AN ESSAY ON THE ART AND SCIENCE OF TEACHING by Dennis · PDF fileAN ESSAY ON THE ART AND SCIENCE OF TEACHING by Dennis L ... presenting complex material to students in terms that are

AN ESSAY ON THE ART AND SCIENCE OF TEACHING

by Dennis L. Weisman*

Abstract

The primary purpose of this essay is to identify instructional practices that can serve to enhance

teaching effectiveness. There is both an art and a science dimension to effective teaching. The science

dimension entails a comprehensive knowledge of the discipline, both historical foundations and

research on the frontiers. The art dimension, which is likely to be the more elusive of the two, involves

presenting complex material to students in terms that are readily understandable. Organized around

twelve principles, this essay delineates various techniques that may be employed to enhance overall

teaching effectiveness, even among those individuals who may not be “natural teachers.” Selected

lessons from Charles Franklin Kettering, one of America’s most prolific inventors, are integrated

throughout the essay to bring these teaching principles to life. A secondary purpose of this essay is to

offer a critical, albeit constructive, assessment of the teaching profession at the university level.

Keywords: teaching, principles, classroom, instruction

JEL Classifications: A22, A23

I. Introduction

This essay is the culmination of three decades ofexperience in teaching (“methods for effectivelyimparting information”) various groups, includ-ing university students, executives in Fortune 500corporations, legislators and government regula-tors.1 This experience provides a unique vantagepoint from which to make a number of observationsabout effective teaching at the university level andpossibly beyond. I also trust this essay can helpthose in the teaching profession avoid the manyobstacles they are likely to encounter along the way.

The primary purpose of this essay is to develop aset of principles for effective teaching. In organiz-ing the essay in this manner, my objective is to delin-eate various practices and techniques that may beemployed to enhance overall teaching effectiveness,

even among those individuals who may not be “nat-ural teachers.” A secondary purpose of this essay isto provide an assessment of the teaching professionat the university level; and while this assessment is attimes critical, I hope that it is also constructive.

I should begin with a word or two about myinterest in the topic of this essay and how it cameto be. In my first year of graduate school, I enrolledin a course on the Philosophy of Science taught byProfessor David Hawkins. Professor Hawkins wasno ordinary philosophy professor. He had earned hisPh.D. at Berkeley in probability theory where hebecame acquainted with Robert Oppenheimer, therenowned physicist who headed the ManhattanProject. Hawkins subsequently became an aide toOppenheimer and the official government historianfor that project (Lehmann-Haupt 2002). He pub-lished widely in an astonishing number of fields,

* Professor of Economics, Department of Economics, 246 Waters Hall, Kansas State University, Manhattan,KS 66506-4001. I am greatly indebted to many former teachers, students, colleagues and friends forproviding me with invaluable constructive criticism on previous drafts of this essay. I wish to thank, inparticular William Becker, Elchanan Cohn, Lyle Hawes, Alfred Kahn, Daniel Kuester, Dale Lehman,Thomas McCraw, Tom Miles, Ben Mooneyham, John Morrill, Anthony Phillips, Glen Robinson, DavidSappington, Stephen Schmidt and Lester Taylor. I owe a special debt of gratitude to Melanie Weisman forher candor, counsel and good humor as this essay traversed through its various stages of development. I amgrateful to the staff at Princeton University’s Mudd Library for their assistance in locating selectedreferences and to Yuan Gao and Soheil Nadimi for superb research support. Finally, I thank the editor, PaulGrimes, and an anonymous referee for constructive comments that significantly improved the manuscript.

Vol. 57, No. 1 (Spring 2012) 111

including biology, mathematics, philosophy, politicaland social theory, economics and education andseemingly left a major mark in whatever field hehappened to wander into on that particular day.He reserved his greatest passion for education andhe devoted a significant part of his life to understand-ing how children think and learn (Hawkins 2002).He was the recipient of a MacArthur Foundation(“genius”) Grant in the very first year of the awardsfor work in philosophy and childhood science educa-tion. I can make no claim that this essay rivals anyof Professor Hawkins’ writings, but he is the inspira-tion for it. He challenged his students to thinkseriously about teaching and how we can do it better.

Throughout this essay, I integrate selected lessonsfrom Charles Franklin Kettering—one of America’smost prolific inventors and commentators on educa-tion and industrial progress. My purpose for high-lighting Kettering’s teachings is four-fold. First, hestruggled early on with his own formal educationand managed to overcome handicaps that wouldhave thwarted lesser men. Second, while he recog-nized the importance of formal education, he alsounderstood its limitations in frustrating the processof learning and discovery. Third, Kettering ferventlybelieved in the importance of intelligent failure as alearning tool, something we may have lost sight ofin our educational system today (Boyd 1961).2 Forhim, there was no disgrace in failure—there wasonly disgrace in not learning from failure. Finally,Kettering began his storybook career as a school-teacher and developed a reputation as a gifted andinnovative teacher, one that paid close “attention tothe individual needs of his students . . .” (Leslie1983:6). He believed that teachers should endeavorto develop three qualities in their students: vision,imagination and courage.

Through vision they will see things as theyreally are. Through imagination they willdream greatly of things that may be. Throughcourage they will act boldly to make theirdreams come true (Boyd 1961:30).

Charles Kettering (1876-1958) was born in theyear the telephone was invented and died in the heartof this country’s industrial supremacy. His nearly200 patents ranks second only to Thomas Edison.Among his inventions were the electric cash register,the individual ringing function for party line tele-phone service and the electric starter for the automo-

bile engine. Kettering began his career with NationalCash Register, co-founded Delco Corporation andlater served as the research chief at General Motorsfor over twenty-five years. While at GM he broughtlife to a struggling division known as Frigidaire byencouraging the development of Freon gas. Ketteringwas also a strong supporter of medical research. In1945 he founded the Sloan-Kettering Cancer Insti-tute. By any measure, Kettering’s life was one ofgreatness, genius and vision—of turning handicapinto advantage.

Poor eyesight caused Kettering to drop out ofOhio University because he was unable to com-plete the drafting assignments for the engineeringcurriculum. He later succeeded in completing hisdegree at the age of twenty-seven by enlisting hiscollege roommates to read the textbooks to him sohe could learn the material and pass the examina-tions. Kettering’s poor eyesight was an impedi-ment to him, but it also forced him to develop akeen intuition that served him well throughout hislife and was a contributing factor to his success.

Perhaps due to his own educational experience,or his great success in spite of these difficulties,Kettering developed an inherent distrust for so-calledexperts and highly educated people. He believedthat experts could be so caught up in what theyalready knew that they frequently had a difficulttime learning anything else. As a result, they maybe less likely to find an innovative solution to adifficult problem if it required them to think in adimension different from that in which they weretrained. As Kettering liked to point out, “The Wrightbrothers flew right through that smoke screen ofimpossibility” (Boyd 1961:239). He understood theimportance of “thinking outside the box” longbefore it became part of the vernacular.

