What if the goal is for students to become teachers?

[MakingEducationWrite]

I am not a teacher but would like to receive feedback about the idea of requiring a portion of homework to be teaching the respective subject.

That is, the student proves their understanding of the subject by writing, or perhaps video recording, an explanation of the subject.

For example, High School chemistry ... balancing a chemical equation. 

A common argument is that HS chemistry has little practical value but wouldn't all students benefit from being assigned to explain the concept, in writing or verbally, as though they were the teacher?

In other words, if learning is measured by ability to teach then every subject becomes instantly valuable as every subject exercises writing and speaking skills.

In still other words, make every subject, at least in-part, an English, and perhaps, public speaking, exercise.

Thank you,

Randy

[sweet2ndchance]

Welcome to the board!

I don't think requiring a student to teach back what they have learned, particularly in every subject, is a good idea. As a break from the regular here and there, sure. But not as a regular requirement.

You also have to consider that sometimes your best students make the worst teachers. For example, my husband is great at higher level math. He was the type that could not study and ace the test. But he is terrible at explaining how to do the math. A lot of times students with a natural aptitude for a given subject forget that not everything is intuitive to everyone else so their explanations are poor or they might be unable to explain it all in some cases because the answer is so obvious to them that they cannot come up with an explanation.

Another example, I won many awards and honors playing the flute when I was younger but I am terrible at teaching someone else how to play the flute. Many people have asked me why I don't tutor on the side for extra income but I learned a long time ago that I just don't know how to teach someone else to do what I can do with the flute. My natural talent in music doesn't make me a great music teacher.

BUT...

I struggled with math when I was younger. I did eventually become proficient, when I was in college, but I was never the best student in class. I did however become a math tutor toward the end of college. My struggles made it easy for me to relate to other's struggles and teaching math was easy for me. Later on, homeschooling my kids and teaching anything but music has been easy and fun. Music education I had to delegate to others even though it was my passion, I realized that I'm horrible at teaching it.

[8filltheheart]

I don't think demonstrating understanding has to be so boxed into ps mentalities. Kids can demonstrate understanding through simple conversations. Assignments can be creative. For example, younger kids can create their own Wild Kratts type show on an animal/ecosystem they have studied. They can create a themed newpaper/magazine, do PP presentations, etc. (We have read a couple of Barabara Demick's books this yr for history. She is a taleented journalist who intertwines multiple people's interviews into a compelling narrative. My 10th grader's last assignment for history was to create a single person's story in Demick's style for the region we were studying. Her piece was amazing. It was so good it took me by surprise.)

Teaching does demonstrate understanding, but homeschooling can be so much more.

[lulalu]

We have done this a few times (DS is still in elementary). When DS was learning to read he would "teach" dad phonics in the evening. He has "taught" dad math concepts a few times too. Usually he wants to show dad and I am not making him, dh is a willing participant and engages in asking questions and so forth. Last year learning fractions took effort, but once he understood multiplying and dividing fractions he really wanted to show dad how it all worked. It was a great way to check complete understanding, and provide an insight to ds' thought process. 

[MakingEducationWrite]

Ok I see some good points.

I think that if the learning was done through word comprehension then demonstrating the learning is better through words as well ... writing and speaking... the intent of which I am calling teaching.

So non-english subjects, maths and music for example, aren't served by learning to explain Euler's or music theory.

I think LULALU's example ... exemplifies!  I think a parent having a child, perhaps even paying!, to teach the parent what they learn in school ... and other non-school subjects, sports rules, current events, hobbies, law?, medicine? ... whatever topics interest them or the parent ... it doesn't really matter what the topic is, it's a thinking, writing and speaking exercise.

For example I envision a child with an interest in baseball being offered the 'teaching job' of explaining the infield fly rule to the parent through a 5-10 minute live presentation and being paid $5? to do it with reasonable critique from the parent (or sibling!).

In this manner every child could be 'employed' as a teacher ... perhaps part of the chores required for earning allowance?

 

 

[Clarita]

43 minutes ago, MakingEducationWrite said:

So non-english subjects, maths and music for example, aren't served by learning to explain Euler's or music theory.

