Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » Education » math-teach

Topic: Saxon ad
Replies: 18   Last Post: Feb 27, 1995 8:54 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Michael Paul Goldenberg

Posts: 7,041
From: Ann Arbor, MI
Registered: 12/3/04
Re: Saxon ad
Posted: Feb 25, 1995 6:45 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Sat, 25 Feb 1995, Andrei TOOM wrote:

> On Sat, 25 Feb 1995, Michael Paul Goldenberg wrote:
>

> > ...define what YOU mean by "poorly stated." Finally, the burden is on
> > you to show examples from the Standards. Like Mr. Saxon, you seem to be
> > uncomfortable with the Standards, but you don't articulate very clearly
> > what your objections are. For me to cite examples, let's just say that I

>
> `Poorly stated' means `unclear' or `ununderstandable'.
> How can I have objections to something I don't understand ?
> You claim that you understand ? But you cannot explain.
> And don't mix me with Mr. Saxon. Andrei Toom
>
>
>
>

Well, let's not jump to any conclusions about what I "cannot explain." I
thought you might have the courtesy of citing one particular standard
that you find "unclear or ununderstandable." Since you didn't, it seems
reasonable to conclude that you feel such terms apply across the board.
Hence, you should not object to MY selecting one for discussion. I'll
choose #6 from the K-4 standards:

"6. The K-4 curriculum should make appropriate and ongoing use of
calculators and computers."

As a stand-alone statement, this doesn't seem particularly opaque. I'd
say it suggests that calculators and computers need to be employed in the
K-4 mathematics curriculum in a manner which is appropriate to the
age-level of students in those grades. By "appropriate" one might suggest
that the state of the art in cognitive research should inform how
calculators and computers are applied. Alternately, a more pragmatic
approach might be employed. The key point, to my thinking, is that
students are allowed, taught, and encouraged to use these devices in
their exploration of elementary mathematics.

There is no need for my interpretation, however. Here is what follows
immediately on p. 19 of the Curriculum and Evaluation Standards:

"Calculators must be accepted at the K-4 level as valuable tools for
learning mathematics. Calculators enable children to explore number ideas
and patterns, to have valuable concept-development experiences, to focus
on problem-solving processes, and to investigate realistic applications.
The thoughtful use of calculators can increase the quality of the
curriculum as well as the quality of children's learning.

"Calculators do not replace the need to lean basic facts, to compute
mentally, or to do reasonable paper-and-pencil computation. Classroom
experience indicates that young children take a commonsense view about
calculators and recognize the importance of not relying on them when it
is more appropriate to compute in other ways. The availability of
calculators means, however, that educators must develop a broader view of
the various ways computation can be carried out and must place less
emphasis on complex paper-and-pencil computation. Calculators also
highlight the importance of teaching children to recognize whether
computed results are reasonable.

"The power of computers also needs to be used in contemporary mathematics
programs. Computer languages that are geometric in nature help young
children become familiar with important geometric ideas. Computer
simulations of mathematical ideas, such as modeling the renaming of
numbers, are an important aid in helping children identify the key
features of the mathematics. Many software programs provide interesting
problem-solving situations and applications.

"The thoughtful and creative use of technology can greatly improve both
the quality of the curriculum and the quality of children's learning.
Integrating calculators and computers into school mathematics programs is
critical in meeting the goals of a redefined curriculum"

Okay. Now what SPECIFICALLY is unclear here, Andrei? What is
ununderstandable?

-michael paul goldenberg/University of Michigan

"Flaubert's vision of stupidity is this: Stupidity does not give way to
science, technology, modernity, progress; on the contrary, it progresses
right along with progress!" MILAN KUNDERA: 'Art of the Novel'





Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.