There's a lot of fun in math. Do we really have to teach such dead material? If we could get a cadre of people who love math and who get it the way you get it or the way I get it -- people who know what math is about -- you don't need to tell them how to teach. You just leave them alone, and it'll be OK.1. Teaching is hard. You do need to teach them how to teach. It won't be OK.
2. His idea is that the main obstacle to excited students is the content, but kids encounter content through pedagogy. Content is not enough, and for that reason content-knowledgeable people is not enough.
Update: Patrick Honner clarifies Strogatz's position in the comments:
Maybe it's not clear from the context, but the "you just leave them alone, and it'll be ok" line refers to the administrative and curricular micromanaging that many teachers face nowadays. It isn't a claim that content-knowledgeable people are automatically good teachers.
In particular, Strogatz was talking about the freedom his Calculus teacher, Mr. Jofffray (the subject of The Calculus of Friendship) had in the way he taught the subject. The school trusted him. He could "put his own stamp" on the course--that is, teach it the way it made sense to him, and make his own personal pedagogic decisions.
It's also worth noting that, in the book, Strogatz points out that Mr. Joffray was not the most knowledgeable mathematician, even at the school where he taught. As a student, Strogatz was initially skeptical, but learned that a lot more than content went into making a great teacher.
Maybe it's not clear from the context, but the "you just leave them alone, and it'll be ok" line refers to the administrative and curricular micromanaging that many teachers face nowadays. It isn't a claim that content-knowledgeable people are automatically good teachers.
ReplyDeleteIn particular, Strogatz was talking about the freedom his Calculus teacher, Mr. Jofffray (the subject of The Calculus of Friendship) had in the way he taught the subject. The school trusted him. He could "put his own stamp" on the course--that is, teach it the way it made sense to him, and make his own personal pedagogic decisions.
It's also worth noting that, in the book, Strogatz points out that Mr. Joffray was not the most knowledgeable mathematician, even at the school where he taught. As a student, Strogatz was initially skeptical, but learned that a lot more than content went into making a great teacher.
Thanks for the clarification. I'll push it into the main body of the post.
DeleteThanks for the great interview!
Thanks for posting this Michael. I was fortunate to see Strogatz give a lecture last winter at Princeton (and get "The Joy of x" signed). He was amazing. One thing I thought was curious: I asked him what his opinion was of the math common core standards, how he felt they might effect math education and his future students. He admitted that he knew very little about them.
ReplyDeleteDefinitely agree with you, Michael. Reminds me of this post and video http://deltascape.blogspot.com/2014/01/not-so-easy-is-it.html of Deborah Ball talking about misconceptions, as well as your work at Math Mistakes. Diagnosing and responding to misconceptions is just one of the areas that I, as a math teacher and lifelong math lover turned teacher, have struggled with. I think what drives me and makes me a better teacher is more my love of pedagogy--of figuring out misconceptions, planning for them, and structuring lessons around them--than my love of content.
ReplyDelete