You’ve told us what Detterman thinks but, uncharacteristically, you haven’t offered any reason we should agree with him. I’m open to being persuaded, but I’d like to be persuaded.
I don't like Detterman's philosophy of teaching at all. My style of teaching is based around the metaphors of a builder constructing a house or a mechanic fixing a machine. I fancy myself as the old hand while they are my young apprentices. I show them what tools are available and some of the things they can do. As those tools were handed to me by my elders i feel an obligation to hand them on intact to the youngsters, along with a few more I have picked up and cobbled together along the way.
"...teach people exactly what you want them to learn in a situation as close as possible to the one in which the learning will be applied."
This just looks like indoctrination and a man trying to replicate his own mind. There is no way we can know what enemies they will face and battles they will have to fight in the future, the best we teachers can do is try to make sure they don't have to face them unarmed.
Scott Alexander quote (from his student days How to teach without your students secretly hating you - Feb. 23rd, 2012 ): One of the most irritating teachers I ever had actually made a class of fifty medical students split up into groups of four, write down definitions of "global health" on a big piece of posterboard, and present them to the class. This took two hours of my life which I will never get back. In case you're wondering, the lavish-resort definition of global health is "health problems, issues, and concerns that transcend national boundaries, may be influenced by circumstances or experiences in other countries, and are best addressed by cooperative actions and solutions".
But knowing this doesn't make one a better doctor, any more than knowing an official definition of "chair" makes one a better furniture artisan. DOCTOR GELLING, GIVE ME MY TWO HOURS BACK!
Detterman was wrong to turn from teaching to think to teaching the specific claims, and it is this switch in what's taught that's at least partly responsible for many schools' decay.
Many parts of learning can be thought of as katas; exercises in technique. Other parts are like sparring. One learns best from sparring with someone more skilled, but not too far ahead.
When presenting an intellectual argument it is vital to show one’s work.
Since people are very diverse, it’s very possible that both approaches are valid for different sets of readers. Some might respond to the direct approach, but others may only be convincible by first showing them a way of reasoning, which they themselves might later apply to reach a similar conclusion
The lessons to impart depend on the audience. What a car owner should know about changing an air filter is rather simple. What a mechanic needs to know in order to trace a problem back to a faulty air filter requires deeper knowledge. And what an engineer needs to know in order to design an engine that might not even need an air filter is all together different.
As a long time student (school+university) plus teacher, I could not agree more. Some commenter wrote, "hey, this is just a thesis, deliver the argument". Indeed, it is not. But, then: "Hey" Work out the reasoning for yourself and do not complain it was not served on a silver tray". Seriously You do NOT want the teacher to tell you what are the best books/studies/profs in the given speciality? Or what she considers the best approaches and why? - Once, in a seminar about "Vocabulary acquisition in FLT" I very much wanted to learn better ways how to help learners to learn the vocabulary efficiently. After weeks of zero progress on that, I even asked the prof directly (in private) to come to the point and teach it to us. Well, the course ended without me or any student any wiser. What a. Waste.
That said: Where does Tyler ever argue for (more) socialism and against free markets or against immigration? One does not have to be an anarcho-capitalist to prefer a market-economy.
You’ve told us what Detterman thinks but, uncharacteristically, you haven’t offered any reason we should agree with him. I’m open to being persuaded, but I’d like to be persuaded.
I don't like Detterman's philosophy of teaching at all. My style of teaching is based around the metaphors of a builder constructing a house or a mechanic fixing a machine. I fancy myself as the old hand while they are my young apprentices. I show them what tools are available and some of the things they can do. As those tools were handed to me by my elders i feel an obligation to hand them on intact to the youngsters, along with a few more I have picked up and cobbled together along the way.
"...teach people exactly what you want them to learn in a situation as close as possible to the one in which the learning will be applied."
This just looks like indoctrination and a man trying to replicate his own mind. There is no way we can know what enemies they will face and battles they will have to fight in the future, the best we teachers can do is try to make sure they don't have to face them unarmed.
Scott Alexander quote (from his student days How to teach without your students secretly hating you - Feb. 23rd, 2012 ): One of the most irritating teachers I ever had actually made a class of fifty medical students split up into groups of four, write down definitions of "global health" on a big piece of posterboard, and present them to the class. This took two hours of my life which I will never get back. In case you're wondering, the lavish-resort definition of global health is "health problems, issues, and concerns that transcend national boundaries, may be influenced by circumstances or experiences in other countries, and are best addressed by cooperative actions and solutions".
But knowing this doesn't make one a better doctor, any more than knowing an official definition of "chair" makes one a better furniture artisan. DOCTOR GELLING, GIVE ME MY TWO HOURS BACK!
Detterman was wrong to turn from teaching to think to teaching the specific claims, and it is this switch in what's taught that's at least partly responsible for many schools' decay.
Your point seems obvious. Perhaps you’re not making it bluntly enough to Tyler. 😉
Many parts of learning can be thought of as katas; exercises in technique. Other parts are like sparring. One learns best from sparring with someone more skilled, but not too far ahead.
When presenting an intellectual argument it is vital to show one’s work.
Since people are very diverse, it’s very possible that both approaches are valid for different sets of readers. Some might respond to the direct approach, but others may only be convincible by first showing them a way of reasoning, which they themselves might later apply to reach a similar conclusion
The lessons to impart depend on the audience. What a car owner should know about changing an air filter is rather simple. What a mechanic needs to know in order to trace a problem back to a faulty air filter requires deeper knowledge. And what an engineer needs to know in order to design an engine that might not even need an air filter is all together different.
As a long time student (school+university) plus teacher, I could not agree more. Some commenter wrote, "hey, this is just a thesis, deliver the argument". Indeed, it is not. But, then: "Hey" Work out the reasoning for yourself and do not complain it was not served on a silver tray". Seriously You do NOT want the teacher to tell you what are the best books/studies/profs in the given speciality? Or what she considers the best approaches and why? - Once, in a seminar about "Vocabulary acquisition in FLT" I very much wanted to learn better ways how to help learners to learn the vocabulary efficiently. After weeks of zero progress on that, I even asked the prof directly (in private) to come to the point and teach it to us. Well, the course ended without me or any student any wiser. What a. Waste.
That said: Where does Tyler ever argue for (more) socialism and against free markets or against immigration? One does not have to be an anarcho-capitalist to prefer a market-economy.