In a similar vein, it is noteworthy that two ofthe greatest mathematicians of the last century,John Nash and Srinivasa Ramanujan, were attimes castigated by their colleagues for a less-than-complete familiarity with writings in theirfield.3 An interesting conjecture is whether the crea-tivity that so distinguished Nash and Ramanujanfrom other mathematicians was due, in part, to atype of optimal ignorance in which a somewhatincomplete knowledge of the discipline actuallyenhanced rather than inhibited their creativity.4,5

This idea is closely related to Kettering’s obser-vation that “experts” could be so encumberedby their vast knowledge that it made it difficult

112 THE AMERICAN ECONOMIST

for them to think in a dimension different fromthat in which they were trained.6

The remainder of this essay is organized asfollows: Section II sets the stage for this essay withfour key observations about the nature of the teach-ing profession, in Section III, twelve principles foreffective teaching are developed and discussed inturn, and Section IV concludes.

II. Key Observations

In writing this essay, I am motivated by fourobservations about the nature of the teaching pro-fession and the individuals that make up its ranks.And, while I have not purposely set out to offendmy colleagues in the academy, I recognize thatthe nature of the subject matter and the candorwith which it is presented risks doing just that.My only hope is that I have not offended anyonewho does not deserve to be offended.

First, individuals that embark upon a careerin teaching at the K-12 level typically earn anundergraduate degree in education and serve apracticum in which their teaching skills are care-fully evaluated. In contrast, a college professornormally earns a Ph.D. or some other terminaldegree in their specialized research field andmarches into the classroom to enlighten themasses with little or no credible demonstrationof teaching competence.7 This is paradoxical and,for all but the most naturally gifted teachers,wrongheaded. There is both an art and a sciencedimension to effective teaching. The science dimen-sion is concerned with a comprehensive knowledgeof the subject matter, including its historical foun-dations and research on the frontiers of the disci-pline. The art dimension, which is likely to be themore elusive of the two, is the ability to convey com-plex material in terms that are readily understand-able to willing and sometimes unwilling students.

My second observation is that many (perhapseven most) professors do not teach particularly welland even those who do it well may not do it wellfor very long.8 Universities often do little more thanpay lip service to good teaching,9 but virtually allof them value research scholarship and extramuralfunding.10 Hence, in most cases the rewards fromexceptional teaching must come from within.

My third observation is that the nature of theteaching profession lends itself to staying on longer

than you really should. A professor can alwaysextend his lecture notes for one more year; the classtime can be whittled away telling “war stories” orengaging in other mindless musings that lack anyreal focus. We should not delude ourselves intothinking that this is effective teaching because it isnot. There are certainly outstanding teachers andin special cases teachers that are outstanding for longand distinguished careers. For myriad reasons, thereare natural tendencies that make this the exceptionrather than the rule—not the least of which is theever-increasing age differential between those doingthe teaching and those being taught. What is more,delivering passionate and inspiring lectures is bothphysically and intellectually demanding—so eventhe very best teachers likely have only a limitednumber of truly extraordinary lectures in them. Withfew exceptions, teaching, or at least effective teach-ing, is a “young” person’s sport!

My final observation is that professors devotetoo much time teaching a given body of materialand too little time developing their students’ abilityto think.11 Ideally, what we teach our studentsshould serve as a floor on which they stand toreach greater heights rather than as a ceiling thatlimits what they are able to achieve. The classroomreality is often quite different, likely because theneed to test our students in the end dictates whatwe teach them. As a result, we tend to emphasizemastery of material that is more amenable to objec-tive evaluation. Creative thinking is the resultantcollateral damage.

Most definitions of intelligence focus on thecapacities that are important for success inschool. Problem solving is recognized as acrucial component, but the ability to fashion aproduct – to write a symphony, execute a paint-ing, stage a play, carry out an experiment – isnot included, presumably because the afore-mentioned capacities cannot be probed ade-quately in short-answer tests (Gardner andHatch 1989:5).

III. Teaching Principles

The purpose of this section is to develop acomprehensive set of teaching principles and therationale for them. The overarching theme is thateffective teaching begins with first identifying and

Vol. 57, No. 1 (Spring 2012) 113

then breaking down what can be quite formidablebarriers to student learning.

To impart information in the classroom mosteffectively and develop the students’ self confi-dence, it is necessary for the teacher to subjugatehis ego to some degree.12 Spend less time convinc-ing your students how smart you are and more timeconvincing your students how smart they are (or atleast how smart they could be if they work hard andappreciate that there is always more to learn). Themost effective teachers understand that their integ-rity in the classroom rests not only on what theyknow, but also on their willingness to concede whatthey do not know.

In this process, moreover, it is not so much theintellectual superiority of the teacher that countsas it is his maturity in facing the unknown andhis willingness to leave unanswerable ques-tions unanswered (Nouwen 1971:12).

In order to create the type of classroom environ-ment conducive to learning, I begin the first classof each term with a quotation from the philosopherRalph Waldo Emerson.

Meek young men grow up in libraries, believ-ing it their duty to accept the views whichCicero, which Locke, which Bacon have given,forgetful that Cicero, Locke and Bacon wereonly young men in libraries when they wrotethese books (Emerson 1971:56).

I then ask my students to tell me what this quota-tion means to them. The answers are always illu-minating and serve as a catalyst for fruitfuldiscussion. The motivation for the Emerson quo-tation is to convey to students the importance oftrusting their own ideas and instincts,13 while help-ing them to realize that their instincts can some-times lead them astray.14 As Emerson observed,“Books are the best of things well used; abusedamong the worst. . . . They are for nothing but toinspire” (Emerson 1971:56).

A professor must establish credibility with hisstudents, but he must also create opportunities forhis students to establish credibility with him. In asense, he must enable his students to think evenmore highly of their ideas than those ideas mightwarrant on the merits. This can be done, in part, byexample. As the eminent number theorist, G. H.Hardy, observed:

Good work is not done by ‘humble’ men. It isone of the first duties of a professor, forexample, in any subject, to exaggerate a littleboth the importance of his subject and hisown importance in it. A man who is alwaysasking ‘Is what I do worthwhile?’ and ‘Am Ithe right person to do it?’ will always beineffective himself and a discouragement toothers. He must shut his eyes a little andthink a little more of his subject and himselfthan they deserve (Hardy 1967:66).

The tension arises when Hardy’s call for pro-fessors to “think a little more of his subject andhimself than they deserve” morphs into professorsthinking “a great deal more of his subject andhimself than they deserve.” This is problematicbecause an exaggerated sense of self-importancecan be as off-putting as a modicum of well-placedself confidence can be inspiring.

The economist John Maynard Keynes empha-sized that learning new ideas requires one to “escapefrom habitual modes of thought and expression”(Keynes 1935:viii). Joseph Schumpeter, anotherprominent economist and contemporary of Keynes,wrote of the perennial gale of creative destruction—the process of discovery in which new ideas andpractices continually challenge and displace oldideas (Schumpeter 1942).15 Learning is first andforemost a process of creative destruction thatenables students to escape the habitual modes ofthought and expression of which Keynes spoke. Themore entrenched the knowledge, the more difficultthe escape.

