|
0 members (),
43
guests, and
131
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,145
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,145 |
OK I haven't read this article in it's entirity - let me say that upfront - but it sounds like it might be relevant to this topic. Lockhart's LamentI just read all 25 pages. Thanks for sharing that, Dazey! He makes many good points, I think, some the same as Dr. F and some that are more extreme and a wee bit scary... But the focus of the article on the art and beauty of math, the DIY nature of math that current math instruction is lacking makes some sense to me. I like the notion of using the history of math to teach math. I think that gives me a way into math that is interesting and useful. DS6 loves history, and I find it less intimidating to go at it from that direction, so that might be very helpful to me. The article also makes me think I need to go back to the geometry book and be sure I'm not making all the mistakes he named in my use of geometry with DS6! Yikes!
Kriston
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,783
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,783 |
If you don't get it, then you're forced to rely on rote memorization for the doing, and that's painful for a GT kid. It's not just painful, rote memorization takes a whole lot more effort (at least for me!) and is less "sticky" than understanding something. I think it's because when you just memorize you may learn a fact but it's just floating there in your brain, not connected to anything. It can be hard to retrieve that floating information. If I know how to reason something out it's like a trail of breadcrumbs to follow back to the memory. Each time I repeat the reasoning process it becomes easier to find and follow the breadcrumbs. If you think about something enough, the trail becomes like a superhighway leading straight to the answer.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,145
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,145 |
Oh, Cathy! <swoon> You made that whole argument against rote memorization that I was struggling to make so beautifully. the breadcrumbs analogy is ideal! Okay, now I'm not only thinking that I'm having trouble with math, I'm having trouble with language... Wanna write my book for me? 
Kriston
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 830
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 830 |
If you don't get it, then you're forced to rely on rote memorization for the doing, and that's painful for a GT kid. It's not just painful, rote memorization takes a whole lot more effort (at least for me!) and is less "sticky" than understanding something. I think it's because when you just memorize you may learn a fact but it's just floating there in your brain, not connected to anything. It can be hard to retrieve that floating information. If I know how to reason something out it's like a trail of breadcrumbs to follow back to the memory. Each time I repeat the reasoning process it becomes easier to find and follow the breadcrumbs. If you think about something enough, the trail becomes like a superhighway leading straight to the answer. Haha, this reminds me of taking beginning Accounting in college. I did very well in Accounting but memorized very little except for terms. Just before a test I would review one note which reminded me when cash was a credit or debit. As soon as I sat down I would write on the test when it was a credit. Everything else was a snap because I could relate it to cash one way or another. Other students struggled to memorize individual transactions and never could grasp the relationships easily.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,783
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,783 |
Oh, Kriston! <melting> Do you know how great it is to have people be interested in and appreciate my pet theories  ? Ok, maybe that's enough of our little lovefest 
Last edited by Cathy A; 04/23/08 04:11 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 902
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 902 |
It's about the method. Long division is one way to get the answer, but if you basically write the problem out in long division form in your head, then you're not using intuition because long division is a method taught to you, not one you would just come to on your own. Yes, pretty much everyone can figure out 100/8 in their heads, I hope! The problem itself has nothing to do with intuition; it's just a way to check how you think about math. Good, I was getting worried that he didn't expect people to calculate 100/8 in their heads Honestly it must be a really hard work to do it in your head the same way like you do it on the paper. I am not going to try to figure out how DS5 does it. I am afraid he could loose me somewhere in the middle  It's not just painful, rote memorization takes a whole lot more effort (at least for me!) and is less "sticky" than understanding something. I think it's because when you just memorize you may learn a fact but it's just floating there in your brain, not connected to anything. It can be hard to retrieve that floating information. If I know how to reason something out it's like a trail of breadcrumbs to follow back to the memory. Each time I repeat the reasoning process it becomes easier to find and follow the breadcrumbs. If you think about something enough, the trail becomes like a superhighway leading straight to the answer. I am the same way. I took heaps of math and computer classes and exams and it was such a relieve since I just had to get it so to speak. I didn't have to memorize it, as long as it made sense I was fine. I hate when I have to memorize things, I don't usually see a point in doing that and the results show it.
LMom
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,145
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,145 |
Oh, Kriston! <melting> Do you know how great it is to have people be interested in and appreciate my pet theories ? Ok, maybe that's enough of our little lovefest LOL! Well, I'm really thinking that maybe I can just get YOU to teach me how to teach math! Everything you've written could come right out of Dr. F's talk, and if I can make you melt just by telling you how brilliant you and your theories are, then maybe I can buy you off more easily than I can buy him. Yes, I think I'm saying that you might be a cheap (math) date, but I mean that in the nicest way!
Kriston
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,783
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,783 |
I'm happy to help. I've never heard of Dr. F but this thread caught my eye. I have done some thinking about math pedagogy just for my own amusement, though. Mostly, I inflict my theories on my mom, who says that she has some kind of inability to learn algebra.
My mom is a very smart lady and she was a whiz at arithmetic in school. Geometry proofs were intuitive for her and she is a logical thinker. Somehow, she says algebra just doesn't stick in her brain. She can listen to someone explain a problem and it makes perfect sense at the time but she can't reproduce it on her own. I have always wondered if it is just a matter of finding the right way to explain it to her or if she truly has some kind of math disability. I often wish I could do experiments on her <rubbing hands together>....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 516
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 516 |
LOL Cathy! Most people I know who were good at geometry weren't so good at algebra and people who were good at algebra weren't as good at geometry. I personally LOVED algebra and although I did well in geometry I hated proofs with a passion. I saw absolutely no point in them. Anyone else out here love one and disliked the other or is that just a phenomenon I've noticed in the few people I've discussed this with???
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,145
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,145 |
It's supposed to be pretty common, I think.
Doesn't one of the books about being visual-spatial mention that liking geometry is one sign of many that you're a VS learner, while liking algebra is one sign of many that you're auditory-sequential?
I don't have that backwards, do I? Proofs always seemed pretty sequential to me, but the figures are obviously VS...
Kriston
|
|
|
|
|
