes for teaching. One problem I have thought present is that pedagogy is not regarded As a separate endeavor to pursue, whether artfully or scientifically. It is this lack of regard that I believe renders teaching the second class citizen the world over, second to the subject matter.
Really thought provoking. Writing and literature are my things rather than math, and I certainly started with a love (or rather fascination) with reading and writing, but once I started teaching I became hugely interested in the "problem" of teaching, how to best help students learn the skills, attitudes, knowledge and habits of of mind that help them engage in what I call a "shared inquiry into the subject at hand," or in other words, the course. Teaching then became a continuous experiment with real-life stakes where students could be collaborators in the experiment. That experiment is ultimately what I'm most fascinated by, but the fascination with the underlying subjects seems to be necessary fuel as well.
Hi Dan! When you get back from Spring Break, can you tell us more about how this book is different from the original. I would have preferred that you were more transparent about the original 5 Practices in your letter to us.
I love this article and it fits perfectly with some teacher reflection I am leading this spring. The second link to the Smith and Stein information took me to the same page for the book you wrote the forward to. I would appreciate getting the correct link and seeing the resources you mentioned if possible.
Thanks for always sending your thoughtful articles that often seems to land in my inbox on the perfect day with a message I need to hear!