The process by which students learn and pro-cess information is heterogeneous rather than

Teaching Principle 1. Effective teaching strikesa delicate balance between the self confidencethat students must develop to become independentthinkers and the humility they must maintain torecognize how much more they have to learn.

Teaching Principle 2. Effective teaching entailstransmitting the subject matter on a number of dif-ferent “frequencies” to accommodate the hetero-geneous nature of how students learn.


homogeneous—a natural outgrowth of the theoryof multiple intelligences (Gardner 1983; Gardnerand Hatch 1989). Hence, an effective teacherrecognizes that the same teaching technique willnot be successful with every student. The profes-sor may be transmitting on a frequency differentthan that which some students in the class arereceiving. As a result, it may be necessary forprofessors to broadcast on a number of differentfrequencies to ensure that each student in the classis receiving the information. In the face of obviousconfusion about the material, simply repeating thesame concept over and over again using the sametechnique (i.e., transmitting on only one frequency)or proclaiming the obvious nature of the materialis not likely to be effective.16

Aristotle remarked that what is first in theorder of intelligibility is often last in theorder of learning. In the mind of a goodteacher that dictum has the status of a truism.Through practical experience, such a teacherknows the diversity of such pathways oflearning and is alert to discover new ones. Inthe mind of such a teacher the organizationof subject matter is a network of multipleinterconnections, not a single sequence oftopical steps laid out in advance (Hawkins2000:50–1).

For example, when I teach a particular economicconcept, there are typically conceptual, graphicaland mathematical methods by which to present thematerial. I generally employ all three methods,recognizing that not every student will understandeach of the three approaches, but there is a verygood chance that every student will be able to graspat least one of the three approaches.17 That is tosay, while virtually every student “can get it” theycannot all get it in the same way.

Not surprisingly, most students are embarrassedto admit publicly that they do not understand aconcept. For these students, it is critical that theyhave the opportunity to meet with professors one onone—ideally during office hours scheduled to max-imize (not minimize) accessibility. When studentscome to the professor’s office, it is important thatthey feel welcome. One way to convey this senti-ment is for the professor to get up from behindhis desk and sit with the student at a table or someother common area. This reduces any anxiety that

the student may have about meeting with the pro-fessor and also signals a genuine desire to help onthe part of the professor. When a professor sits onone side of the desk and the student sits on theother side, the desk itself becomes a barrier tolearning. The teachers that have played the mostsignificant role in my education have alwaysbeen those that were the most accessible, thosewho literally and figuratively got out from behindtheir desks.

Whether one is lecturing to students, businessexecutives or government officials, it is importantthat each lecture begin and end with a concisestatement of the significance of the particular issuefor the “bottom line.” To wit, why should I want toknow the answer to this question?18 Wheneverpossible, the importance of the concept should beunderscored with real-world examples so that yourstudents become part of the subject matter ratherthan merely observers from afar. The Internet pro-vides a virtually unlimited supply of such exam-ples.19 Effective teachers think carefully about howparticular concepts relate to what students encoun-ter in their everyday lives and build upon theserelationships in the course of their lectures.

Charles Kettering confronted a similar problemwhen he set out to convince the paint engineer atGM that lacquer paint, which was dry to the touchin just a few minutes, could significantly reducethe time required to paint an automobile. Despitemany attempts, Kettering failed to convince thepaint engineer of the merits of this innovation.The paint engineer was simply “not buying” whatKettering was “selling.” Never one to be deterred,Kettering invited the paint engineer out to lunchand had his car painted while they dined. Upon hisreturn from lunch, the paint engineer was unableto find his car. Kettering pointed to a car in thedistance and inquired “is that not your car overthere?” “My car is not that color” said the engineer,to which Kettering replied “it is now!” (Bernstein1988:125-6).

Much like Kettering, effective teachers worktirelessly (and sometimes employ unconventionalmethods) to help students understand the rele-vance of the lectures and their value in addressing

Teaching Principle 3. The effectiveness of thelecture is limited by the students’ willingness to“buy” what the teacher is “selling.”

Vol. 57, No. 1 (Spring 2012) 115

real-world problems. As Keynes (1935:viii) astutelyobserved, “The difficulty lies, not in the new ideas,but in escaping from the old ones. . .”

The classroom should not be used by professorsas a platform to advance their own political orsocial viewpoints. A professor is most effectivewhen s/he argues all sides of an issue in classroomdiscussions so as to encourage students to thinkcarefully, objectively, and rigorously. It is oftenuseful for the teacher to play the role of the devil’sadvocate in facilitating classroom discussions.Most importantly, it is critical that students notfeel obliged to answer examination questions in acertain way out of fear that the professor holdscontrary viewpoints. A teacher is most effectivewhen students cannot discern with any real cer-tainty his personal political or social leanings. Ifa teacher can keep his students guessing, he cankeep them learning.

The Socratic Method can be an effective teach-ing tool,20 but it need not be, and I believe shouldnot be, used in a punitive manner.21 The use of theSoft Socratic Method in which questions are posedto individual students, but there is no penalty per seif the question is answered incorrectly can be muchmore effective. It is counterproductive for profes-sors to belittle students for providing incorrectanswers. In fact, typically the professor need noteven tell the student that s/he is incorrect becausein many cases other students will jump in toprovide the correct answer. The professor shouldstand ready to provide any clarification that maybe required should the correct answer not be forth-coming. In this mode, the professor serves prima-rily as a facilitator (rather than an interrogator) inencouraging meaningful classroom discussion.

The professor can always interject a particularpoint or raise another question to keep the discus-sion moving in the right direction, but his roleis more passive than active in nature. It is more

conducive for learning when students are correctedby other students rather than by the professor. Theimportant point is not that the student fails per se,but that he learns to fail intelligently—in a mannerthat brings him one step closer to finding the solu-tion. Moreover, even if the student provides ananswer that is not correct, he likely made somestatement in his response that was correct. Thecorrect part of his answer should be underscoredwhile the professor moves on to other students inthe class who may be able to supply the correctanswer in its entirety.

The Soft Socratic Method is most effective whenprofessors take the time to learn some backgroundinformation about their students. This may includephotographs of your students along with a shortbiographical profile, including their major, classstanding, graduate school plans and career aspira-tions. This enables the professor to reach out tostudents on a more personal level in applying theSoft Socratic Method.22 For example, if a student isa computer science major, it may be helpful to seekher out should questions arise about the softwarebattles between Apple and Microsoft. The fact thatyou have sought out particular students because oftheir expertise in a given field instills confidencein them and renders them more comfortable inanswering questions in class. Once again, it is impor-tant for the professor to subjugate his ego, resistthe urge to be all-knowing and make his studentsthe stars of the lecture.

