Singing Science 129
udderly writes "
Wired is running a story about a University of Washington biology lecturer,
Greg Crowther, who sings lectures. From the article: 'Crowther bursts
into song to the melody of Sugar Sugar, the bubble-gum '60s tune - "Glucose,
ah sugar sugar / You are my favorite fuel from the
bloodborne substrate pool / Glucose -- monosaccharide sugar -- you're sweeter
than a woman's kiss / 'cause I need you for glycolysis."' In
college I used many different types of devices to help memorize information like
this. Crowther has a page
where you can download samples. Among my favorites are
The Krebs Cycle and Come On Down (The Electron Transport Chain)."
Memory devices work... (Score:3, Insightful)
It is one of the reasons dissection is so important in Biology classes. Kids can't learn by looking at a picture in a book of what the digestive system looks like. It is different to cut a frog open and see for yourself. It also stimulates the imagination in ways books can not. I remember looking at the cardiovascular system and wondering "Why do we have heart attacks? Why not just add a small pump at the inferior vena cava to help weak hearts. And if someone has a heart attack, the pump will act like a CPR machine, keeping blood flowing.
Teachers like this guy are a pleasure to have. They love their field. They feel a responsibility to reach all students, regardless of how the kid learns. I knew some smart kids in highschool who never made it that far in academia because they got stuck with book learning- read the book than take a scan tron. But when you talk with them, you realize they learn 10X as much as the rest of us when they see something done. I've seen this guy tear a carburetor apart and rebuild it, after watching someone else do it. But he could not do simple Chem 100 problems.
I wonder how many savants are out there who were pushed out of mainstream education because traditional book reading followed by test taking did not show their potential?
I think the anwser for education is to require a Ed.D instead of a Ph.D to teach the first four years of college. Let the Ph.D's do research. Just because they are expert in their field does not mean they know how to convey that information to others.
Re:Memory devices work... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Mnemonics (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, one of the reasons that universities force you to learn so many things that you will later forget is so that your future employer knows that you are capable of learning these things. The knowledge itself is often secondary to the ability to acquire that knowledge.
Re:Mnemonics (Score:2, Insightful)
Just because a class ends, does not mean the learning ends. Some people will have a lightbulb click on in their heads, a year later, remembering something from a previous class.
Most of what we learn when young is compartmentalized. We don't know how topic A1 relates to topic B4. In your example, maybe glucose means nothing to the test taker, except an answer to get a good grade in Biology 100. But next year, when taking Chem 100 and hearing about exothermic reactions, something will click in his head, and he will remember ATP and the krebs cycle. Maybe he will sit back, close his eyes, and start thinking of making a super mitochondira where an elephant can lift 10 times the normal weight, and how to use this elephant in hard to reach parts of Africa to build better housing or hospitals.
We should get the most from everyone, use whatever methods work, and not critisize a teacher for reaching 10% of his students that might otherwise not understand.
Re:Memory devices work... (Score:3, Insightful)
His teacher used the standard write-the-rules-on-the-board method and then gave a nmemonic to remember it. That gives you just one extra thing (that's worth a lot) to link it to in memory. That's the best way to memorize things, not to sit and read it over and over again, but to give it a relationship to something else in memory.
Re:Mnemonics (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Mnemonics (Score:1, Insightful)
I'm thinking you're probably American? I've heard that US universities make undergrads take a mix of courses outside of their major.
In New Zealand and Australia (and many other countries I am sure), you have a huge freedom in choosing extra papers as long as you do a few major-related required papers. This means that most people can go through their degree and never have to take any non-major classes they aren't interested in.
Sure, you come out with a "narrower" education, but you don't have to take English Lit. if you're only interested in biochem, and vice versa
(I think our degree programs end up being shorter as well because of this?)