• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

reforming math education

Gabe

New member
Joined
Nov 17, 2007
Messages
590
MBTI Type
ENTP
any level of math education, from grade school through college. At each one of these levels I have noticed what seem to me to be pretty obvious ways that math is badly/inneffectively/un-applicably (wait, math is supposed to be usefull?) taught.

I'd like to hear what other people think about this.
 

Eileen

New member
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
2,179
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6?
What are your ideas?

I've actually read some stuff lately that claimed that the efforts to make math "practical" have really kind of failed in a massive way. A better way to teach math, claimed this article that I'll have to go looking for now, is to teach it as a kind of game with rules.. ie, basically theoretically.
 

Ivy

Strongly Ambivalent
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
23,989
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6
This is the math program they use at my daughter's school:

Welcome to Investigations | Home | Investigations in Number, Data, and Space

It's supposed to be more conceptual, less memorization. It's fairly controversial, I understand, because it basically ignores things like times-tables (although my daughter's 3rd grade teacher had them do times-tables this year anyway). IMO, my daughter understands math much better than I did at her age, though. I'm not too concerned about the criticisms. But I'd be curious to see what other folks think about it.
 

Lateralus

New member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
6,262
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
3w4
Moved post

This sounds like a shift from the SJ approach to an intuitive approach.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

alicia91

New member
Joined
Nov 20, 2007
Messages
671
Our school district has also switched to a more Intuitive approach - University of Chicago School Mathematics Project - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. My kids have a much better grasp on math than I had growing up and they all have thrived. Two of my three are Ns and one S - but he's doing equally well so I'm pleased.

But it's controversial with parents, and for some kids the spiral nature of the curriculumn doens't seem effective so they supplement with drill and kill work.
 

Eileen

New member
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
2,179
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6?
I moved this to Academics and Careers because it seems to fit better.
 

Aerithria

Senior Thread Terminator
Joined
May 18, 2008
Messages
568
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w4
I learned it fine the normal way, but I'm about the biggest math nerd in my province, so who can say. In my opinion, any way that lets kids learn it easier should be used, perhaps not universally so the people who can't learn it that way can attempt to be taught it in the regular way. I don't get the controversy: if it works, why is it questionable?
 

millerm277

New member
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
978
MBTI Type
ISTP
I have no idea here...except that I have extreme difficulty with doing "higher math" as it is currently taught. When I was younger, I was advanced the equivilant of 2 years for math, because I was so good at it. Around the end of Algebra 1, that went out the window. Don't know why either. Since then, I've gotten a low C and a high D in Algebra 2 and Geometry. (In the class that is one level below Honors/AP).
 

The_Liquid_Laser

Glowy Goopy Goodness
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
3,376
MBTI Type
ENTP
My biggest problem with Math Education today is that a lot of kids are not learning their multiplication tables. I used to teach "developmental" (i.e. remedial) mathematics to college students, and the worst problems I would see would be from kids who never learned their multiplication tables. They had to use their calculator for the simplest calculation, and they had no idea if the answer that came out was reasonable.

Now a lot of kids had a variety of other problems, but those could be cleared up just covering the algebra in the class that I was teaching. But in regards to the kids who could not multiply, they had such a hard time learning anything, because they had absolutely no type of "math literacy". They had no intuition of what a correct or incorrect answer would look like. This is like trying to teach literature to kids who can't read most three letter words. There is a basic level of knowledge that needs to be memorized and multiplications tables fit into that category.
 

Eileen

New member
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
2,179
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6?
Yeah, I'm not sure about this business with not memorizing multiplication tables. It seems like a relatively small investment of time for something that will be really helpful later on.
 

nozflubber

DoubleplusUngoodNonperson
Joined
Mar 30, 2008
Messages
2,078
MBTI Type
Hype
any level of math education, from grade school through college. At each one of these levels I have noticed what seem to me to be pretty obvious ways that math is badly/inneffectively/un-applicably (wait, math is supposed to be usefull?) taught.

I'd like to hear what other people think about this.

actually the most important part about mathematics can't be taught in a school or any classrom. The history of Scientific and Mathematical advancement is a history of human temperament.
 

The_Liquid_Laser

Glowy Goopy Goodness
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
3,376
MBTI Type
ENTP
actually the most important part about mathematics can't be taught in a school or any classrom. The history of Scientific and Mathematical advancement is a history of human temperament.

There's a big difference between learning a subject and advancing a field. People of every type can learn any subject, while very few individuals will ever significantly advance a field regardless of type.
 

Colors

The Destroyer
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
1,276
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
I found that most math classes involve are the first third review, the second third review of old concepts but with the addition of new applications, and the last third new concepts altogether. This curriculum style is really hectically paced for me and confusing to boot. If they'd just explain stuff once clearly instead of twice quickly I think more people might get it.

I do okay in math. I like its nonsubjectiveness and its problem solving aspects, but a lot of times, it's like who cares? Nonsensical/illogical word problems do NOT make math seem more practical.

