Search All of the Math Forum:

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

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Failing Linear Algebra:
Replies: 91   Last Post: Jan 10, 2007 12:56 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 David C. Ullrich Posts: 21,553 Registered: 12/6/04
Re: Failing Linear Algebra:
Posted: Apr 28, 2004 8:33 AM

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 22:41:50 +0000 (UTC), magidin@math.berkeley.edu
(Arturo Magidin) wrote:

>In article <20040427182710.15274.00000430@mb-m18.aol.com>,
>Anonymous wrote:

>>David:
>>

>>>Actually from what you say here it seems pretty likely that
>>>you do know what linear independence _is_, but the
>>>way you're stating the definition is totally wrong.

>>
>>Right. That's my point. I *do* know the definition, but the phrasing always
>>gets me.

>
>That tells me that you do not really "know" the definition. You
>->think<- you know it, you ->think<- you understand it, but you
>actually do not. If you did, the phrasing would not be a problem.

Or, as seems quite possible from the definition he gave, he
does understand what independence means, but he doesn't
understand how to state things coherently. (Which of course
is equally fatal - one of many reasons for memorizing these
definitions vergatim is to give us a stock of examples to
use in learning _how_ to say _exactly_ what we mean.)

>> It's like this, probably, for a bunch of the main terms. Still, you
>>say the number one problem is that students don't understand all the
>>definitions. Is my understanding of "independence" then not good enough? Or
>>is it?

>
>If your understanding is not sufficient to lead you to a coherent and
>correct statement of the term, then it is not good enough. Unless you
>can state coherently and correctly what the definition is, then it
>will cause you problems when you try to use it.

************************

David C. Ullrich

Date Subject Author
4/24/04 Daniel Grubb
4/24/04 Marc Olschok
4/24/04 Daniel Grubb
4/24/04 Marc Olschok
4/24/04 Daniel Grubb
4/24/04 Thomas Nordhaus
4/24/04 Dave Rusin
4/25/04 Jonathan Miller
4/25/04 Felix Goldberg
4/24/04 Daniel Grubb
4/28/04 Tim Mellor
4/28/04 James Dolan
4/28/04 Daniel Grubb
4/28/04 James Dolan
4/28/04 Daniel Grubb
4/28/04 gersh@bialer.com
4/29/04 Daniel Grubb
4/29/04 Dave Rusin
4/28/04 Guest
4/29/04 Guest
4/28/04 Guest
1/10/07 David C. Ullrich
4/29/04 Dave Rusin
4/28/04 Guest
1/10/07 Law Hiu Chung
1/10/07 Dave Seaman
1/10/07 Marc Olschok
1/10/07 George Cox
4/28/04 Guest
1/10/07 Dave Rusin
4/28/04 Lee Rudolph
4/28/04 Guest
4/28/04 Guest
1/10/07 Marc Olschok
1/10/07 Toni Lassila
4/29/04 Guest
1/10/07 M L
1/10/07 Thomas Nordhaus
4/30/04 Guest
1/10/07 David C. Ullrich
1/10/07 Toni Lassila
4/30/04 Guest
1/10/07 George Cox
1/10/07 Marc Olschok
4/30/04 Guest
4/30/04 Guest
4/27/04 Guest
1/10/07 Thomas Nordhaus
1/10/07 David C. Ullrich
1/10/07 Dave Rusin
1/10/07 David C. Ullrich
5/9/04 James Dolan
5/10/04 David C. Ullrich
5/10/04 James Dolan
5/10/04 David C. Ullrich
5/10/04 Marc Olschok
5/10/04 David C. Ullrich
4/27/04 Guest
1/10/07 Thomas Nordhaus
4/27/04 Guest
1/10/07 magidin@math.berkeley.edu
1/10/07 David C. Ullrich
1/10/07 Marc Olschok
1/10/07 David C. Ullrich
1/10/07 Tim Mellor
4/28/04 Daniel Grubb
4/28/04 Daniel Grubb
4/27/04 Guest
1/10/07 David C. Ullrich
4/28/04 Dave Rusin
4/28/04 Daniel Grubb
4/27/04 Guest
1/10/07 Marc Olschok
4/24/04 Wayne Brown
4/24/04 Thomas Nordhaus
4/24/04 David Ames