A number of prominent economists reportwriting important papers in a particular field as adirect result of teaching a course in that field(Becker and Kennedy 2005, 2006). In this sense,there can be a complementary relationship betweenteaching and research.

Each lecture provides the teacher with an oppor-tunity to sow the seeds of wisdom. Some of theseseeds, though sometimes fewer than we would like,will find their way into fertile soil (what Hawkins(2002:18) refers to as the “subsoil of the humanmind”) and the harvest that springs forth is likelyto be intergenerational in nature. Whereas a pro-fessor may begrudge the high opportunity cost of

Teaching Principle 4. The effective teacher neverconfuses indoctrination with teaching because theobjective is to develop thinkers not “parrots.”

Teaching Principle 6. The effective teacher useshis research to enhance his teaching and his teach-ing to enhance his research while recognizing theimportance of taking the long view.

Teaching Principle 5. The use of the SoftSocratic Method is superior to the traditionalSocratic Method because teaching by facilitationis more effective than teaching by interrogation.


stellar teaching in terms of foregone research, thisopportunity cost can be reduced significantly whenproper account is taken of the research and accom-plishments of the professor’s students. Througheffective teaching, the professor enables his studentsto scale intellectual heights that may even transcendthe professor’s own reach.23 Hence, whether stellarteaching “costs” or “pays” depends upon how onemeasures the output over the long-term.

It should not be presumed that just becauseprofessors are highly trained in a given field ofstudy that they alone are capable of making asignificant contribution to scholarship or indus-trial progress.24 Charles Kettering underscoredthis point with his observation that some of thegreatest inventions in history were the productof the work of non-specialists.25 In 1940, at theSesquicentennial of U.S. Patent Law, he made thefollowing observation.

It is very difficult to tell just who is going tooriginate a new thing. A schoolteacher, EliWhitney invented the cotton gin. Goodyearwas a store clerk. Fulton and Morse wereartists. The Wright brothers ran a bicycleshop and George Eastman was a bookkeeper.The developments that eventually made thesemen famous had practically no relationship totheir occupations. But, of first importanceeach of them had an idea. And, with thesemen, the perfection of the idea became thecontrolling influence. (Boyd 1961:107).

To be a lifelong learner means that students learnfrom professors and professors learn from studentsin a manner that is bi-directional in nature.26 Thisfree exchange of ideas is essential to fostering a richand productive learning environment.

It is likewise important for professors to under-stand that being an effective teacher means beingan effective listener. It is all too easy to fall intothe trap of thinking that we are teaching only whenwe are lecturing, but we are also teaching when welisten carefully to what our students have to say,whether they are responding to a question, asking

a question or simply making an observation. AsProfessor Maynard Mack (1998:176) observes:

From such interactions, rather than from thepassive transmission of information, comethose moments of revelation, however rare,that change lives.

It was not all that long ago that college profes-sors taught a variety of courses across a number ofdisciplines. Largely as a result of the exponentialgrowth in the academic literature in individualfields and subfields, these practices are no longerfeasible. Unfortunately, the specialization in sub-fields of the discipline, a division of labor essentialfor cutting-edge research,27 can work at cross-purposes with effective teaching and interdisci-plinary thinking. Reading a book or an article inanother field bears an increasingly high opportunitycost for professors actively engaged in research.Nonetheless, professors that read across disciplines,including subfields within their own discipline, andinvest the time and effort to acquaint themselveswith interesting problems in other fields will findthemselves able to connect with students in a mannerthat those who are deeply but not broadly knowl-edgeable never will.

In an important sense, the art of asking the“right” question is more important than framingthe “right” answer. There is a tendency for profes-sors to want to provide all of the answers, perhapsto come across as all-knowing or to make theirstudents feel comfortable. And yet, the reallearning takes place when students are somewhatuncomfortable, when they are forced to strugglewith the questions and put the pieces of the puzzletogether for themselves.

All of which indicates how inadequate it isto think of the teacher as primarily someonegiving out information to someone else whodoesn’t have it. The teacher’s function is tohelp create the structure of the subject in thestudent’s mind. That is why it is the teacherwho asks most of the questions and not the

Teaching Principle 7. The dissemination ofknowledge is maximized when the teacher developsmultiple communication pathways and encouragesinterdisciplinary thinking.

Teaching Principle 8. Effective teaching is lessabout providing students with the right answersand more about developing in them the ability toask the right questions.

Vol. 57, No. 1 (Spring 2012) 117

student. The student already knows a greatdeal more than he realizes he knows (Frye1988:13).

Charles Kettering believed unfailingly in the impor-tance of new ideas the genesis of which entailedasking the right questions. To underscore this point,Kettering was fond of telling a story about twochemists working on the so-called universal solventin a small laboratory on the edge of town. One day aman driving by had a blow-out in one of his tires.Seeing the small laboratory in the distance, the manwalked in and inquired of the two chemists work-ing there if he might use their phone to call forassistance? “Sure” the chemists replied, “go rightahead.” The man picked up the phone and inquiredof the chemists, “by the way, what are you workingon so intensely?” The chemists replied with a senseof utter conviction, “we are working on the greatestinvention in history—the universal solvent, a sol-vent that will dissolve anything.” “Very interesting”replied the man, “very interesting indeed, but whatare you going to keep it in?” (Boyd 1961:108).

Student anxiety over the complexity of coursematerial can be a formidable barrier to learning.Breaking down these barriers is the first order ofbusiness. The students in the classroom will not beat ease in learning the material if the teacher is notat ease in presenting the material. Hence, a one-size-fits-all approach to crafting lectures is notlikely to be effective. I tend to interject humor intomy lectures because I believe in the power oflearning-through-laughter—a process by whichhumor reduces student anxiety, lowers barriers tolearning and facilitates comprehension. I know ofother professors that play musical instruments, singand even play rock music to achieve similar results.

By the use of humor in the classroom, I do notmean to suggest that it is necessary for teachers toserve as the comedic equivalent of late-night talkshow hosts. A little bit of humor can go a longway in refocusing students’ attention and keepingthem interested in the material. Indeed, there is abeneficial leveling effect that can be achieved withthe use of humor, particularly self-deprecating

humor, because it humanizes the professor in theeyes of the student. It is especially important tointerject humor if the material is dry and it isdifficult for students to maintain concentration forextended periods of time.28

An effective lecture must be carefully prepared,but not over-prepared. The latter occurs when thelecture is so thoroughly scripted that it takes on adegree of rigidity (and often a humorless tone) thatactually impedes learning. The effective teacher,through use of the Soft Socratic Method, is con-stantly taking the “temperature” of his class toassess whether the material is being received onthe frequency on which it is transmitted. A profes-sor that over-prepares his lecture may only grudg-ingly depart from the script to address issues thatarise on a real-time basis. Students will quicklypick up on the professor’s reluctance to departfrom his script and this works at cross-purposeswith an interactive classroom environment.

