Photo by Emily Morter on Unsplash
When looking at the idea of What vs How; I ask Why (I dislike dichotomies)? Why represents the purpose of action beyond how and what. What is the base of the content you are teaching, and how is the delivery. Both important and I would argue, out the two choices, I would side with how. Is what is being learned, for a purpose for life experience, beyond a grade? If true, it is essential that we teach students to think critically and have a logical purpose in solving issues. That is essential. If we are selecting what we teach, meeting the broad BC Curriculum, based on the process more than the end goal, that greatly improves the options of how we teach that material, what material we decide to teach, and how the students explore for the answers.
As it pertains to the question at hand, Egan states that what is more important than how. However, what is directly entwined with how. If what is being taught is flawed, senseless, futile, or baseless then how we teach it is pointless. Conversely, if what is being taught is useful, but how it is taught is feckless and poorly delivered, then the what becomes less important.
I am a technology teacher and I find the importance of how I teach, directly affects what is being taught. Most students are afraid of being out of their comfort zone, and if their experience with particular software, no matter its true future value, is poor or too ridged, they will be less likely to use that software. Therefore, how I taught the software directly affected what was being taught; the efficacy of the software.
I will sum up by saying that life is ambiguous. If we are looking for a linear direction in every instance that life provides then we are going to stop moving. Ambiguity means choice. Furthermore, choice means options, and options mean problem-solving. Therefore, let’s arm the future with the skills that will allow them to navigate or society.
P.S. as for the clarity of this article, it would have been more clear if the author had a 500-word count, just saying. The metaphor really took on more than it needed to.
Andrew Vogelsang
I read your other feed on Blade and Egan as well. I like how you framed your ideas on Egan, and feel that Blade makes greater sense of the question of “Why” which you state is the overall big picture. Definitely had to read your article twice, and liked the boldness of it!