A lot about what being a good teacher is about isn’t about being smart but emotional management. That means things like being consistent with students and not acting from a place of being emotionally triggered by students.
Ok, I see where I disagree, then. I don’t think a smart person who’s avoided training and research about teaching can teach an average class better than a somewhat less smart person who’s trained and studied how to teach. Probably better than a dumb person, and where the point of indifference is I don’t know.
I don’t think it’s feasible to know physics or math very well without research and study of prior art, so I don’t think that’s an evaluatable claim. There are probably some math problems where raw IQ can get someone through, but never as well as somewhat less smart and actual study.
Yeah.
It’s mostly like applying the knowledge somewhere. Suppose you have to solve a real problem that requires knowing physics.
Of course you can also read the literature, but my post was about when it’s possible to do better without having done so.
A lot about what being a good teacher is about isn’t about being smart but emotional management. That means things like being consistent with students and not acting from a place of being emotionally triggered by students.
Ok, I see where I disagree, then. I don’t think a smart person who’s avoided training and research about teaching can teach an average class better than a somewhat less smart person who’s trained and studied how to teach. Probably better than a dumb person, and where the point of indifference is I don’t know.
I don’t think it’s feasible to know physics or math very well without research and study of prior art, so I don’t think that’s an evaluatable claim. There are probably some math problems where raw IQ can get someone through, but never as well as somewhat less smart and actual study.