Being well-prepared for a lecture means allow-ing for a certain degree of spontaneity in both thedelivery of the material and in the responses to anyquestions that may arise. A good lecture is not aspeech in which one merely reads the words offthe proverbial teleprompter. A speech is rigid bydesign and broadcast by nature. In contrast, aclassroom lecture is fluid by design and interactiveby nature. A professor cannot anticipate the reac-tions of his students to every question that mayarise, and this is precisely why attempts to scriptevery word in advance are counter-productive.29

The unpleasant truth is that professors oftenrefrain from assigning term papers or writingassignments because they do not want to gothrough the “agony” of reading them. Admittedly,there may be some pain involved, but it is necessarypain. In this age of e-mails, texting and tweeting,

Teaching Principle 9. The effective teacher craftshis lectures to play to his strengths in communi-cating the material in the classroom, be it throughhumor, music, poetry, etc.

Teaching Principle 10. The well-planned lecturelike the general’s battle plan should be sufficientlyflexible in design to allow for real-time adjust-ments necessary to address unforeseen obstaclesencountered in the course of the “struggle.”

Teaching Principle 11. We fail our students whenwe teach them the material without also instructingthem on the most effective methods to communi-cate what they have learned.


our students’ writing skills have been allowed towane. We do our students a great disservice whenwe do not require them to develop these skills. Goodwriting skills are essential, not only for the com-munication of ideas but for nurturing creativity aswell. Seasoned writers recognize that it is possibleto write down ideas and thoughts that they were noteven mindful that they knew. Such is the power ofwriting in unleashing the creativity from within.

Students should be encouraged at every turn toexercise economy of presentation, to formulate theirarguments in a concise and effective manner so asto make “every word tell.”30 These principles applyto both in-class discussions and writing exercises.31

Vigorous writing is concise. A sentence shouldcontain no unnecessary words, a paragraphno unnecessary sentences, for the same reasonthat a drawing should have no unnecessarylines and a machine no unnecessary parts.This requires not that the writer make allhis sentences short, or that he avoid all detailand treat his subjects only in outline, but thatevery word tell (Strunk and White 1979:23).

It is likewise important for teachers to practicewhat they preach when it comes to communica-tion of concepts. Professors increasingly rely uponPowerPoint slides,32 transparencies and other media,frequently prepared by textbook publishers, tocraft their lectures. Whereas, there can be impor-tant benefits from the use of these media there canalso be significant costs.

For example, when writing on the board in theclassroom, I observe that students are activelyengaged with the material, transcribing their notesand carefully thinking about what they understandand what they do not. In contrast, the use of aPowerPoint format can be disengaging on twofronts. First, the professor is disconnected from hisown lectures because the slides are frequently pre-pared by the textbook publisher. Second, the avail-ability of the slides causes the students to putdown their writing instruments and/or turn offtheir laptops—passively watching the learning pro-cess as opposed to actively participating in it. Inthis manner, PowerPoint-based lectures can mar-ginalize professors by relegating them to passiveprojectionists rather than active lecturers.33

There is a beneficial learning process that takesplace when students transcribe their own notes

rather than rely upon copies of professors’ slides.34

When students write down the material, they simul-taneously write on the “hard drive” in their brainsand this aids comprehension.35 Students are seem-ingly able to identify points of confusion morereadily when the material is created anew for them(i.e., written on the “board” in some fashion) ratherthan provided to them in pre-prepared format.Striking the right balance may take the form ofproviding students with electronic access to selectedmaterials, but not at a level of granularity that reducesincentives to attend class and take careful notes.

The available evidence indicates that high gradesdo not guarantee high teaching evaluations.36 Buteven if it were possible to “buy” high teachingevaluations with high grades, the real question iswhy would you want to? I half-jokingly tell mystudents on the first day of class that I probablyreceive a $1.50 more in compensation at the end ofthe year if I receive high teaching evaluations ratherthan average or low teaching evaluations, so the costto adhering to my principles is negligible. My prac-tice is to distribute the teaching evaluations from thelast time I taught the course so that the students canread first-hand what former students had to say.

These practices give rise to two desired effects.First, those students that may be less serious aboutlearning can find some other class in which toenroll.37,38 Second, it is important for students tohave full information about the course so that theycan make an informed decision as to whether it isappropriate for them. In light of the high (andincreasing) cost of a college education, every effortshould be made to help students allocate theirtuition dollars in the most efficient manner possible.

Finally, a word or two about teaching awards isin order. Whereas many gifted (and no so gifted)professors will receive a teaching award or two inthe course of their careers, there are professorsmost deserving of such honors that will neverreceive them.39 Some of the most influential andable professors that I encountered in college nevereven came close to winning a teaching award. Iwould not say that this was a badge of honor for

Teaching Principle 12. The teachers’ effective-ness is not measured by the numbers on the teach-ing evaluations at the end of the term, but by whatthey have helped their students to achieve over thecourse of a lifetime.

Vol. 57, No. 1 (Spring 2012) 119

these professors, but I believe they understoodwhat really mattered.

IV. Conclusion

In his retirement years, Charles Kettering lec-tured throughout the country on industrial progressand research. He talked increasingly of failure—hewas for it. Kettering had long been critical of theAmerican educational system because he said ittaught young people only the dark side of failure.He believed that failure was integral to effectivelearning and that preconception was the real enemy.He often said that if he could teach a young personto fail intelligently, he could make an inventor outof him. Indeed, for Kettering, an inventor wassomeone who did not take his education too seri-ously. I believe that what he meant by this is thatthe successful inventor leverages his centrifugal(“center-fleeing”) thought processes to move beyondthe limits of his formal education rather than allowhimself to be encumbered by it.

By definition, a professor plays a critical role inthe education of his students, but that role is muchmore conductor than composer. The students’formal education is but one part of a much largerand ongoing process of learning and discovery.The most important skills we teach our studentsare not reflected in a set of facts and theories, butin the ability to think rigorously, critically andobjectively in the pursuit of truth and knowledge.Endowing our students with the thirst for suchknowledge, the courage to challenge prevailing ortho-doxy and the ability to ask the “right” questions tran-scends the importance of the subject matter itself.

So what is effective teaching? A precise defi-nition of effective teaching is elusive, but we knowit when we see it. Indeed, to truly experience effec-tive teaching is, to paraphrase Ernest Hemmingway,“a moveable feast” because “wherever you go forthe rest of your life, it stays with you . . .”40 It ison this note that I would like to bring this essay toa close.

David Hawkins, my former philosophy profes-sor, passed away in 2002 and it has been more thanthree decades since I walked out of his classroomfor the last time. Through the years, I have come toappreciate that the real beauty of the Hawkins lec-tures is that they never stop teaching. That is, Isuppose, the real magic of it all; the important

lessons, the ones we take with us and keep closeto our heart never really die—they are passedalong from one generation to the next as part ofthe sacred covenant of teaching.

Notes

1. There are notable differences between teachinguniversity students and teaching other groups.For example, university students tend to internal-ize any difficulties with comprehension—“whatam I missing?” In contrast, executives and gov-ernment officials tend to externalize any suchdifficulties—“why can’t you be more clear?”

