Links for 2011-02-24

  • “Pseudoteaching is something you realize you’re doing after you’ve attempted a lesson which from the outset looks like it should result in student learning, but upon further reflection, you realize that the very lesson itself was flawed and involved minimal learning.

    We hope that though discussion, we’ll be able to clarify and refine this definition even further. The key idea of pseudoteaching is that it looks like good teaching. In class, students feel like they are learning, and any observer who saw a teacher in the middle of pseudteaching would feel like he’s watching a great lesson. The only problem is, very little learning is taking place. “

  • “What makes smart girls more vulnerable, and less confident, when they should be the most confident kids in the room?  At the 5th grade level, girls routinely outperform boys in every subject, including math and science.  So there were no differences between these boys and girls in ability, nor in past history of success.   The only difference was how bright boys and girls interpreted difficulty – what it meant to them when material seemed hard to learn.  Bright girls were much quicker to doubt their ability, to lose confidence, and to become less effective learners as a result.

    Researchers have uncovered the reason for this difference in how difficulty is interpreted, and it is simply this:  more often than not, bright girls believe that their abilities are innate and unchangeable, while bright boys believe that they can develop ability through effort and practice. “

One thought on “Links for 2011-02-24

  1. The Psuedoteaching post is awesome and well worth reading. I’m a high school Physics teacher in the UK and it’s really made me think about the way I teach.

    Still, a 10% and 14% fail rate = 90% and 86% pass = a pretty good performance in my book

    Ian

Comments are closed.