One is led to believe that as we are educated we are transformed. So my question here is what do we mean by transformation and how much can one be transformed without losing the essence of who we are?
I have no doubt that some personality traits must be eliminated, when they are negative elements in the behavior of the individual. But thinking that one must reinforce and develop the good traits of personality that allows the individual to be a good member of our society, a good citizen, and to prepare him/her to perform in a constantly changing technological world, one can see that the need for transformation (in this sense) is what we are talking about.
So transformation as maturation/preparation can be addressed in education. I believe that this context will allow to clearly define the curriculum for transformation in a way that will work with and not against the needs of the student. This point is particularly critical as we know that students come to schooling from a very diverse background and personal history. So the need to personalize curriculum becomes now a days very important. How can we personalize education when schools have limited resources? How can we do it when it looks like the tendency today is that of normalization, standardization, and homogenization? Can we have individualized education through the use of technology?
Here I will say one thing about the last question. I think -YES. We could develop programs that using today's technologies could help individual students get the education they need to acquire or develop a level of understanding that permits them to perform providing the services required by society. Which means that as students get into the market economy of society they will be able to provide the service required (in other words -get a job) and be productive, constructive citizens.
This if course doesn't mean that we would not have standards for graduation, what it means is that the ways and means to get to those standards are going to be tailor made for each individual.
Friday, February 21, 2014
Wednesday, January 8, 2014
Boundaries and Expectations
Many of the techniques in conflict resolution apply to teaching, especially teaching subjects that are outside of what some people consider ordinary such as science. Of course science is and should be an ordinary thing and learning it should also be considered ordinary, but it is not in general. So I suggest that setting boundaries and establishing expectations is the first step in having a good relationship with students, of course this will be independent of subject matter but I think is especially important when teaching science.
It is common practice to require students to satisfy a minimum of competency when entering a class but in science this can be accomplished with a simple set of questions in a test. This will be the first boundary in this context. A minimum standard of knowledge for that course, both in regards to the subject and on the mathematical language required for the subject. Here is where most students fail: mathematics. The problem I think lies in the way that math is taught traditionally. Taught as an independent subject even though as examples of its implementation is common to see problems from physics like the displacement-velocity-time relationship used in differential calculus, or the simple algebra that relates mass and volume with density. But the problem arises when these mathematical concepts are applied to areas outside the traditional examples like the ones mentioned before. One area in particular that is troublesome is chemistry. It is not common to see in math courses examples from chemistry so when a student is in a chemistry class doesn't see how it can be applied. This is where establishing expectations for the course is important.
On the one hand the student must be clear on what is expected from him/her; and on the other what is the student to expect from the class, his/her peers, his/her professors and tutors, and the auxiliary material such as textbooks, and web related instruments. Addressing the first point: "what is expected from the student" is in particular difficult for several reasons. One reason of course is that students are a diverse group of people and not all have the same level of commitment or preparation. So when we think about the expectations we generalize and that might be a problem because students may feel that is not about them in particular and will not see the need to personalize the requirements established in the expectations until is too late, once the student starts to struggle in class due to the lack of preparation or commitment.
The only way I see to make the student aware of the personalization of the requirements in to do it regularly in class and not depend on the first day of class, as we normally introduce the syllabus and talk about the course in general. The teacher has to do it then but he/she has to go back to these expectations and boundaries regularly during the semester, and it has to be done intentionally and openly. What I do is to have one of the lab sessions designated to one-to-one interview where I explain clearly what I expect from them and what they can expect from me, at the same time it gives me the opportunity to learn what is their level of awareness regarding the difficulties of the course and the need for them to know and use all the resources available outside the classroom.
It is common practice to require students to satisfy a minimum of competency when entering a class but in science this can be accomplished with a simple set of questions in a test. This will be the first boundary in this context. A minimum standard of knowledge for that course, both in regards to the subject and on the mathematical language required for the subject. Here is where most students fail: mathematics. The problem I think lies in the way that math is taught traditionally. Taught as an independent subject even though as examples of its implementation is common to see problems from physics like the displacement-velocity-time relationship used in differential calculus, or the simple algebra that relates mass and volume with density. But the problem arises when these mathematical concepts are applied to areas outside the traditional examples like the ones mentioned before. One area in particular that is troublesome is chemistry. It is not common to see in math courses examples from chemistry so when a student is in a chemistry class doesn't see how it can be applied. This is where establishing expectations for the course is important.
On the one hand the student must be clear on what is expected from him/her; and on the other what is the student to expect from the class, his/her peers, his/her professors and tutors, and the auxiliary material such as textbooks, and web related instruments. Addressing the first point: "what is expected from the student" is in particular difficult for several reasons. One reason of course is that students are a diverse group of people and not all have the same level of commitment or preparation. So when we think about the expectations we generalize and that might be a problem because students may feel that is not about them in particular and will not see the need to personalize the requirements established in the expectations until is too late, once the student starts to struggle in class due to the lack of preparation or commitment.