2. The late Randy Pausch, professor of computerscience at Carnegie-Mellon University, gaveout what he called “The First Penguin Award.”This award was given to teams of students thattook the biggest gamble in trying new ideasand technology, while failing to meet theirstated goals. See Pausch (2008:148–9).

3. See Nasar (1994) and Hardy (1967). In thecase of Ramanujan, this lack of familiaritywas likely due to his being isolated from themajor centers of learning. For John Nash, itwas seemingly more deliberate.

4. Nasar (1994:12) makes the following observa-tion about Nash’s creativity.

No one was more obsessed with origi-nality, more disdainful of authority, ormore jealous of his independence. As ayoung man he was surrounded by thehigh priests of twentieth-century science—Albert Einstein, John von Neumann, andNorbert Wiener—but he joined no school,became no one’s disciple, got alonglargely without guides or followers. Inalmost everything he did—from gametheory to geometry—he thumbed his noseat the received wisdom, current fashions,established methods. . . . Nash acquiredhis knowledge of mathematics not mainlyfrom studying what other mathematicianshad discovered, but by rediscovering theirtruths for himself. . . . When he focusedon some new puzzle, he saw dimensionsthat people who really knew the subject(he never did) initially dismissed as naiveor wrong-headed. Even as a student, his


indifference to others’ skepticism, doubt,and ridicule was awesome.

5. The quotation that “life is a blank slate onwhich experience writes” is most often attrib-uted to the philosopher, John Locke. WhatLocke (1690:1) actually wrote appears in thefollowing passage.

Let us then suppose the mind to be, aswe say, white paper, void of all charac-ters, without any ideas:–How comes it tobe furnished? Whence comes it by thatvast store which the busy and boundlessfancy of man has painted on it with analmost endless variety? Whence has it allthe materials of reason and knowledge?To this I answer, in one word, fromEXPERIENCE. (footnote omitted)

The relevant question then for the purposes ofour discussion is whether this “experience” pro-vides a basis for solving the particular problemat hand, or merely muddies the “slate” andmakes it more difficult to see the solution. Thenotion of optimal ignorance derives from thebasic idea that some knowledge is good, but toomuch may be bad. The conjecture is that thereare not only decreasing returns to knowledgeafter a certain point, but quite possibly negativereturns when the metric of interest is creativityand problem solving. In other words, is it “diffi-cult to teach an old dog new tricks” becausethere is too much written on his slate?

6. As Nasar (1994:12) observes, Nash’s uniquestyle of thinking coupled with the absenceof preconception differentiated him fromother mathematicians.

. . . Nash saw the vision first, construct-ing the laborious proofs long afterward.But even after he’d try to explain someastonishing result, the actual route he hadtaken remained a mystery to others whotried to follow his reasoning. DonaldNewman, a mathematician who knewNash at MIT in the 1950s, used to sayabout him that “everyone else wouldclimb a peak by looking for a path some-where on the mountain. Nash wouldclimb another mountain altogether and

from that distant peak would shine asearchlight back onto the first peak.”(footnote omitted)

7. This statement should not be construed tosuggest that formal training in teachingmethods for new Ph.D.s would necessarilyyield more effective teaching. In the case ofK-12 teachers, Staiger and Rockoff (2010) findlittle empirical evidence that teaching creden-tials are related to teaching effectiveness.

8. The Harvard business historian, ThomasMcCraw, contends that “Almost all businesses,no matter how strong they seem to be at a givenmoment, ultimately fail — and almost alwaysbecause they failed to innovate.” (McCraw,(2007:495). A related observation applies toteachers and for similar reasons.

9. Becker (2000) contends that top-rated univer-sities and prestigious colleges appear to beplacing more emphasis on the importance ofteaching scholarship, and that this has becomea major part of personnel decisions. This maywell signify a sea change on the part of univer-sity administrators toward teaching. For exam-ple, Sowell (1993:205–6) previously describedthe winning of teaching awards at prestigiousuniversities as “the kiss of death” because itoften preceded the denial of tenure.

10. I would be remiss if I did not point outthat grants provide critical funding for theoperation of universities and this, of course,includes teaching.

11. Some of my students ask me why the exami-nations include questions that require themto think beyond the material discussed inclass. My response is always the same, “noemployer will pay you to tell them what theyalready know.”

12. The importance of this practice was under-scored in one of my first Ph.D. classes. Theclass was taught by a distinguished professorwho had that very year won a Nobel prize. Astudent in the class was on the losing side ofa debate with this professor when, as a lastact of desperation, he suggested that perhapsthe professor did not fully understand theintellectual subtleties of the material. Wewere awe-struck by the professor’s restraintwhen he remarked only that “perhaps I donot fully comprehend the point the author

Vol. 57, No. 1 (Spring 2012) 121

is making; I should read the material again.”This was an incredible demonstration ofhumility, particularly among members of theacademy for whom such an occurrence mightbe considered something of a “black swan”(Taleb 2007). The issue in dispute is long-forgotten, but not the free exchange of ideasthat flowed in that classroom following thisevent. The deeper lesson to be learned is thatwhen you have the goods, in this case a NobelPrize, there is no need to continually remindyour students of your intellectual prowess—learning must always take center stage.

13. Schumacher (1977:1) articulates a similar ideawhen he notes that at some point in the courseof his education and intellectual maturity, he“ceased to suspect the sanity of my perceptionsand began, instead, to suspect the soundness ofthe maps.”

14. As Keynes (1935:vii) observed in the prefaceto his most famous work, “It is astonishingwhat foolish things one can temporarily believeif one thinks too long alone . . .”

15. Kuhn (1996:Chapters IX and X) discussessimilar ideas in the context of paradigm shiftsin politics and science.

16. There is an old adage about a mathematicsprofessor who writes down the proof of atheorem on the blackboard. The last line ofthe proof reads that “it is intuitively obviousthat A follows from B.” Immediately uponcompleting the proof, the professor walks tothe back of the room and begins pacing backand forth while he studies the blackboardintently without uttering a single word. Sud-denly, the professor leaves the classroom alto-gether and walks down the hall to his office.The students sit in the classroom for twentyminutes before deciding to send a representa-tive to the professor’s office. The designatedstudent arrives at the professor’s office andobserves him busily scribbling mathematicalcalculations at his desk. At long last, the pro-fessor returns to the classroom, and with abig smile on his face he jubilantly announces“I was right, it is intuitively obvious!”

17. Research by Cohn et. al (2001, 2004) raisesthought-provoking questions regarding thevalue of graphical analysis as a learning toolin principles of economics courses, particu-larly among certain race-gender groups.

18. Laskin (1999:§3) underscores this very pointwith his observation that “We absorb andremember information best when we knowwhy it is important and how it is relevant.”

19. Becker (2000:111–2) underscores the need forprofessors to bring the headlines into the class-room to keep students engaged with the material.

