Name: Mr. Science !/sdw8f7Aa6 2007-03-16 8:49 ID:mtO18IOp
I disagree with the OP of http://dis.4chan.org/read/sci/1173802068/1-, however I agree that science sometimes uses unnecessarily complex language to describe things. I often find myself coming across some garble that I have to spend 5 minutes looking up to decipher, only to discover the concept I was worried over was in fact wee easy and could have been explained using layman's language and often with less volume of text.
It takes 4 steps to teach someone a concept.
Ensure background knowledge (if anything is lacking simply teach someone the concept they are unaware of using these 4 steps).
The smallest explanation possible of that concept. By this I mean abbreviated, not over-simplified or abridged.
Examples to help the student illsutrate, remember and prove the function of the concept.
Problems to solve using that concept for the same reason.
I just came up with these 4 steps on the spot based on how I usually explain something by explaining the concept first and giving and example then adding 2 more steps following how I learned things as a student. I decided to post this in a new thread because although the OP of http://dis.4chan.org/read/sci/1173802068/1- was wrong most of the time he did bring up the point that some concepts in science are actually quite easy but tend to be distorted from the normal understanding by scientists and when the new distorted form is presented to laymen and students it can be confusing. This point needs to be distinguished from the OP's conspiracy theory. Indeed some people misunderstand this confusion and believe it to be stupidity when in fact the student may well be perfectly capable of understanding the concept if it was presented in layman's terms, but this is due more to experienced scientists creating abbreviations and additional concepts of their own which people are not familiar with. There is a difference between knowing the elemental symbols for the actinides and understanding the lorentz transformation. One depends more on memory and the other depends more on cognitive ability.
I believe there is a superior form of education which can follow these concepts with a clear structure from base concepts that 4 year olds are aware of all the way up to university level analytic skills and knowledge. What do you think?
It takes 4 steps to teach someone a concept.
Ensure background knowledge (if anything is lacking simply teach someone the concept they are unaware of using these 4 steps).
The smallest explanation possible of that concept. By this I mean abbreviated, not over-simplified or abridged.
Examples to help the student illsutrate, remember and prove the function of the concept.
Problems to solve using that concept for the same reason.
I just came up with these 4 steps on the spot based on how I usually explain something by explaining the concept first and giving and example then adding 2 more steps following how I learned things as a student. I decided to post this in a new thread because although the OP of http://dis.4chan.org/read/sci/1173802068/1- was wrong most of the time he did bring up the point that some concepts in science are actually quite easy but tend to be distorted from the normal understanding by scientists and when the new distorted form is presented to laymen and students it can be confusing. This point needs to be distinguished from the OP's conspiracy theory. Indeed some people misunderstand this confusion and believe it to be stupidity when in fact the student may well be perfectly capable of understanding the concept if it was presented in layman's terms, but this is due more to experienced scientists creating abbreviations and additional concepts of their own which people are not familiar with. There is a difference between knowing the elemental symbols for the actinides and understanding the lorentz transformation. One depends more on memory and the other depends more on cognitive ability.
I believe there is a superior form of education which can follow these concepts with a clear structure from base concepts that 4 year olds are aware of all the way up to university level analytic skills and knowledge. What do you think?