Also I think a lot of the practice makes perfect aspect of math makes it a sort of thing that really benefits from group work. I'd never understand any math if I couldn't interact with classmates/ other people in figuring out the sequencing of steps and such. It's not a lecture class!

My worst math class was with an instructor who never wrote anything down essentially. And used rulers and other props held up in the air and pointed with his fingers at said rulers in order to illustrate the graphs. (And this was class was Pre-Calc... which as its name indicates is the class before begining calculus.) And verbally discussed people's questions about problems. And used PowerPoint for the lectures. It confused the hell out of me because I need the interaction of seeing how the problem is approached and the method and the sequence. And I didn't seem to have enough simulataneous processing power to construct the mental image of the graph at the same time as seeing how it related to the equations. (For this "lack of process" reason, math textbooks are really gibberish to me.)

Another bad teacher was all about the homework and the procedure and organization (and all that other SJ stuff) and memorization of the names of the corollaries needed for geometry proofs. Boo geometry proofs.

My best math teacher (I'm excluding elementary school teachers here because I can barely remember anything about that) was my Calc 1B teacher. He hated graphing calculators (yah!) and taught the whole class by the overhead projector. Explaining the concepts and lots and lots and lots of doing problems! It wasn't rehearsed. If he had the wrong approach the first time around, he'd adjust it later. The bad thing about this was that if you were lost it was really hard to "latch" back on (not really any texts, etc) (and a LOT of people dropped the class). I hate graphing calculators because complex programming (I can never remember how to summon a certain type of graph, etc, etc). And graphing things I wouldn't even dream of being able to graph on my own (with a paper and pencil).

I think the worst thing about math is that I'm never sure if I "get" the concepts. If I'm lucky and work hard at it, I can use them, but how do you know the philosophy of math? I mean, obviously it would be quite impossible for me to be led by the hand to rediscover how people arrived at all the math milestones one by one, but I do want a little more of this bottom-up approach! (Like in Chemistry, for example: "X-person saw that certain elements had similar qualities and started organizing them.... Leading to the creation of the periodic table... and the similar qualities can be linked to their outer shell electron #.... reactivity, nonreactivity of noble gases... pi bonding, sigma bonding.)
 

FDG

pathwise dependent
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
5,903
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
7w8
It depends a lot from the teacher, really. My results have ranged from exceptional to rather bad depending on the teacher. I had great results with ENTJ, ISTP, ISFJ, ENTP teachers. Bad results especially with INTPs and ISTJs, these two types always focus on minutia that I am unable to pay attention to. Obviously this is my own subjective opinion - they may say that what I call minutia is essential for learning.
However, fortunately math is a subject that can be sufficiently easily learnt from textbooks.
 

nozflubber

DoubleplusUngoodNonperson
Joined
Mar 30, 2008
Messages
2,078
MBTI Type
Hype
There's a big difference between learning a subject and advancing a field.

That was my entire point: advancing the field is more important than being a human calculator. As for your last point, I don't think you could be more wrong - it's very type related in that the likeliehoods are different
 

nemo

Active member
Joined
Jan 21, 2008
Messages
445
Enneagram
<3
I tend to be suspicious of voodoo math reform, to be honest. I think most of the problems are in education in general and aren't specific to mathematical pedagogy, although perhaps the rigor of the subject exaggerates some of those problems.
 

The_Liquid_Laser

Glowy Goopy Goodness
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
3,376
MBTI Type
ENTP
That was my entire point: advancing the field is more important than being a human calculator. As for your last point, I don't think you could be more wrong - it's very type related in that the likeliehoods are different

As far as the ability to learn math goes the only type(s) that really seem predisposed toward it are thinkers. Furthermore I think this has more to do with interest than ability. The jobs that require a lot of math are generally not jobs that would attract feelers (engineer, physicist, etc...). On the other hand among doctors there are probably more feelers than thinkers in the field, and pre-med students have to do very well in math and science to be accepted to med school. Feelers can learn math just as well as thinkers if they have the motivation. Overall I think type affects interest more than ability.
 

ygolo

My termites win
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
5,988
Generally, pay teachers a better salary, and you will get more people wanting to be teachers.

Give them more respect, and again, we will attract more people wanting to be teachers. Abolish the "those who can't do, teach" mentality.

Specifically for Math, I like the "magic trick" approach:

1) Give students a fairly involved problem that they will struggle to solve without knowledge of a particular concept (like integration, for instance), and have them attempt to solve it. Some may even succeed, but either way they will have a deep insight into the concept about to be presented.

2) Then place them in groups, and have them try to solve the problem as groups. Encourage them to be creative and to transform the problem in to equivelent ones, or approximate ones, or smaller ones, etc. Have them go at it as if they were trying to solve a puzzle. Many more will likely solve the problem, without the aid of the concept being taught. Keep track of the approaches the students take that are most promosing, or interesting. Have them discuss/present the most interesting approaches.