20. The Socratic Method is a process by whichinformation is conveyed and learning is fos-tered through a process of questions andanswers. It is commonly used in professionalschools that employ the case study approach,such as business schools and law schools. SeeMcCraw (1999) for an illuminating expositionof the use of the case study approach in teach-ing business history to Harvard MBA students.

21. The traditional form of the Socratic Methodwas perhaps most vividly portrayed on filmin the movie The Paper Chase (1973). In aclassic scene (Scene 30), the much-fearedProfessor Kingsfield (John Houseman) callsupon Hart (Timothy Bottoms), a first-yearlaw student, to answer a question. Hart states,in a dismissive tone, that he has nothing rele-vant to say and passes on answering the ques-tion. Professor Kingsley fumes at this responseand summons Hart down to the lectern. Hecoldly admonishes him, “Mr. Hart, here is adime, call your mother and tell her that there isserious doubt about your becoming a lawyer.”Upon being publicly rebuked in front of hisclassmates, Hart proceeds to walk out of theclassroom, but stops midway, turns around andexclaims “you are a son of a bitch, Kingsfield.”Professor Kingsfield pauses for a moment andthen exclaims “Mr. Hart, that is the mostintelligent thing you’ve said today, you maytake your seat.”

22. It is important not to discount the importanceof calling upon your students by their names.This can be challenging, but not insurmount-able, in large classes. In large lecture classes,the instructor can review background infor-mation on six or seven students in advanceand call upon these students in class on thatparticular day. This practice goes a long waytoward establishing the rapport with studentsthat is necessary for effective teaching.

23. A related idea is underscored in one of the origi-nal episodes of Star Trek entitled “Tomorrow isYesterday.” The Starship Enterprise operates


under Star Fleet’s prime directive—a policy ofnon-interference with respect to the naturaltimeline of a civilization’s development. TheEnterprise crew is faced with a moral dilemmawhen it contemplates whether a detained pilotfrom an earlier time period should be returnedto earth with knowledge of the future? Mr.Spock, the Vulcan first officer, dispassionatelyobserves that the pilot did not make a signifi-cant contribution to mankind, so there wouldbe no violation of the prime directive in notreturning him to earth. He subsequently retractshis statement when he looks into the future andsees that the pilot’s yet unborn son will go onto head the first successful Earth-Saturn probe,a rather significant scientific advance. Hence,the pilot does play a material role in the time-line of his civilization through the achievementsof his son. Star Trek, The Original Series, Sea-son 1, Episode 19, “Tomorrow is Yesterday,”Original Air Date, January 26, 1967.

24. This is not to suggest that being too muchsmarter than your professors is not without risk.A case in point is that of Milton Babbitt, whowrote a path-breaking dissertation at Princetonin the 1940s that used advanced mathematicsto analyze the 12-tone system. Babbitt’s dis-sertation was rejected, in large part, becauseno one on the music faculty could understandit. This injustice was corrected some forty-six years later when Babbitt’s dissertation wasresurrected from Princeton’s Archives and hewas finally awarded the Ph.D. See PrincetonUniversity Press Release (1992).

25. The basic idea of tradable property rights forthe management of environmental quality, thefoundational idea for the cap-and-trade poli-cies currently being debated, was actually con-ceived by a political scientist rather than aneconomist. See Dales (1968) and Baumol andOates (1988). An English monk, Roger Bacon,invented gunpowder and in the process changedthe entire course of civilization.

26. Hawkins (2000:45–6) is critical of the factthat there is very little two-way interchangein schools. “What is found mostly is unidirec-tional flow, a truncated communication of‘instruction’ punctuated by fixed alternativeresponses.” And yet, “the desired outcome isthat full symmetry be established, and learnersturn into teachers.”

27. For example, the last mathematician for whomit could be said that he knew all of mathematicswas Henri Poincare (1854–1912). As noted byEves (1976:433), “Mathematics has grown atsuch an incredible rate in modern times that itis believed quite impossible for anyone everagain to achieve such a distinction.”

28. McLuhan and Fiore (1967:10) underscore thisidea in the following observation:

Learning, the educational process, has longbeen associated only with the glum. Wespeak of the “serious” student. Our timepresents a unique opportunity for learningby means of humor—a perceptive or inci-sive joke can be more meaningful thanplatitudes lying between two covers.

29. Hawkins (2000:45) observes that fosteringtwo-way communication between student andteacher is critical for effective learning “andnot predictable in its outcome from a perusalof the teacher’s notebook.”

30. It is noteworthy that the U.S. Supreme Courtallots only thirty minutes for each side topresent their case. This disciplines the partiesto think as carefully about what they are goingto say as how they are going to say it.

31. See also Williams (1990) for a comprehen-sive treatment of the principles of clear andpersuasive writing.

32. For a thought-provoking critique of the use ofPowerPoint to effectively convey information,see Edward R. Tufte, “The Cognitive Style ofPowerPoint: Pitching Out Corrupts Within,”Reprinted in Tufte (2006:156–185).

33. Tufte (2006:161) argues that there is a fun-damental inconsistency between the use ofPowerPoint and the core ideas of teaching. Heargues further that the PowerPoint style “tendsto set up a dominance relationship betweenspeaker and audience as the speaker makespower points with his hierarchical bullets topassive followers.”

34. Cohn et. al (1995:303) find that “instructorswho distribute notes and insist that studentsrefrain from taking notes so that they can paymore attention to the lecture may be deceivingthemselves.”

35. This suggests something akin to McLuhan’s(1964:Chapter 2) distinction between a hot

Vol. 57, No. 1 (Spring 2012) 123

and cold medium. A hot medium allows littlefor the observer to fill in, and the opposite istrue for a cold medium. “Any hot mediumallows of less participation than a cool one, asa lecture makes for less participation than aseminar, and a book for less than dialogue”(p. 37). In this sense, we might think of aPowerPoint lecture as a hot medium and atraditional lecture combined with the SoftSocratic Method as a cold medium.

36. Research by Isely and Singh (2005) suggeststhat the relevant explanatory variable for teach-ing evaluations is the difference between thegrades students expect and their cumulativegrade point average rather than the absolutelevel of grades or expected grades.

37. Babcock and Marks (2010) report that theaverage college student in the United Statestoday puts in less than 60 percent of the studytime per week compared to their counter-parts in 1961 (14 hours versus 24 hours). Theauthors conclude that “The most plausibleexplanation for these findings . . . is that stan-dards have fallen at post-secondary institu-tions in the United States” (p. 1).

38. Research by Isely and Sing (2005) suggeststhat instructors in classes that draw a dis-proportionate number of top-performing stu-dents would tend to receive lower teachingevaluations, ceteris paribus. The rationalefor this finding is that top students may tendto credit their own abilities and work ethicfor their superior performance rather thanthe instructor.

