90% confident. I’d factor that question into the overall confidence rating that I gave in the post about whether or not this proposal would ultimately be successful or not.
Reasons why I’m so confident:
His lectures are carefully structured, with minimal errors in delivery. Information transmission is therefore dramatically higher per unit time compared with a poorly-rehearsed or poorly-structured lecture.
I’ve been a teacher for 10 years, and have also spent time reviewing the scientific literature evaluating what good teaching looks like. His style ticks the boxes for a highly effective teacher.
His lectures on Youtube have 1-2 million views each. The comments are overwhelmingly, effusively positive.
The concept of “learning styles” is controversial science. Even if true, I don’t have a strong sense that I have a particular learning style, but I believe that I have a very good sense for quality teaching based on the fact that I tend to share my fellow students’ perceptions of the quality of our teachers.
My overwhelming impression of why his teaching is good is that he’s friendly, good at getting and holding students’ attention, well paced, breaks things down in a carefully structured way, is extremely careful with his words, provides excellent visuals, and focuses on building mathematical intuitions while also offering proofs of the concepts he’s delivering.
But you can watch his videos and judge for yourself.
How confident are you that [proposed lessons] are (sufficiently) better in general, and not just better for your learning/communicatiin style?
90% confident. I’d factor that question into the overall confidence rating that I gave in the post about whether or not this proposal would ultimately be successful or not.
Reasons why I’m so confident:
His lectures are carefully structured, with minimal errors in delivery. Information transmission is therefore dramatically higher per unit time compared with a poorly-rehearsed or poorly-structured lecture.
I’ve been a teacher for 10 years, and have also spent time reviewing the scientific literature evaluating what good teaching looks like. His style ticks the boxes for a highly effective teacher.
His lectures on Youtube have 1-2 million views each. The comments are overwhelmingly, effusively positive.
The concept of “learning styles” is controversial science. Even if true, I don’t have a strong sense that I have a particular learning style, but I believe that I have a very good sense for quality teaching based on the fact that I tend to share my fellow students’ perceptions of the quality of our teachers.
My overwhelming impression of why his teaching is good is that he’s friendly, good at getting and holding students’ attention, well paced, breaks things down in a carefully structured way, is extremely careful with his words, provides excellent visuals, and focuses on building mathematical intuitions while also offering proofs of the concepts he’s delivering.
But you can watch his videos and judge for yourself.