3) Develop the concept from its founding principles. This is the usual exposition. Then try and relate the theoretical foundation to the approches students took on the problem. The teacher will likely trip up in several spots trying to do this. That's OK, and actually prefered; it shows that even proffesionals have to struggle with math sometimes, and shows how they struggle with it. Point out that there "maybe some connection here or there." But then go back and summarize the core theoretical concept concisely. Don't show them the solution to the orignal problem, yet.

4) Place them back into groups, and have them have one last go at the orignal problem, now armed with the concept just presented. For those who did just understand the concept may marvel at the "magic" of using the new concept in making the problem easier.

5) Present theoretical solution to the problem. Take questions for clarification, etc.

6) Quiz/Test the individuals on many similar problems in different contexts to the one solved. If a review of the concept is needed, then repeat steps 1-6 and a different appropriately chosen problem.

7) Quiz/Test individual on extremely diverse sets of problems requiring the same concept. If a review of the concept is needed, then repeat steps 1-7 and a different appropriately chosen problem.

To have time for this approach (which I estimate to be 3x-4x normal exposition), give students a short time to prepare for a pretest of review information, and only allow those who "pass" to take the class.

Sorry, but without the foundations, going further is often futile.
 

Gabe

New member
Joined
Nov 17, 2007
Messages
590
MBTI Type
ENTP
Generally, pay teachers a better salary, and you will get more people wanting to be teachers.

Give them more respect, and again, we will attract more people wanting to be teachers. Abolish the "those who can't do, teach" mentality.

Specifically for Math, I like the "magic trick" approach:

1) Give students a fairly involved problem that they will struggle to solve without knowledge of a particular concept (like integration, for instance), and have them attempt to solve it. Some may even succeed, but either way they will have a deep insight into the concept about to be presented.

2) Then place them in groups, and have them try to solve the problem as groups. Encourage them to be creative and to transform the problem in to equivelent ones, or approximate ones, or smaller ones, etc. Have them go at it as if they were trying to solve a puzzle. Many more will likely solve the problem, without the aid of the concept being taught. Keep track of the approaches the students take that are most promosing, or interesting. Have them discuss/present the most interesting approaches.

3) Develop the concept from its founding principles. This is the usual exposition. Then try and relate the theoretical foundation to the approches students took on the problem. The teacher will likely trip up in several spots trying to do this. That's OK, and actually prefered; it shows that even proffesionals have to struggle with math sometimes, and shows how they struggle with it. Point out that there "maybe some connection here or there." But then go back and summarize the core theoretical concept concisely. Don't show them the solution to the orignal problem, yet.

4) Place them back into groups, and have them have one last go at the orignal problem, now armed with the concept just presented. For those who did just understand the concept may marvel at the "magic" of using the new concept in making the problem easier.

5) Present theoretical solution to the problem. Take questions for clarification, etc.

6) Quiz/Test the individuals on many similar problems in different contexts to the one solved. If a review of the concept is needed, then repeat steps 1-6 and a different appropriately chosen problem.

7) Quiz/Test individual on extremely diverse sets of problems requiring the same concept. If a review of the concept is needed, then repeat steps 1-7 and a different appropriately chosen problem.

To have time for this approach (which I estimate to be 3x-4x normal exposition), give students a short time to prepare for a pretest of review information, and only allow those who "pass" to take the class.

Sorry, but without the foundations, going further is often futile.

Good stuff. Especially the trying to solve a problem before learning the concept. They just need to remember to give lots of time for that, or else the excercise is perfunctory and frustrating.

You might of mentioned it, but in calculus they should stop designing tests that tell you exactly what you'll have to do. What I think is great about the AP calculus exam is it didn't tell you what kind of problem you were looking at, so you had to use what you knew (and you needed conceptual knowledge to know how to solve the problem). Which actually matches real life, and science, where you will never be told beforehand what kind of math you will need to model something and solve a problem.
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
I think the worst thing about math is that I'm never sure if I "get" the concepts. If I'm lucky and work hard at it, I can use them, but how do you know the philosophy of math? I mean, obviously it would be quite impossible for me to be led by the hand to rediscover how people arrived at all the math milestones one by one, but I do want a little more of this bottom-up approach! (Like in Chemistry, for example: "X-person saw that certain elements had similar qualities and started organizing them.... Leading to the creation of the periodic table... and the similar qualities can be linked to their outer shell electron #.... reactivity, nonreactivity of noble gases... pi bonding, sigma bonding.)

I agree with this. Perhaps there should be a supplementary history of math (or math principles, whatever you want to call it) to go along with regular math. This way you could understand exactly why and how the concepts that are so familiar were thought up and proven.

At my university they had a special set of math classes for elementary education majors where the instructor would make them go back through the principles of the basic elements of math (+,-,x, etc...) so that they could understand them thoroughly. It was amazing to see people who had taken advanced calculus courses struggle to understand why the basic division algorithm works (not the procedure, but the concept). Of course, they may have just been a dumb class.
 
Top