I think though teaching someone who is struggling in a subject is much better at deepening knowledge thanwriting a lesson plan on it. Writing a lesson plan or report on a topic can just be regurgitating information. Whenever I had to tutor someone in a math topic, I have to go through several different explanations and question how I know something to explain it back to them. Certainly, when I've had to do that, it required real understanding of the topic. I believe that's what most people mean when they think a student being able to teach a topic demonstrates they have a deep understanding of the topic. I think that is true with any subject; however, that dynamic is hard to replicate artificially.

Learning can be demonstrated in a lot of ways. Teaching someone is just one of the ways. My favorite demonstration of knowledge is to be able to use it. The day I truly knew I understood Z-transforms was the day I used it to control light output of an LED.  That method I think is easier to facilitate. 

[MakingEducationWrite]

What do you mean that dynamic is hard to replicate artificially.

I don't know if you're agreeing or disagreeing. Z-transforms are a math so there's not as much value in being able to masterfully explain it. (However there are no situations where a person never has to explain their understanding. A physicist and mathematician must be able to successfully publish and if that is a large hurdle they're not going to be happy about it.)

[8filltheheart]

3 hours ago, MakingEducationWrite said:

Ok I see some good points.

I think that if the learning was done through word comprehension then demonstrating the learning is better through words as well ... writing and speaking... the intent of which I am calling teaching.

So non-english subjects, maths and music for example, aren't served by learning to explain Euler's or music theory.

I think LULALU's example ... exemplifies!  I think a parent having a child, perhaps even paying!, to teach the parent what they learn in school ... and other non-school subjects, sports rules, current events, hobbies, law?, medicine? ... whatever topics interest them or the parent ... it doesn't really matter what the topic is, it's a thinking, writing and speaking exercise.

For example I envision a child with an interest in baseball being offered the 'teaching job' of explaining the infield fly rule to the parent through a 5-10 minute live presentation and being paid $5? to do it with reasonable critique from the parent (or sibling!).

In this manner every child could be 'employed' as a teacher ... perhaps part of the chores required for earning allowance?

FWIW, I would never pay my kids $$ for anything academic related.  Our parental/educational philosophy is counter to that underlying premise.  We raise our children to understand that learning is its own reward and that personal satisfaction is gained through mastering skills and concepts.  Our entire goal is to encourage our children to be lifelong learners who are internally motivated to pursue their interests.

We spend lots of time discussing ideas. It is evident through just interacting with my kids as to whether or not they have mastered concepts.  It is not like a classroom where you aren't interacting with them directly every step of the way.  Interactive teaching doesn't leave room for plug and chug without actual understanding.  (Of course, curriculum selection plays a major role here as well.  There are definitely low-level knowledge-based curriculums out there that don't encourage deep conceptual understanding.)  My experience with my kids is that ownership over their educations leads to long-term success into adulthood.

[Clarita]

Sorry I had a kid crawling on me while typing so statements got misplaced and I meant to delete the Z-transform thing. I'll start again in what I was trying to say.

I guess what it boils down to is if someone thinks HS Chemistry has little practical value making them teach it back isn't going to make it have any more practical value. Practical value happens when someone actually has to use that knowledge in a practical manner. So, the top choice should be providing students with that. For HS Chemistry it could be the ability to predict what is going to happen when I combine 2 or more chemicals. For phonics it would be reading books or spelling. Every subject can be instantly valuable if we show/tell people, it is valuable and why.

[MakingEducationWrite]

"I guess what it boils down to is if someone thinks HS Chemistry has little practical value making them teach it back isn't going to make it have any more practical value."

Right... and as such I've said that the way to give it practical value is to make it an exercise in writing and presenting.

And parents at home, if they don't already have a handle on education quality, can help make up for bad schooling by having, or paying, their children to do writing and speaking assignments.

[8filltheheart]

24 minutes ago, MakingEducationWrite said:

"I guess what it boils down to is if someone thinks HS Chemistry has little practical value making them teach it back isn't going to make it have any more practical value."

Right... and as such I've said that the way to give it practical value is to make it an exercise in writing and presenting.

And parents at home, if they don't already have a handle on education quality, can help make up for bad schooling by having, or paying, their children to do writing and speaking assignments.

I am not sure how paying children to do writing and speaking assignments can make up for bad schooling or lack of understanding of educational quality.  How are the writing and speaking assessed?  How does a writing or speaking assignment make chemistry have more practical value?  I don't see the connection between that sort of engagement with material making it more practical to the student.  Using chemistry to apply chemistry knowledge makes it have practical value.  Writing about chemistry is just another abstraction.

