Christopher Green wrote:
(On top of the fact that I think it is plain silly to expect each
student to effectively recapitulate the entire history of mathematics by
themselves in the course of a basic public education.)
This is what I find to be the weird Haeckelian notion that a student
c
Rick Froman wrote:
Christopher also wrote:
"The constructivist method seems to be failing badly in the school district featured
in the article, even with students whose parrents are mathematically sophisticated.
That's got to be a bad sign for virtually everywhere else."
Where was the eviden
Title: Re: "constructivist"
math
At 9:25 AM -0500 11/10/05, Christopher Green wrote:
Bob Grossman wrote:
Allen Esterson wrote:
This "traditional" approach to
the teaching of mathematics in schools is
not only, I believe, more effective than the constructivist approach,
it
i
cribed curricula, federal mandates, state
benchmark testing, etc. I'm not sure yet, based on the Intelligent
Design metaphor invoked in the original post on this thread, who are the
fundamentalists and who are the progressives on the issue of
constructivist math.
Christopher also wrote:
"
Bob Grossman wrote:
Allen Esterson wrote:
This "traditional" approach to the teaching of mathematics in schools is
not only, I believe, more effective than the constructivist approach, it
is also far less time-consuming, enabling considerably more material
to be
covered.
I had similar opini
Allen Esterson wrote:
This "traditional" approach to the teaching of mathematics in schools is
not only, I believe, more effective than the constructivist approach, it
is also far less time-consuming, enabling considerably more material to be
covered.
I had similar opinions until this summer wh
Another point in the NYT article discusses the use of calculators beginning
in the early grades. I have seen its use taught as early as 2nd
grade. These students never learn how to do the basic arithmetic
operations independently. The rationale for doing this is that
they can learn to do
hematics were derived and developed originally by people of
outstanding intellectual abilities. To expect more than a small minority
of children to arrive at the concepts themselves, even with the guidance I
presume they must get in "constructivist math", is absurd -- and becomes
more so with ev
On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 17:34:07 -0800, Christopher D. Green:
>
>Here's a NYT article about a basic educational dispute that may
>well outstrip the evolution "debate" in terms of its long-term
>implications. I notice that most of my stats students know next
>to nothing about trigonometry or probabil
ath. Several
teachers, in the privacy of their own classrooms, contravened the
official curriculum to teach the problem-solving formulas that
constructivist math denigrates as mindless memorization.
"My whole experience in math the last few years has been a struggle
against the program," Jim said
10 matches
Mail list logo
