TeachingPhilosophy

Home

What does it mean to understand something? Is it the ability to transfer a working knowledge of a set of principles from the environment in which it was introduced to a new environment? Is it the mastery of a set of tasks? From my own experiences I think there is validity in all of these definitions, as well as many more which tend to come up in conversations on this topic.

I would even go so far as to say that the lack of a singular common definition lends evidence to my theory that the meaning of understanding is not singular and is constantly being mediated between those in the conversation. From this description I derive my own definition of understanding: the act of translating one's thoughts and / or actions in such a way that multiple parties can find common ground. For example: I say the word 'work', how do I or anyone else know if I understand this concept? In talking with other people, drawing from previous experiences, and making additional observations I can work to find enough common ground with other people on the meaning of 'work', at least in a specific context, that I can say I understand 'work'. Understanding in this sense is the mediating of a conceptual common ground.

To me then teaching is the process of helping my students understand how to think scientifically and communicate both in standard language and with mathematics. I want my students to understand how 'the truth' is not some abstract ideal but a set of common and reproducible observations, and it comes about from being systematic about one's observations, record-keeping, and communications. The Universe is ultimately indifferent to what you want to be true, and what turns out to be the case is often a best-guess, a concession towards present limitations. Though if the conversation and investigation is interesting in of itself it is worth doing. Why else practice science and its teaching?