Tue Dec 11, 2012, 12:21 PM
FarCenter (17,316 posts)
Khan Academy Founder Salman Khan Breaks Down The Future Of Education And Learning
1. Theory may not be as important as before.
2. Even people in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) will be considered creative.
3. You will still need to have a solid base of knowledge and conceptual understanding before you can make connections.
4. Data narratives and deep assessment diagnostics will replace test score snapshots.
5. The internet will be used to identify talent, and perhaps even genius.
2 replies, 637 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Response to FarCenter (Original post)
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 12:41 PM
enlightenment (8,830 posts)
2. This man has trouble staying on track
from one sentence to the next:
“Sometimes I think people confuse rote learning with traditional conceptual instruction. A good traditional conceptual instruction is what I got from my better professors at MIT. They would be at a chalkboard, and they would literally be explaining something and working through a problem, but it wasn’t rote. They were explaining the underlying theory and processes and intuition behind it. And some people just assume that if you have an equation on the board or you are working through mathematical symbols that it is somehow rote, which is not the case.”
“I personally believe that most of the time if you’ve worked yourself enough, your brain starts to draw connections. Sometimes the connections happen before the problem solving, sometimes the problem solving happens before the connections. There are basic rote things that people do have to know, such as the multiplication tables and basic addition and subtraction. And even once you get into higher mathematics, you’re more likely to be able to engage at a more fluent level if you do have some key things that are in rapid access memory.”
Conceptual instruction is better than rote, because it explains theory (that thing he said maybe wasn't as important) and processes and intuition (I had no idea intuition could be 'explained').
If you work your brain enough, it starts to draw connections. In the context of this discussion, the assumption is that you are "working your brain" by doing mathematical equations. Doing them "enough" suggests that you are practicing and practicing until they become second nature. In my world, that's called memorization - or rote learning.
Yes, he says, there are things you need to learn to do by rote: addition, subtraction, multiplication . . . oh, and probably a bunch of other stuff in higher mathematics because that makes it easier for you to be "fluent".
Sooo . . . understanding why a mathematical equation operates the way it does is better than just learning how to do it - EXCEPT you need to just learn how to do it so you can do some really cool (unspecified) stuff later. So you should learn that stuff by rote.
And he thinks that argument is going to sway the non-maths people? He's delusional.