Musings on Education

When will men who would never for a moment, encourage their sons to enter the work of the public schools, cease to cease to tell us that education is the greatest and highest of callings? Education does not need these compliments.

–William Chandler Bagley, Craftsmanship in Teaching

Print PDF

But the cynic forgets that there are some people that never lose their illusions, some men and women who are always young, and whatever may be the type of men and women that other callings and professions desire to enroll in their service, this is the type that education needs.

–William Chandler Bagely, “Craftsmanship in teaching”

Print PDF

Teaching technical topics, both from an instructor led approach and a self directed video approach can pose a variety of challenges.   One of the questions that comes up continually is how much detail should be given with respect to instructions.   Should instructions be step by step, indicating every button to push, or should they be more general, outlining the process without the “stereo installation instruction” level of detail.

In John M Gregory’s the seven laws of teaching he addresses this issue.   The third law, the law of language, asserts that:

The language used in teaching must be common to the teacher and the learner.

Read the rest of this entry »

Print PDF

I recently had the opportunity to read Gregory’s Seven Laws of Teaching, and felt it was worth putting up as an article.   The book is more than a century old, but it still has value when we think on the process of teaching.

1. The teacher must know that which he would teach.   And in a true teacher, a teacher must teach that which they know.
2. The learner must attend with interest the fact or truth to be learned.  Without the attention of the student, nothing can be learned.
3. The language used in teaching must be common to the teacher and the learner.
4. The truth to be taught must be learned through the truth already known.   A student can only learn based upon what they already know.
5. Excite and direct the  self-activities of the learner, and tell him nothing he can learn himself.
6. The learner must reproduce in his own mind the truth to be acquired.
7. The completion, test, and confirmation of teaching must be made by reviews.

Print PDF

A good courseware developer told me that course materials (i.e. PowerPoint slides in today’s world) are nothing more than a framework to help an instructor through a class.  They serve as a roadmap to assist the instructor in remembering what needs to be covered.

However, when we transition from the static course materials to teaching them, the instructor needs to develop a style, or method, of taking the course materials and lecturing on them.   In Bennion’s “Principles of Teaching” he actually addresses this question.   I hadn’t read such a good analysis of this process.   He indicates there are several different methods of delivery:

1. Tell a story
2. Reading Round
3. Special Topic
4. Lecture
5. Discussion

Some of these methods are applicable in today’s modern classroom, and others are not as good a match.

We can take a given lesson and elect to tell a story.   While Bennion says this is a good method for children I’d argue that in a work environment, it’s applicable as well, and can serve well to reinforce concepts.   For example, lets say we’re doing a lesson about preparing a press release.   We start by saying “Let me tell you a story about Tom, the admin assistant who was asked to prepare a press release, and had never done it before.”   We can go through his process of asking questions, looking at examples to determine how a good press release is structured.   The student, by following Tom’s story, can follow the relevant sections of learning, while we choose not to include the section of Tom’s story that lead him down the wrong path.

However, the trick to telling a story is to keep it brief, and to the point.   This is where we need to stay focused on what topic we’re teaching when we talk about this story.

Reading round is a very old concept that comes out of the 19th century.   You pass a book around from student to student, and each person reads a segment.   This model, as developed, ultimately ended up being pretty disastrous from a teaching model, as students really only retained the sections they themselves read.

However, we can use Reading Round for a different approach.  We can go around the classroom  and ask students what their experiences are with a given topic,  what challenges they have faced, and how they have dealt with them.   The instructor can comment in between each story, giving advice where appropriate.

The Special Topic method applies when we have material that doesn’t weave well in with the other material, but its critical that it be covered.   In longer classes it can be extended even further so a student is handed a special topic, and is asked to talk on it.   I’ve encountered this several times in my past, once in a mathematics class when I was in junior high, and once in a class at a Law School.   While the concept of special topics allows for in depth coverage of material, the problem is that it poses a problem with cohesion for the entire material covered in the course.

However, it does have the effect of engaging the students more than a standard lecture, and it also fosters individual expression.

The trick may be to use Special Topics sparingly, and only when it either involves material that doesn’t fit well within the course material, or alternatively, having the student research the topic provides enhanced learning.

The  Lecture method is what most instructors are used to, particularly in the technical field, an instructor gets up, and talks for 45-60 minutes on a topic.   I see this as typical undergraduate school education, particularly in the early years.  Lecturing allows the educator to make sure that the appropriate information is getting to the student.   However, what it lacks if used without other approaches, is feedback from the student.   Are they understanding what is being taught?   Have they formed some opinions about what the educator is talking about?

For example, when I am teaching about vulnerability scanning I advise students that they should be doing topology scans twice a day, vulnerability scans one a day, and compliance scans once a month.  (don’t worry if you don’t know what these are).   I have no real measure to know whether when the student goes home, whether they are likely to follow my advice.     So, the lecture method is terrific at getting out basic information, but when it comes to taking that information and applying it, the lecture method becomes less useful.

The Discussion (i.e. Socratic) method of instruction is commonly used in law schools.   This is where the educator poses a series of questions to the students, and has them respond.  The process of answering the question and exploring the possibilities allows them to learn.   In many ways, this method is the best method to reinforce a topic.   However, its not appropriate in many circumstances.   For example, if we’re talking about the navigation bar in a piece of software, and its components, its a little silly to ask a series of questions.  Though you could.   For example I could say “Where do you think you’d find the ability to print out a report?”   We could ask each student where they think it would be, and ultimately come up with the right answer.   However, it would be an extremely slow process, and might not be the best way to spend the student’s valuable time.

Ultimately, the trick to taking course materials and transitioning them to teaching is to mix and match styles, based upon the topic, the students, finding the best method for the given situation.

Print PDF