The only way I see to make the student aware of the personalization of the requirements in to do it regularly in class and not depend on the first day of class, as we normally introduce the syllabus and talk about the course in general. The teacher has to do it then but he/she has to go back to these expectations and boundaries regularly during the semester, and it has to be done intentionally and openly. What I do is to have one of the lab sessions designated to one-to-one interview where I explain clearly what I expect from them and what they can expect from me, at the same time it gives me the opportunity to learn what is their level of awareness regarding the difficulties of the course and the need for them to know and use all the resources available outside the classroom.
Friday, December 27, 2013
How to teach intuition
Reading the book "Farewell to Reality" by Jim Baggott one finds the following quote by Einstein about the development of natural laws: "There is no logical path to these laws; only intuition, resting on symphathetic understanding of experience, can reach them".
So when we teach science there are really two elements that have to be addressed, on the one hand one has to teach ideas and their historical development; but on the other hand can we teach "intuition"? Many science teachers will say that what we do is teach "problem solving skills" which sounds very logical and sensible and in many cases happens to be the kind of skill that anybody will need in their professional activities. But also again and again history has shown how new concepts and innovations have been developed by not following procedures stated and regulated by a set of skills learned.
So my question is how do we teach students "intuition"?
So when we teach science there are really two elements that have to be addressed, on the one hand one has to teach ideas and their historical development; but on the other hand can we teach "intuition"? Many science teachers will say that what we do is teach "problem solving skills" which sounds very logical and sensible and in many cases happens to be the kind of skill that anybody will need in their professional activities. But also again and again history has shown how new concepts and innovations have been developed by not following procedures stated and regulated by a set of skills learned.
So my question is how do we teach students "intuition"?
Thursday, December 26, 2013
The need to know
Teaching chemistry to non-majors is challenging mainly because students don't feel the need to know. Why should a student that is thinking about pursuing careers in biology, pharmacy, medicine, physical therapy, or any other field in the health sciences needs to know about the periodic table, bond energies, or Gibbs free energy? The simpler answer is of course: because....
When framed within today's perception that knowledge should be utilitarian in the sense of direct practicability is difficult to answer the question, but looking from a wider perspective and knowing that learning topics based on immediate use is shortsighted we could try to answer the question by saying: It is not about the topic but about the process that leads to the knowledge of that topic. What I mean by this is that even though learning about the quantum model of electronic behavior around the atom may not have immediate use, comprehending how the model is developed and used in the understanding of the chemical behavior of elements in nature is the basis of a deeper level of thinking what one could call "complex-higher level" analysis.
The advantages of this higher level of thinking will undoubtedly be advantageous for students later in their career, when they will have to face challenges requiring this sort of analysis. It will be outside the realm of chemistry but the fundamental structure of the situation requiring solution will be similar to the structure of the problem analyzed in chemistry.
Further arguments are based on the perception that one can be a good user of ideas even if one lacks deep understanding of their history and evolution, but one will never be able to improve the use of these ideas or to innovate these ideas or to create different ideas in this field without that deepness on understanding. A pharmacist will be able to administer medicines prescribed by a doctor just by following the instructions on a prescription without understanding the bio-chemical functionality of the chemicals. But the pharmacist will not be able to know and therefore recommend a proper use of these medications when other medicines have been administered to the patient. This is extremely important as we now know that any medicine will have some secondary effects on the patient and it could be dangerous -in fact, in some cases with extreme consequences. It seems that is taken for granted that if the pharmacist is working in industry related to the development of medications, hir knowledge of bio-chemistry is fundamental.
The same could be mentioned about biology. One could argue that in order for a biologist to perform in hir field, say by studying plants, the only thing s/he needs is either a good memory (to remember all classification of species) or most likely today good access to the information but not how the cells in the organism is being fed. Of course that is false! As we know today in order to understand how an organism functions we must understand each individual organ works. In turn that means going all the way deeper into understanding how each organ is made of cells and these made of bio-chemicals, and these made of atoms.
This is where I get my chance to play, it is my turn when someone is asking questions about the how and why of a process in the natural world. So my roll as a chemistry professor is to facilitate a connection between everyday in my students life with every concept developed in class. This is why at the end of each semester I ask my students to write a short paper where they describe one or two concepts learned in class that relate to something they consider important or relevant in their lives.
When framed within today's perception that knowledge should be utilitarian in the sense of direct practicability is difficult to answer the question, but looking from a wider perspective and knowing that learning topics based on immediate use is shortsighted we could try to answer the question by saying: It is not about the topic but about the process that leads to the knowledge of that topic. What I mean by this is that even though learning about the quantum model of electronic behavior around the atom may not have immediate use, comprehending how the model is developed and used in the understanding of the chemical behavior of elements in nature is the basis of a deeper level of thinking what one could call "complex-higher level" analysis.
The advantages of this higher level of thinking will undoubtedly be advantageous for students later in their career, when they will have to face challenges requiring this sort of analysis. It will be outside the realm of chemistry but the fundamental structure of the situation requiring solution will be similar to the structure of the problem analyzed in chemistry.
