Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Gary Williams's avatar

I've been wondering about the role of questioning in explanation. It strikes me that the formalism described above might be aimed more at teachers and making sure we've understood all the important points we need to explain. But then the actual explanation will be different and might hinge on some key questions. Watching videos of explanations I'm struck by how the best ones seem to ask lots of questions or say nothing. The worst ones seem to be the ones where they attempt a whole scale transfer of the picture in the teachers head into the students head. Asking questions seems to be more like highlighting crux issues you need to understand. An analogy might be a rock climb. We want to know whether we did the climb in the guide book. But we only need to know whether we did the same route as described, we don't need to have put our hands in the exact places as the first ascender or subsequent ones. By asking questions like "did you come out over that edge?" we can ascertain whether the climb was done. But of course a good description of the climb is needed to start with. It isn't enough to state that you started at point A at the bottom and emerged at point B at the top.

Also, I wonder if all good explanations start with a description of the scenery; this linking of conceptual to physical. As physics teachers I think we very often take for granted the symbolism we use. Like when you have one of those "oh.....we're viewing it from above....I thought..." moments.

Expand full comment

No posts