Hey Science Teachers Make It Fun By Tyler Dewit Analysis

Tyler DeWitt’s “Hey Science Teachers- Make it Fun”: An Evaluation Science being a complex and intricate topic can be sometimes hard to understand, Tyler DeWitt sees this trouble when he is teaching his middle school class in his first year of being an educator. DeWitt notices his students are not learning the course material and he proposes that the issue his students are facing is directly attributed to the dense nature of the course material, with long and hard to understand words. Dewitt proposes a new method of teaching dense course material by changing the way that it is presented to youth. Dewitt argues that science should be taught in a manner that is fun and easy to understand by using visual aids such as drawings and telling stories

One may feel as though the story he proposes and his experience, not being a documented study on education or anything of the sort, may be hard to view as credible. However Dewitt’s Stage presence being charismatic and involved, shows a true care about the topic he is discussing and adds to the believability of his claims that science teachers should make science a fun subject. His support may not be appropriate or credible, but it is believable. Science teachers may appeal to the nature of Dewitt’s argument having possibly had the same experience in teaching this subject. Secondly DeWitt helps make his argument believable by addressing the audience after telling his story by asking “So this stuff is not that hard right? And now all of you understand it.” He does this to show that the way he told the story about the subject rather than quoting science terms from a book, helps to make science more understandable. Dewitt attempts to support his argument one last time by saying “Good story telling is about emotional connection. We have to convince our audience that what we’re talking about matters. But just as important is knowing what details we should leave out so the main point still comes across.” Once again, this support is believable in its nature, however overall it is not appropriate and is not based in

His argument is not complete however, and neglect to show any support for his claims that teaching science needs to change. Dewitt provides only one example being the story he tells, he does not include important factors to help support his claims such as expert testimony, statistics, supporting evidence or comparisons. Because of this incomplete nature his argument could be seen as nothing more than a casual story telling. Which in many ways that is exactly what Dewitt’s argument is. DeWitt fails to look at examples of students that do not have an issue with course material. In other words he fails to talk about the students that don’t need a different teaching method in order to succeed at science, and the whole slew of problems that could arise from slowing the pace of a class down. A listener of his argument could very well refute his him by saying that his teaching method could be just as detrimental to learning as a fast paced intelligent and precise pace in the class room. Dewitt would have done well to address this potential