Teaching, Batting, Craft, and Science

Today I happened to have lunch with Russ Roberts, so we discussed his talk with Elizabeth Green. Some notes:

1. I like his analogy between the task of teaching and the task of hitting a baseball. In both cases, there is a limit on what you can learn by studying books or videos. At some point, you have to learn by trial and error. In baseball, a coach can do a lot to make a hitter’s practice more productive. Green, influenced by Doug Lemov and others, argues that a coach can do a lot to help a teacher.

2. This helps to bring out the difference between a science and a craft. You can learn a lot about science, such as chemistry, without trial and error. You can learn a lot through reading and through ordinary instruction in the classroom and in the lab. But you cannot learn much about hitting a baseball that way. Or you cannot absorb much of what you learn. Instead, you learn best by trying to hit and by being coached on how to hit.

3. My experience as a high school teacher have convinced me that these issues of “craft” are important. I think of most pedagogical theory as something that you could apply to writing a textbook or creating a MOOC. But actually getting a classroom to function takes a lot of skills that one can acquire only through practice and by responding to feedback. Green’s point is that American education methods tend to minimize teachers’ opportunities to receive coaching and feedback.

4. Coaching itself is very much a craft. In the case of hitting, how many people really know how to teach hitting really well? And can any of those people convey their knowledge of coaching well to others, so that other people can learn to coach hitting really well? The analogous problem exists in education. If “building a better teacher” is a scalable solution in education, then you need to find people who can teach teacher-coaching in a scalable way, so that there are enough good coaches of teachers to build lots of better teachers. I am skeptical that this is the case.

5. Coaching can improve any hitter. But it cannot make just anybody into a really good hitter. So I am also skeptical that you can make almost anyone into a really good teacher.

6. For me, the hardest things for a teacher include:

–understanding how students get things wrong, so that you can steer them from wrong to right.
–dealing with the trade-off between introducing new concepts and trying to solidify the concepts you taught last week, particularly when you have students who are at different levels of mastery
–trying to engage in cognitive instruction and deal with behavioral issues at the same time
–motivating students to reveal to themselves what they do not know and to work on those deficiencies

7 thoughts on “Teaching, Batting, Craft, and Science

  1. Are you familair with the work of Zig Engelmann?
    http://www.zigsite.com/

    He spent decades building systems that teach teachers how to teach.

    It is a interesting study in someone who was empirically successfully at achieving results at scale. Sadly political success did not follow.

        • I read his book on how to execute the method. Very robotic. Although it might help some students in the short run, it struck me as having the potential to do severe long-term psychological damage to many others. I personally think I would have been traumatized had I been subjected to it as young kid.

  2. Much of what you write in #6 seems to be at odds with Robin Hanson’s quip that School Isn’t About Learning.

    Hanson has endorsed the view that schooling is about conformity, and conditioning children to grant deference to authority and fit into modern industrialized work patterns. But it seems to me that people (especially young boys) find formal education and typical work patterns equally unnatural settings and that ‘dealing with behavioral issues’ is coincidental in both contexts – using similar human disciplinary techniques that work on most humans in most contexts. That is, his claim is the Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. Just because work follows education, and both require similar systems of adjustment and behavioral influence, doesn’t mean that the earlier is for the sake of the latter.

    I’ve both been a work-supervisor and instructor of very young men (18-20), and whether one is trying to focus their attention and keep them on task or impart familiarity of some knowledge or improve their performance of some skill, the techniques are largely the same. And yes, plenty of experience and coaching / mentoring in these techniques can be very helpful to one’s effectiveness.

Comments are closed.