Further arguments are based on the perception that one can be a good user of ideas even if one lacks deep understanding of their history and evolution, but one will never be able to improve the use of these ideas or to innovate these ideas or to create different ideas in this field without that deepness on understanding. A pharmacist will be able to administer medicines prescribed by a doctor just by following the instructions on a prescription without understanding the bio-chemical functionality of the chemicals. But the pharmacist will not be able to know and therefore recommend a proper use of these medications when other medicines have been administered to the patient. This is extremely important as we now know that any medicine will have some secondary effects on the patient and it could be dangerous -in fact, in some cases with extreme consequences. It seems that is taken for granted that if the pharmacist is working in industry related to the development of medications, hir knowledge of bio-chemistry is fundamental.
The same could be mentioned about biology. One could argue that in order for a biologist to perform in hir field, say by studying plants, the only thing s/he needs is either a good memory (to remember all classification of species) or most likely today good access to the information but not how the cells in the organism is being fed. Of course that is false! As we know today in order to understand how an organism functions we must understand each individual organ works. In turn that means going all the way deeper into understanding how each organ is made of cells and these made of bio-chemicals, and these made of atoms.
This is where I get my chance to play, it is my turn when someone is asking questions about the how and why of a process in the natural world. So my roll as a chemistry professor is to facilitate a connection between everyday in my students life with every concept developed in class. This is why at the end of each semester I ask my students to write a short paper where they describe one or two concepts learned in class that relate to something they consider important or relevant in their lives.
Monday, August 12, 2013
The chemistry of nature
As we look at whole picture we find an intrinsic interconnectedness between the material (science) and the non material super-natural world. I am not thinking of superstition or about a"magical" world. I am thinking about the "things" that we can't measure, at least until now. Things like "love", "empathy", "respect", "depression", etc. In her book Molecules of Emotions Dr. Pert explains how there is an intimate relationship between the biochemistry of the human being and the emotional status of that person. Along the same lines Dr. Hoffmann (1981 Nobel Prize in Chemistry) writes in his book "The Same and Not the Same" about the interconnectedness of discovery and human needs, with curiosity as the medium through which one is motivated. Thus asking questions becomes the driving engine.
Friday, April 19, 2013
e Learning
The only thing I want to register here today is an e book I just got from Amazon about teaching. The book is a compilation of articles published at The Teaching Professor. Teaching Strategies for the College Classroom: https://www.amazon.com/gp/css/order-history/ref=oh_menu_yo_new_digital?ie=UTF8&digitalOrders=1&orderFilter=last30&unifiedOrders=0
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
It's About Expectations
Two books that are helping me with the way I teach are Mind Over Mind by Chris Berdick and http://www.chrisberdik.com/ and The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt http://people.stern.nyu.edu/jhaidt/home.html. In these books the main topic is that we are not really rational humans but instead we use rationality to justify our feelings and desires. So pedagogically what would be the implications of these thoughts? More so as we teach science that is supposed to be the epitome of objectivity an rationality. True one thing is the object of study, the content in a science class and another how do we approach pedagogically the students both individuality and as a group. Based on what Haidt said we are dealing with emotional beings that will only go where their emotions lead them, so the pedagogical question then becomes how can the teacher influence the student's emotions? Or as Berdick postulates it is all about "expectations"! So, can the teacher establish or modify the student's expectations? One has to say "yes" to the last question if one is on the mission of education; and for the first question one has to say that "art" the art of teaching that includes compassion and empathy.
This art of teaching that is based on empathy is not new but has evolved in recent years as students come to class with a strong sense of entitlement, more so in the United States where parents have done everything in their power to be complacent, they will say supportive of their inheritors. The teacher in this situation must continue with support without diminishing the need that students have for affirmation but with the knowledge that the educator is not only a gate keeper for later studies but a guarantor, certifier of studies and degrees.
How can the educator provide the safe context for the student's emotions? How can the educator establish the frame of reference for the expectations for the course? One must acknowledge that these have to be done since before the class, one has to start with the design of the course i.e the syllabus.
The critics of long syllabi may state that students don't read the syllabus, therefore is dangerous to write a long one that discourages reading. One can argue that a long syllabus aka syllabook is a document that can be read in sections and can be read during the course of the class. The other avenue for the syllabook to be a living document is to have it online in the course management system where students have access and will be using practically every day during the course of the term.
This art of teaching that is based on empathy is not new but has evolved in recent years as students come to class with a strong sense of entitlement, more so in the United States where parents have done everything in their power to be complacent, they will say supportive of their inheritors. The teacher in this situation must continue with support without diminishing the need that students have for affirmation but with the knowledge that the educator is not only a gate keeper for later studies but a guarantor, certifier of studies and degrees.
How can the educator provide the safe context for the student's emotions? How can the educator establish the frame of reference for the expectations for the course? One must acknowledge that these have to be done since before the class, one has to start with the design of the course i.e the syllabus.
The critics of long syllabi may state that students don't read the syllabus, therefore is dangerous to write a long one that discourages reading. One can argue that a long syllabus aka syllabook is a document that can be read in sections and can be read during the course of the class. The other avenue for the syllabook to be a living document is to have it online in the course management system where students have access and will be using practically every day during the course of the term.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)