Question

Date Page Topic - If you don't know anything it is not bad, it is bad if you are not ready to learn anything" ​

Answer 1

Answer:

Related publications

Question

Asked 29th Dec, 2013

Domenico Masciotra

What do you think of this principle of teaching: Do not teach what you know as an expert?

Teach only what the student is able to learn. Or better, teach only the most of what your can actively share with your student.

Some eventual arguments:

1. Knowledge is not transmittable.

2. The meaning of knowledge can’t be the same within deep experience or within poor experience.

3. The locus of knowledge to be learned is in between, let’s say, the master of dance and the student, both in action. The beginner dancer dances better because of the help of the master.

In this example, the new knowledge seems to be "in between" (master vs learner). It is not completely the deep knowledge of the Master since he reduces his possibilities to adapt them to the beginner, and it is neither the actual possibilities of the beginner since he dances better only because he is helped by the master. So there is some knowledge enacted "in between" by both of them. What is then the nature of this knowledge that is short of what the teacher knows and beyond what the beginner already knows?

Comment: The term expert is used here in a very wide sense: it just means that the teacher knows better and more than the student. For example, one doesn't need to be an expert mathematician to teach math at the primary level. At the university level, at least, you would need to be an expert to teach math.

Explanation:

Hope it's helpful for you

↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