|
|
Re: [MATHEDU] Writing Requirement
Posted:
Nov 23, 1999 10:26 AM
|
|
>At Mon, 22 Nov 1999 13:26:33 -0600, Judy Roitman wrote:
>>>The secret is to pick relatively low level material. Some sources:
>>>Mathematics Intelligencer; College Math Journal; other texts, or even your
>>>own text with optional material.
>
>I would not consider the "Mathematical Intelligencer" or the "College Math
>Journal" to be "relatively low level material". In a sense they are harder
>to read than a normal technical textbook because you have to understand
>the mathematics *and* the writing.
>I would say that reading texts from these journals
>and others like "Quantum" or "The American Mathematical Monthly"
>would be highly beneficial to students.
>If, in each course, students would be required to read one two articles
>maybe students would not have so many problems with writing later on.
>I wonder why there are not substantial reading requirements
>in mathematics courses. I think there are quite a few fine journals;
>and probably there would be more if more students would
>read (and buy) them.
>
>
>
>
Let me thank Jaime Carvalho e Silva on giving me a chance to correct a
misinterpretation of what I wrote. Of course Quantum, MI, CMJ, the
Monthly, etc. publish, in the sense of exposition, high level articles. In
part this is because their articles are about material which has had a
chance to be well digested to the mathematical community. Because the
material has been digested it becomes, in the sense of levels at which one
learns things, low level, i.e., people who know less can understand more of
it. This is, of course, a mark of excellence.
My implicit contrast was to research papers, which are generally tersely
written, understandable only to people in a very narrow band-width, and
also relatively undigested, i.e., better ways of organizing the material
are generally not yet known. Even expository papers which are considered
excellent within a narrow research community tend to be opaque to
outsiders.
By the way, the high school text I mentioned, Connected Geometry, is
absolutely gorgeously written, extremely high level exposition of beautiful
mathematics (they even get the isoperimetric theorem in there, in a serious
way). But, in the sense that people who know very little mathematics can
understand it, it is low level. This is a great compliment.
So "low level" was not meant to be pejorative, and I apologize if it seemed so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judy Roitman | "Whoppers Whoppers Whoppers!
Math, University of Kansas | memory fails
Lawrence, KS 66045 | these are the days."
785-864-4630 |
fax: 785-864-5255 | Larry Eigner, 1927-1996
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note new area code
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.math.ukans.edu/~roitman/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is an unmoderated distribution list discussing teaching and learning
of post-calculus mathematics.---David.Epstein@warwick.ac.uk
Get guidelines before posting: email majordomo@warwick.ac.uk saying
get mathedu guidelines
(Un)subscribe to mathedu(-digest)by email to majordomo@warwick.ac.uk saying:
(un)subscribe mathedu(-digest)
|
|