FWIW, understanding and seeing practical value in a subject are 2 completely different issues.  Your OP was about improving understanding through students teaching what they have learned.  In order to teach, you have to understand.  So, there is value in that, but the understanding has to precede the teaching.  Not seeing practical value does not equate to lack of understanding.   Students can completely understand a topic and still dismiss its actual value.  

Edited March 6, 2022 by 8filltheheart

[MakingEducationWrite]

2 hours ago, 8filltheheart said:

 

 

 

 

I don't see the connection between that sort of engagement with material making it more practical to the student.  Using chemistry to apply chemistry knowledge makes it have practical value.  Writing about chemistry is just another abstraction.

FWIW, understanding and seeing practical value in a subject are 2 completely different issues.  Your OP was about improving understanding through students teaching what they have learned.  In order to teach, you have to understand.  So, there is value in that, but the understanding has to precede the teaching.  Not seeing practical value does not equate to lack of understanding.   Students can completely understand a topic and still dismiss its actual value.  

"I am not sure how paying children to do writing and speaking assignments can make up for bad schooling or lack of understanding of educational quality."

... because it gives them a reason to practice writing and speaking.

"How are the writing and speaking assessed?"

... by reading and listening to them and asking questions or pointing out what isn't clear.

"How does a writing or speaking assignment make chemistry have more practical value?"

... it doesn't ... the exercise is about writing and speaking ... improving communication skill and self-confidence.

" Your OP was about improving understanding through students teaching what they have learned."

I stated "If learning is measured by ability to teach then every subject becomes instantly valuable as every subject exercises writing and speaking skills."  I am absolutely not saying there is any intention to master the subject. I am absolutely saying the only intention is to challenge writing and speaking skills by working to master the subject.

If your child thinks the law is interesting then have the child do a presentation on what a Tort is, or the difference between Criminal and Civil Law, or the process to make a local law ... it doesn't matter what the topic is, the point is to challenge the child (or any person, adults too, such as done in Toastmasters) to exercise communication skills which would obviously serve any and every pursuit.

 

 

[Clarita]

3 hours ago, MakingEducationWrite said:

I stated "If learning is measured by ability to teach then every subject becomes instantly valuable as every subject exercises writing and speaking skills."  I am absolutely not saying there is any intention to master the subject. I am absolutely saying the only intention is to challenge writing and speaking skills by working to master the subject.

Maybe I've misunderstood would the goal be to make writing and speaking skills more relevant or to make the subject being learned more relevant?

I do agree making a student write and/or speak on a topic they already find interesting/relevant/practical definitely shows them writing and learning to present properly can be useful in their lives. To that point, I think there are more types of writing and presentation skills beyond just teaching a topic that could be practiced. For example, lab reports, proposals, etc.   

I strongly disagree that writing about or presenting material back to an incompetent teacher is going to enhance their education. I hope all educators try to actually impart the practical value in the subjects they teach. 

I think a child "teaching" mom and dad back a topic that they learned is good not for their education's sake but for their relationship with their parents. A chance for parents, friends and family to show that they are proud of the child's accomplishments.

[MakingEducationWrite]

3 hours ago, Clarita said:

i think a child "teaching" mom and dad back a topic that they learned is good not for their education's sake but for their relationship with their parents. A chance for parents, friends and family to show that they are proud of the child's accomplishments.

Why isn’t it completely valuable if the education sake about becoming a better communicator.

Are you saying that challenging someone to explain something new with clarity has no value?

[8filltheheart]

If the objective is simply to become a more effective communicator, then I'll reiterate my pt from earlier in the thread, 

Assignments can be creative. For example, younger kids can create their own Wild Kratts type show on an animal/ecosystem they have studied. They can create a themed newpaper/magazine, do PP presentations, etc. (We have read a couple of Barbara Demick's books this yr for history. She is a talented journalist who intertwines multiple people's interviews into a compelling narrative. My 10th grader's last assignment for history was to create a single person's story in Demick's style for the region we were studying. Her piece was amazing. It was so good it took me by surprise.)

Teaching does demonstrate understanding, but homeschooling can be so much more.

In terms of overall daily academics, writing assignments/presentations have their place, but it is completely unnecessary to turn every subject into a writing/presentation heavy course. Effective communication skills develop over time. Students who have mastered how to organize their thoughts in an orderly, supported presentation can adapt those skills to work for a variety of situations, both in writing genres and speaking.

