Difference Between Knowledge And Understanding

https://www.bigquestionsonline.com/2014/05/19/what-difference-between-knowledge-understanding/

I guess understanding comes from relating knowledge to what human being normally do - emoting, relating things to their personal life...

What Watson (IBM Computer) did was to relate different sets of data knowledge.. Somewhat like what Google does when you search. It takes the search parameters and searches web pages using the search parameters and then finally ranks the result in an appropriate sequence, with the most relevant on top. Is Google better at searching than most human beings? Probably yes. Does Google understand my emotions when I am searching? Maybe not. 

And that's why think of the term artificial intelligence while thinking of Google or Watson.

The idea of Google or Watson is to be exceptionally good and better than most people in providing answers to questions (or questions to answers in case of Jeopardy). 

Let's take the metaphor to a human level. What kind of a person is like a Google or Watson? It is a person who has exceptionally intelligence but is spending his time on a subject(s) that he is not passionate about. If one were passionate about a subject, it is inconceivable that he would not have understanding.

This is an interesting thesis on education and teachers: http://education.msu.edu/ncrtl/pdfs/ncrtl/issuepapers/ip894.pdf

Quotes from the link (without permission):

A conceptual mastery of subject matter and the capacity to be critical of knowledge itself can empower students to be effective actors in their environment.  

When teachers possess inaccurate information or conceive of knowledge in narrow ways, they may pass on these ideas to their students. They may fail to challenge students' misconceptions; they may use texts uncritically or may alter them inappropriately. Subtly, teachers' conceptions of knowledge shape their practice--the kinds of questions they ask, the ideas they reinforce, the sorts of tasks they assign.  

"Teachers must not only be capable of defining for students the accepted truths in a domain. They must also be able to explain why a particular proposition is deemed warranted, why it is worth knowing, and how it relates to other propositions."

My wish [was] to present mathematics as a subject in which legitimate conclusions are based on reasoning, rather than on acquiescing to teacherly authority.

Teachers' intellectual resources and dispositions largely determine their capacity to engage students' minds and hearts in learning. For instance, Lampert's deep interest in numbers and their patterns is contagious. And her understanding of mathematics as an active domain of human interest and inquiry leads her to orchestrate opportunities for learning that differ from those found in many mathematics classes.

This teacher's engagement with history as a way of making sense of our past is part of what he communicates to his students.

Because of a student's question, a particular textbook activity, or an intense class discussion, teachers often report that, for the first time, they came to really understand an idea, a theme, or a problem that heretofore they had just known as information. 

Only about half the 17-year-olds were successful with problems such as calculating the area of a 6 x 4 cm rectangle or solving a simple algebraic equation. Most high school seniors (94%) were unable to solve multistep problems: "Suppose you have 10 coins and have at least one each of a quarter, a dime, a nickel, and a penny. What is the least amount of money you could have?" 

I asked a friend to ask her daughter who has just graduated to class 1 from Nursery. "My sister has 2 hands, my brother has 2 hands, i have two hands. How many more brothers should i have so that together we have 12 hands?" She was able to solve the first step (that 6 more hands are needed) but she couldn't go to the 2nd step (that 3 more brothers are needed).  But then the daughter is only 6 years old. She will learn the second step in a year or two.

Dossey at al. (1987) argue that many students "are unlikely to be able to match mathematical tools to the demands of various problem situations that permeate life and work". 

This is also true, in India, of disciplines other than Maths. Are engineering majors "able to match their engineering tools to the demands of engineering situations that permeate life and work?" What went wrong with teaching?

As the researchers observed classes, they saw a predominance of so-called discussions that consisted of teachers asking convergent questions that demanded only one-word answers. 

A liberal education, after all, is education not for any specific end but for its own sake. Still, since teachers' work is centrally involved with knowledge and the life of the mind, their own intellectual qualities are critical. Teachers must care about knowing and about inquiry. 

Can the care to know and inquiry be taught?

Write an equation using the variables S and P to represent the following statement:

"There are six times as many students as professors at this university." Use S for the number of students and P for the number of professors. (Maestre and Lochhead, 1983, p. 24)Typically, students who offer an incorrect equation reverse the variables: 6S = P.

Clement and his colleagues (1981) report that over one-third of the engineering students they tested and nearly 6 out of 10 nonscience majors could not offer an appropriate representation. It appears that many students, even when they have mastered the mechanics of the subject, fail to develop an understanding of the underlying meanings.  

In both physics and mathematics, evidence is mounting that all students, not just those intending to be teachers, can meet the expectations for satisfactory work without developing a conceptual understanding of the subject matter--the lack of which, we have argued, seriously inhibits teachers' capacities to help school pupils learn in ways that are meaningful. 

In mathematics, textbooks often foster an algorithmic approach to the subject--e.g., "To divide by a fraction, just multiply by the reciprocal".
Stodolsky's (1988) analysis of elementary math textbooks suggests that concepts and procedures are often inadequately developed, with just one or two examples given, and an emphasis on "hints and reminders" to students about what to do. 

Teachers' subject matter knowledge may also be affected by the attitudes and expectations that their students bring to the classroom. As was discussed above, if teachers face learners who rebel against uncertain or complex intellectual tasks, they may feel pulled to simplify content, to emphasize algorithms and facts over concepts and alternatives.

Wonder how such rebel learners ought to be taught..

While teachers' knowledge about learners, the curriculum, pedagogy, and the context seems to increase from their practice, that they will learn enough about their subject matter from their teaching to shore up inadequate knowledge and understanding is unclear.  

