IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/amerec/v57y2012i1p111-125.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Essay on the Art and Science of Teaching

Author

Listed:
  • 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.

Suggested Citation

  • Dennis L. Weisman, 2012. "An Essay on the Art and Science of Teaching," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 57(1), pages 111-125, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:amerec:v:57:y:2012:i:1:p:111-125
    DOI: 10.1177/056943451205700109
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/056943451205700109
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/056943451205700109?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elchanan Cohn & Sharon Cohn & Donald C. Balch & James Bradley, 2001. "Do Graphs Promote Learning in Principles of Economics?," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(4), pages 299-310, January.
    2. Scott E. Carrell & James E. West, 2010. "Does Professor Quality Matter? Evidence from Random Assignment of Students to Professors," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(3), pages 409-432, June.
    3. Baumol,William J. & Oates,Wallace E., 1988. "The Theory of Environmental Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521322249.
    4. Paul Isely & Harinder Singh, 2005. "Do Higher Grades Lead to Favorable Student Evaluations?," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1), pages 29-42, January.
    5. William E. Becker & Peter E. Kennedy, 2005. "Does Teaching Enhance Research in Economics?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(2), pages 172-176, May.
    6. Babcock, Phillip & Marks, Mindy, 2010. "Leisure College, Usa," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt1zd0q0vn, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Weisman, Dennis L., 2017. "How to integrate economic analysis into classroom discussions of diversity?," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 8-14.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Beleche, Trinidad & Fairris, David & Marks, Mindy, 2012. "Do course evaluations truly reflect student learning? Evidence from an objectively graded post-test," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 709-719.
    2. Anne Boring, 2015. "Gender Biases in student evaluations of teachers," Documents de Travail de l'OFCE 2015-13, Observatoire Francais des Conjonctures Economiques (OFCE).
    3. Rieger, Matthias & Voorvelt, Katherine, 2016. "Gender, ethnicity and teaching evaluations: Evidence from mixed teaching teamsAuthor-Name: Wagner, Natascha," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 79-94.
    4. Aurora Garc𫑇allego & Nikolaos Georgantz & Joan Mart󻑍ontaner & Teodosio P鲥z-Amaral, 2015. "(How) Do research and administrative duties affect university professors' teaching?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(45), pages 4868-4883, September.
    5. Benjamin Artz & David M. Welsch, 2013. "The Effect of Student Evaluations on Academic Success," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 8(1), pages 100-119, January.
    6. Gorry, Devon, 2017. "The impact of grade ceilings on student grades and course evaluations: Evidence from a policy change," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 133-140.
    7. Maarten Goos & Anna Salomons, 2017. "Measuring teaching quality in higher education: assessing selection bias in course evaluations," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 58(4), pages 341-364, June.
    8. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/1seuirq4ak9b9bouu1j29ebui7 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Wagner, N. & Rieger, M. & Voorvelt, K.J., 2016. "Gender, ethnicity and teaching evaluations : Evidence from mixed teaching teams," ISS Working Papers - General Series 617, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    10. Boring, Anne, 2017. "Gender biases in student evaluations of teaching," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 27-41.
    11. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/1seuirq4ak9b9bouu1j29ebui7 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Anna Salomons & Maarten Goos, 2014. "Measuring Teaching Quality in Higher Education: Assessing the Problem of Selection Bias in Course Evaluations," Working Papers 14-16, Utrecht School of Economics.
    13. Barbara Biasi & Song Ma, 2022. "The Education-Innovation Gap," CESifo Working Paper Series 9653, CESifo.
    14. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    15. Yu-Bong Lai, 2004. "Trade liberalization, consumption externalities and the environment," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 17(5), pages 1-9.
    16. Giancarlo Giudici & Massimiliano Guerini & Cristina Rossi-Lamastra, 2019. "The creation of cleantech startups at the local level: the role of knowledge availability and environmental awareness," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 815-830, April.
    17. Grüll, Georg & Taschini, Luca, 2011. "Cap-and-trade properties under different hybrid scheme designs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 107-118, January.
    18. Na Li Dawson & Kathleen Segerson, 2008. "Voluntary Agreements with Industries: Participation Incentives with Industry-Wide Targets," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(1), pages 97-114.
    19. Sam Fankhauser & Cameron Hepburn, 2009. "Carbon markets in space and time," GRI Working Papers 3, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    20. Ehigiamusoe, Kizito Uyi & Lean, Hooi Hooi & Smyth, Russell, 2020. "The moderating role of energy consumption in the carbon emissions-income nexus in middle-income countries," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(C).
    21. Thomas Akpan Harry & Ekemini John Peter & Nsidibe Akpan Udoduk, 2022. "Environmental Impact Assessment Of Oil Producing Communities In Part Of The Niger Delta. A Case Study Of Ibeno, Ikot Abasi, Onna And Esit-Eket Local Government Area In Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria," Environmental Contaminants Reviews (ECR), Zibeline International Publishing, vol. 5(2), pages 49-56, April.
    22. Stavins, Robert, 2001. "Lessons From the American Experiment With Market-Based Environmental Policies," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-53, Resources for the Future.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:amerec:v:57:y:2012:i:1:p:111-125. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://journals.sagepub.com/home/aex .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.