I happened to have a vehement and probably radical opinion on this.
One of my sayings: "Ironically, our educational system is ideally suited
to teaching computers and ill-suited to teaching human beings." If you
are going to program a computer to do statistics, tell the computer
rules to follow.
If you give students rules to memorize, they will surely forget them.
If you had a student who learned and applied the rules, people would say
that the student was mindlessly following rules and couldn't think for
him/herself. But your best student will just remember half the rules --
and by that, I mean half of each rule.
I know it is hard to make statistics fun, but FOLLOWING RULES IS NEVER
FUN. Not in math, not in games, nowhere.
There are advantages to teaching rules. Most students like it. They
certainly understand that method of teaching. They just won't learn
anything.
Bob F.
EAKIN MARK E wrote:
>
> I just received a review which stated that statistics should not be
> taught
> by the use of rules. For example a rule might be: "if you wish to
> infer
> about the central tendency of a non-normal but continuous population
> using
> a small random sample, then use nonparametrics methods."
>
> I see why rules might not be appropriate in mathematical statistics
> classes where everything is developed by theory and proof. However I
> teach
> statistical methods classes to business students.
>
> It is my belief that if faculty do not give rules in methods classes,
> then
> students will infer the rules from the presentation. These
> student-developed rules may or may not be valid.
>
> I would be intested in reading what other faculty say about
> rule-based teaching depending on whether you teach theory or methods
> classes.
>
> Mark Eakin
> Associate Professor
> Information Systems and Management Sciences Department
> University of Texas at Arlington
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] or
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