Family and community influences on children's learning are more powerful than the schools' influences.

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/tat/pdfs/psych_learning.pdf: Quotes: 

"Deep learning entails examining facts and ideas critically, relating new and older knowledge, linking ideas together, and constructing novel conceptual structures. It involves the ability to place isolated, unlinked facts into larger conceptual structures. 

Student learning can be enhanced or hindered by the classroom environment. A safe, inclusive, and stimulating environment encourages students to actively participate. Fostering such an environment requires an instructor to be acutely sensitive to individual differences and make sure that students understand the instructor’s expectations and goals, as well as the steps the student must take to meet these objectives. In addition to promoting sensitivity, an inclusive classroom encourages dialogue, a process that might include collaborative inquiry, peer criticism, and intellectual give-and-take. 

Best Practices and New Practices

R-Courses: These are research oriented courses that emphasize “bounded inquiry.” The purpose is to encourage students to think like an anthropologist, biologist, chemist, literary critic, political scientist, sociologist, or statistician. Components typically include reviewing and critiquing journal articles, providing students with data sets, and having students make hypotheses and test them.

Encouraging Student Reflection: Specially-designed assignments encourage various forms of student reflection, leading students to assess their knowledge and reflect critically upon their assumptions and perspectives. These include reflection upon content and concepts, personal reflection (description of reactions, thoughts, and feelings), and metacognitive reflection (monitoring of one’s own thought processes).  

A friend sent me this link: http://infed.org/mobi/what-is-education-a-definition-and-discussion/ 

A friend sent me this excerpt and couple of links (of the three, the Telegraph article seems to make sense:

Richard Leblanc, Ph.D.
York University

Editor’s note: In 1998, professor Leblanc was awarded the Seymous Schulich Award for Teaching Excellence. His top ten requirements for good teaching was originally published in The Teaching Professor, Vol. 12, # 6, 1998.

GOOD TEACHING is as much about passion as it is about reason. It’s about not only motivating students to learn, but teaching them how to learn, and doing so in a manner that is relevant, meaningful, and memorable. It’s about caring for your craft, having a passion for it, and conveying that passion to everyone, most importantly to your students.GOOD TEACHING is about substance and training students as consumers of knowledge. It’s about doing your best to keep on top of your field, reading sources, inside and outside of your areas of expertise, and being at the leading edge as often as possible. But knowledge is not confined to scholarly journals. Good teaching is also about bridging the gap between theory and practice. It’s about leaving the ivory tower and immersing oneself in the field, talking to, consulting with, and assisting practitioners, and liaising with their communities.GOOD TEACHING is about listening, questioning, being responsive, and remembering that each student and class is different. It’s about eliciting responses and developing the oral communication skills of the quiet students. It’s about pushing students to excel; at the same time, it’s about being human, respecting others, and being professional at all times.GOOD TEACHING is about not always having a fixed agenda and being rigid, but being flexible, fluid, experimenting, and having the confidence to react and adjust to changing circumstances. It’s about getting only 10 percent of what you wanted to do in a class done and still feeling good. It’s about deviating from the course syllabus or lecture schedule easily when there is more and better learning elsewhere. Good teaching is about the creative balance between being an authoritarian dictator on the one hand and a pushover on the other. Good teachers migrate between these poles at all times, depending on the circumstances. They know where they need to be and when.GOOD TEACHING is also about style. Should good teaching be entertaining? You bet! Does this mean that it lacks in substance? Not a chance! Effective teaching is not about being locked with both hands glued to a podium or having your eyes fixated on a slide projector while you drone on. Good teachers work the room and every student in it. They realize that they are conductors and the class is their orchestra. All students play different instruments and at varying proficiencies. A teacher’s job is to develop skills and make these instruments come to life as a coherent whole to make music.GOOD TEACHING is about humor. This is very important. It’s about being self-deprecating and not taking yourself too seriously. It’s often about making innocuous jokes, mostly at your own expense, so that the ice breaks and students learn in a more relaxed atmosphere where you, like them, are human with your own share of faults and shortcomings.GOOD TEACHING is about caring, nurturing, and developing minds and talents. It’s about devoting time, often invisible, to every student. It’s also about the thankless hours of grading, designing or redesigning courses, and preparing materials to further enhance instruction.GOOD TEACHING is supported by strong and visionary leadership, and very tangible instructional support resources, personnel, and funds. Good teaching is continually reinforced by an overarching vision that transcends the entire organization from full professors to part-time instructors and is reflected in what is said, but more importantly by what is done.GOOD TEACHING is about mentoring between senior and junior faculty, teamwork, and being recognized and promoted by one’s peers. Effective teaching should also be rewarded, and poor teaching needs to be remediated through training and development programs.AT THE END OF THE DAY, good teaching is about having fun, experiencing pleasure and intrinsic rewards…like locking eyes with a student in the back row and seeing the synapses and neurons connecting, thoughts being formed, the person becoming better, and a smile cracking across a face as learning all of a sudden happens. It’s about the former student who says your course changed her life. It’s about another telling you that your course was the best one he’s ever taken. Good teachers practice their craft not for the money or because they have to, but because they truly enjoy it and because they want to. Good teachers couldn’t imagine doing anything else.

THE CORE
Association for Experiential Education
Schools & Colleges Professional Group Newsletter
Spring 1999, Vol. 2, # 1

Are you truly a bad teacher? https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2014/12/19/are-you-a-truly-bad-teacher-heres-how-to-tell/

What makes a good teacher: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationopinion/11347131/You-dont-need-a-qualification-to-be-a-good-teacher.html