NEWS CENTER

新聞中心

Respecting Classics, Acknowledging Limitations: Reflecting on the Current State of Bioelectricity Classroom Teaching

發布時間：

2026-04-24

Respecting Classics, Acknowledging Limitations: Reflecting on the Current State of Bioelectricity Classroom Teaching

Sun Zuodong

As a researcher long engaged in basic scientific research, I have always held scientific classics in awe and stayed true to the educational principle of seeking truth and being pragmatic.

The 1952 research by Hodgkin and Huxley laid the core foundation for the study of cellular excitability. For more than seventy years, the Hodgkin-Huxley (HH) model, the Goldman-Hodgkin-Katz (GHK) constant-field equation, and the Nernst equation have underpinned the development of physiology, clinical drug development, and life science classroom teaching. Their historical contribution and status as academic milestones are beyond doubt, and they deserve respect and objective evaluation from the academic community.

All scientific models inherently have limitations of their era. Constrained by the experimental techniques and observational conditions of their time, many early theoretical settings were reasonable idealized assumptions and functional mathematical fits. They focused on describing the macroscopic laws of bioelectric phenomena and are not entirely equivalent to the microscopic physical entities of cell membranes—a point clearly stated in the two scholars’ original 1952 paper.

To this day, physiology classes at major universities worldwide still use this framework as the standard teaching model. The gating variables m, h, n, complex partial differential equation systems, and various nonlinear fitting parameters have become compulsory examination points and fixed answers.

Yet there is a gentle, objective, and unavoidable practical question that deserves careful reflection from all instructors and learners.

We fully recognize the practical value of classical models and acknowledge the evidence and supplements to the gating functions of ion channels provided by subsequent structural biology research.

But in actual classroom teaching: Can instructors fully derive the core equations of the HH and GHK models? Can they clearly and accessibly explain the origin and meaning of each parameter, underlying assumption, and power-law logic? Can they clearly define the essential boundary between mathematical fitting models and the real physical structure of cell membranes?

The reality is often unsatisfactory. Most classrooms focus excessively on conclusions over mechanisms, and on exam points over critical thinking. Layered with obscure concepts and piled with abstract jargon, the content is hard to understand. Teachers and students mostly rely on rote memorization to complete teaching and exams, and rarely proactively explain the applicable conditions, inherent flaws, and limitations of the theories.

I frankly share my reading experience: After repeatedly comparing textbooks, supplementary materials, and original literature, I still struggle to fully understand and integrate many rigid gating definitions and complicated formula-derivation logics.

This naturally raises a question: If instructors themselves cannot thoroughly interpret and coherently explain these theories, how can they convey complete, rigorous, and defensible scientific knowledge to students?

Generations of students passively accept standardized conclusions. While they appear to finish their coursework, they fail to grasp the underlying logic behind bioelectric phenomena.

The progress of science always relies on rational examination, diverse perspectives, and constructive reflection.

Here, I sincerely suggest that all teachers and students engage in two fundamental rational studies:First, consult and study the core original 1952 paper by Hodgkin and Huxley: A quantitative description of membrane current and its application to conduction and excitation in nerve. Return to the origin of the research to objectively understand the background, premises, and initial boundaries of the theory.Second, actively refer to diverse academic viewpoints, break free from the fixed cognition of single textbooks, and dialectically view the strengths, limitations, and subsequent improvements of classical theories.

Inheriting classics does not mean rigid dogma. The HH model is a landmark scientific achievement, but it should not become an academic barrier that prohibits discussion or avoids questioning.

The fundamental purpose of education is never to instill standard answers, but to cultivate scientific literacy—seeking truth, being pragmatic, thinking independently, and daring to question.

This article is not intended to challenge academic authority, nor to advocate negating or overthrowing classical theories. It only calls for bioelectricity teaching to return to pragmatism and honesty: objectively explain model assumptions, clearly mark applicable boundaries, rationally acknowledge theoretical shortcomings, and reject vague explanations and mechanical indoctrination.

Setting aside fixed textbook phrases, can instructors clearly and logically explain the origin and development of the entire equation system and gating mechanism with solid evidence?

Moving beyond scores and exam-oriented thinking, do young students truly understand the inherent principles and scientific logic of bioelectric operation?

Rational inquiry aims to clarify the source; gentle reflection serves to improve teaching.

Let classics return to their objective position, let classrooms return to the true nature of science, and let every class in basic disciplines stand up to scrutiny and questioning.

Copyright © 2023 哈爾濱奧博醫療器械有限公司   中企動力 | SEO標簽   營業執照   醫療器械生產許可證  互聯網藥品信息服務資格證書   (黑)-非經營性-2016-0017