while(self++) { #85 } // For Example
I recently read a post by Niklas Goeke entitled Why “For Example” Is A Bad Way Of Explaining Things. Goeke criticizes the tendency of many teachers to explain topics via example. He points out that:
…giving us many examples taught us, well, many examples.
What it didn’t teach us was how to think about the underlying mechanism and come to our own conclusions.
However, this criticism simplifies the debate to a mutually exclusive choice: Should you teach by principle or teach by example? In reality, you should teach both by principle and by example.
In my mind, effective explanations need a healthy mix of the concrete and the abstract. You start off with an example, something concrete to jump off of. A problem to solve, in order to make the topic real. Then, you introduce the principle itself, giving us the right tool to use for these scenarios. You solve the initial example. Afterwards, you bring up more relevant examples to solidify how the underlying mechanism applies in multiple circumstances. Perhaps even bring some up that don’t apply and why. Then, summarize the principle again to complete the teaching moment. Ultimately, the “Why?” is the most important aspect of the discussion. Rooting the conversation in it sets your students up for success.