[MakingEducationWrite]

4 hours ago, 8filltheheart said:

If the objective is simply to become a more effective communicator, then I'll reiterate my pt from earlier in the thread, 

Assignments can be creative. For example, younger kids can create their own Wild Kratts type show on an animal/ecosystem they have studied. They can create a themed newpaper/magazine, do PP presentations, etc. (We have read a couple of Barbara Demick's books this yr for history. She is a talented journalist who intertwines multiple people's interviews into a compelling narrative. My 10th grader's last assignment for history was to create a single person's story in Demick's style for the region we were studying. Her piece was amazing. It was so good it took me by surprise.)

Teaching does demonstrate understanding, but homeschooling can be so much more.

In terms of overall daily academics, writing assignments/presentations have their place, but it is completely unnecessary to turn every subject into a writing/presentation heavy course. Effective communication skills develop over time. Students who have mastered how to organize their thoughts in an orderly, supported presentation can adapt those skills to work for a variety of situations, both in writing genres and speaking.

Yes, and everyone of those is exactly what I am talking about.
You are reiterate my pt ... now I'm not sure why.

[JennyD]

OP, welcome to the board!  Are you a homeschooling parent?  How old are your children?

FWIW, I have my kids explain things back to me all the time, but it's much more organic than a formal "assignment" or "homework" (the latter of which doesn't really make sense in a homeschool context, IMO).

[8filltheheart]

I'm disagreeing. My goal is never for them to be "teacher." With those sorts of assignments, it is to bring joy to learning. I would never assign teaching me a topic as a learning objective. I would never assign a chemistry or math presentation. We discuss things all of the time during our days. We often learn things together and ask each other questions. Our homeschool is nothing like a classroom.

[MakingEducationWrite]

I've acquired enough feedback and I'll be moving on.

[Lori D.]

New poster, strange choice of first post topic, broken English... 🧐 Suspicious much?? 😉 

[8filltheheart]

I figured it was someone trying to market a product. 😉

[Jean in Newcastle]

I guess that I'm too late to the party, but I will give a couple of cents worth of thoughts anyway.  I always thought that the point of narration in a Charlotte Mason type education is a form of letting kids "be the teacher" in the sense of demonstrating what they know verbally or in written form.  And as they get older it also works on their organizational skills as they have to organize their material in a coherent whole.  But this is not formal "teaching" and isn't new material.  (Though I suppose kids do presentations on new material that they've researched on occasion too.) 

[Renai]

8 hours ago, Lori D. said:

New poster, strange choice of first post topic, broken English... 🧐 Suspicious much?? 😉 

8 hours ago, 8filltheheart said:

I figured it was someone trying to market a product. 😉

That, and their username pretty much says it...

[Clarita]

I don't think they liked the answer. 

[2_girls_mommy]

On 3/6/2022 at 1:45 PM, Jean in Newcastle said:

I guess that I'm too late to the party, but I will give a couple of cents worth of thoughts anyway.  I always thought that the point of narration in a Charlotte Mason type education is a form of letting kids "be the teacher" in the sense of demonstrating what they know verbally or in written form.  And as they get older it also works on their organizational skills as they have to organize their material in a coherent whole.  But this is not formal "teaching" and isn't new material.  (Though I suppose kids do presentations on new material that they've researched on occasion too.) 

I agree with you here. Most of us are doing these type of assignments (narrations, presentations when appropriate, discussion, written papers that demonstrate knowledge) pretty regularly. I wasn't seeing anything novel except the offer to pay the student, which I think we all thought was... interesting. My senior gets a weekly email reminder every Monday from Mrdmath for the math class she's enrolled in to do a student check-in, which basically tells her to spend today's lesson time teaching her homeschool parent the current lesson. Since I'm not involved daily in her math lessons since it's an online class, these do kind of serve as her "teaching" me, informally. Really they're just more of a time for me to see how much she's understanding of her current lessons, a time for me to plug into her class and see how I can help or how she's progressing. So, teaching mom isn't a new idea to me. I was trying to grasp what was new about the idea.

Edited March 8, 2022 by 2_girls_mommy

[8filltheheart]

I just thought it was humorous that someone who was obviously either doing marketing research or wanting to promote a product on improving communication skills was inept at effectively communicating his objective.  🙂