Big Bang theory just does not make sense

[saac]

12 minutes ago, AstroMuni said:

And I suspect its also a bit down to the way its taught too... the connections between subjects and the linkage is not always made clear in simple terms. Some teachers tend to do that and make the subject 'enjoyable'.

Another challenge is probably due to the way exam papers are written. eg. If you were asked to apply a certain physics principle in maths would it be considered out of syllabus? The other way around is probably more acceptable 🙂 So if the student was aware that they could be called upon to exercise the 'physics' part of their knowledge in a different paper then they would use associate memory rather than think about it as - its a certain paper hence I know the kind of questions in scope. Food for thought!

Too be honest I'm not so sure. I think it owes more to consolidation time than anything else. Again as adults, far removed from the stress of a timetable and a bell calling out subject change, we have had time (many years) to reflect upon what has been taught. Those topics have had time to sit there, be challenged, deconstructed, rebuilt and affirmed.  During our school days we are sadly not afforded that luxury. 

Jim

[ollypenrice]

On 04/09/2023 at 12:20, JOC said:

I believe science on the curriculum would be far more interesting for students to study if only the teachers would include the 'why' when they teach something.  The numbers of practical science experiments I carried out at secondary school without ever understanding 'why' we had done it, until 10+ years later it dawned on me out in 'industry' why that particular experiment had been important, were many and would surely have added to my enjoyment and perhaps even have captured the imagination of more students.   It is a hole that I really try to fill when I go into schools as a STEM ambassador.

What you are describing doesn't just apply to science teaching, but to all teaching. It's sometimes called 'decontextualized teaching,' and leads to something fairly useless called 'school knowledge.' That's to say knowledge which will never play a part in students' lives outside school. It is, as you suggest, the enemy of real and useful teaching.  But...  it is very important not to misunderstand this problem. It is not resolved by finding cutesy little applications of what is learned in class. (I'm not suggesting that you think it is, let me stress.) There is no value in conducting a decontextualized chemistry lesson and then tagging on, at the end, the assertion that 'This is how we make nail varnish.'

Personally, I think that a contextualized lesson is one which delivers the pleasure of truly understanding something.

Olly