39. Notably, Carrell, and West (2010) report anegative correlation between the ratings thatprofessors receive on student teaching evalua-tions and the performance of those students inhigher-level classes. This implies that profes-sors who encourage deeper learning are seem-ingly penalized for their efforts. This raisesquestions about the value of student evalua-tions of teaching performance as a measure ofinstructional quality.

40. The full quotation, which appears on theopening page of Hemmingway’s (1964) bookwith the inscription “to a friend, 1950” readsas follows: If you are lucky enough to havelived in Paris as a young man, then whereveryou go for the rest of your life, it stays withyou, for Paris is a moveable feast.

References

Babcock, Phillip and Mindy Marks. 2010. “LeisureCollege, USA: The Decline in Student StudyTime.” American Enterprise Institute for PublicPolicy Research, No. 7, August.

Baumol, William J. and Wallace E. Oates. 1988.The Theory of Environmental Policy. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Becker, William E. 2000. “Teaching Economics inthe 21st Century.” Journal of Economic Perspec-tives 14(1): 109–119.

Becker, William E. and Peter E. Kennedy. 2005.“Does Teaching Enhance Research in Econom-ics?” The American Economic Review, Papersand Proceedings 95(2): 172–6.

Becker, William E. and Peter E. Kennedy. “TheInfluence of Teaching on Research in Eco-nomics.” Southern Economic Journal, January2006: 747–759.

Bernstein, Mark. 1988. “Charles Kettering: Auto-motive Genius.” Smithsonian, July.

Boyd, T. A. 1961. PROPHET OF PROGRESS – Selec-tions from the Speeches of Charles F. Kettering.New York: E. P. Dutton and Co. Inc.

Carrell, Scott E. and James E. West. 2010.“Does Professor Quality Matter? Evidencefrom Random Assignment of Students toProfessors.” Journal of Political Economy 118(3):409–432.

Cohn, Elchanan, Sharon Cohn, and James BradleyJr. 1995. “Notetaking, Working Memory, andLearning in Principles of Economics.” Journalof Economic Education 26(4): 291–307.

Cohn, Elchanan, Sharon Cohn, Donald C. Balch,and James Bradley Jr. 2001. “Do GraphsPromote Learning in Principles of Econom-ics?” Journal of Economic Education 32(4):299–310.

Cohn, Elchanan, Sharon Cohn, Donald C. Balch,and James Bradley Jr. 2004. “The RelationshipBetween Student Attitudes Toward Graphs andPerformance in Economics.” The AmericanEconomist 48(2): 41–52.

Dales, J. H. 1968. Pollution, Property and Prices.Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Emerson, Ralph Waldo. 1837. “An Oration Deliv-ered before the Phi Beta Kappa Society atCambridge.” The American Scholars, August 31.[Reprinted in The Collected Works of RalphWaldo Emerson, Introduction and Notes by


Robert E. Spiller, Text established by Alfred R.Ferguson. 1971 Vol. I., Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity Press, 52–70.]

Frye, Northrop. 1988. On Education. Ann Arbor:The University of Michigan Press.

Gardner, Howard. 1983. Frames of Mind. New York:Basic Books.

Gardner, Howard and Thomas Hatch. 1989. “MultipleIntelligences Go to School: Educational Impli-cations of the Theory of Multiple Intelligences.”Educational Researcher 18(8): 4–10.

Hawkins, David. 2000.The Roots of Literacy. Boulder,CO: University Press of Colorado.

Hardy, George G. (Foreword by C. P. Snow).1967. A Mathematician’s Apology. CambridgeEngland: Cambridge University Press.

Hawkins, David. 2002. The Informed Vision. NewYork: Algora Publishing.

Hemmingway, Ernest. 1964. A Moveable Feast.New York: Bantam Books.

Isely, Paul and Harinder Singh. 2005. “Do HigherGrades Lead to Favorable Student Evaluations?”Journal of Economic Education 36(1): 29–42.

Keynes, John Maynard. 1935. The General Theoryof Employment, Interest, and Money. New York:Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc.

Kuhn, Thomas S. 1996. The Structure of ScientificRevolutions. 3rd ed. Chicago: University ofChicago Press (Originally published in 1962).

Laskin, John I. 1999. “Forget the Wind Up andMake the Pitch: Some Suggestions for WritingMore Persuasive Factums.” Retrieved October 17,2011 (http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/coa/en/ps/speeches/forget.htm).

Lehmann-Haupt, Christopher. 2002. “David Hawkins,88, Historian for Manhattan Project in 1940’s,”New York Times, March 4. Retrieved October 17,2011 (http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/04/us/david-hawkins-88-historian-for-manhattan-project-in-1940-s.html).

Leslie, Stuart W. 1983. Boss Kettering. New York:Columbia University Press.

Locke, John (Collated and Annotated by AlexanderCampbell Fraser). 1959. An Essay on Human

Understanding. New York: Dover Publications(Originally published in 1690).

Mack, Maynard. 1998. “On Teaching.” excerptedin the American Scholar, 67: 176.

McCraw, Thomas K. 1999. “Teaching HistoryCourses to Harvard MBA Students: BuildingEnrollment from 21 to 1300.” Business andEconomic History 28(2): 153–162

McCraw, Thomas K. 2007. Prophet of Innovation.Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

McLuhan, Marshall and Quentin Fiore. 1967. TheMedium is the Message. New York: Bantam Books.

McLuhan, Marshall. 1964. Understanding Media.New York: New American Library.

Nasar, Sylvia. 1994. A Beautiful Mind. New York:Simon & Schuster.

Nouwen, Henri, J. M. 1971. Creative Ministry,Garden City. New York: Doubleday.

Pausch, Randy (with Jeffrey Zaslow). 2008. TheLast Lecture. New York: Hyperion.

Princeton University Press Release. 1992. “FamedU.S. Composer Finally Awarded Doctorate:Dissertation Was 46 Years Ahead of Its Time.”January 30.

Schumacher, E. F. 1977. A Guide for the Perplexed.New York: Harper & Row.

Schumpeter, Joseph A. 1975. Capitalism, Socialismand Democracy. New York: Harper Torchbooks(originally published in 1942).

Sowell, Thomas. 1993. Inside American Educa-tion. New York: The Free Press.

Staiger, Douglas O. and Jonah E. Rockoff. 2010.“Searching for Effective Teachers with Imper-fect Information.” The Journal of EconomicPerspectives 24(3): 97–188.

Strunk, William and E.B. White. 1979. The Elementsof Style. 3rd ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing.

Taleb, Nassim Nicholas. 2007. The Black Swan.New York: Random House.

Tufte, Edward R. 2006. Beautiful Evidence.Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press LLC.

Williams, Joseph M. 1990. Style – Toward Clar-ity and Grace. Chicago: The University ofChicago Press.

Vol. 57, No. 1 (Spring 2012) 125

Documents

AN ESSAY ON THE ART AND SCIENCE OF TEACHING by Dennis · PDF fileAN ESSAY ON THE ART AND SCIENCE OF TEACHING by Dennis L ... presenting complex material to students in terms that are