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: A question about straight lines
Replies: 103   Last Post: Feb 8, 2014 8:28 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
GS Chandy

Posts: 7,218
From: Hyderabad, Mumbai/Bangalore, India
Registered: 9/29/05
Re: A question about straight lines
Posted: Feb 8, 2014 8:28 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Further my post dt. Feb 2, 2014 5:27 PM (http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=9377902), pasted below my signature for ready reference:

A correction is needed - I had written:
>
> There are several good and very profound
> investigations of WHY your nation and the world
> around are in the manifold message they are in now.
>

The phrase "manifold message" should of course be "manifold messes".

GSC
> Robert Hansen (RH) posted Feb 1, 2014 10:52 PM
> (http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=937741
> 6) - GSC's remarks interspersed:

> > On Feb 1, 2014, at 12:03 AM, GS Chandy
> > <gs_chandy@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >

> > > "Children must be PUSHED (or GOADED) to learn
> > math!" (and presumably everything else).
> >
> > Because most children would rather play with their
> > friends than do times tables, solve problems or
> > practice the piano.
> >

> Not necessarily true. It really depends, I'm fairly
> certain, on just *how* and *why* whatever activity is
> presented to those children. This is true for ALL
> 'learning' not just the 'learning of math'.

> >
> > As parents we have the valuable
> > ability to make them to do these things, while they
> > are young, before they become adults.
> >

> As parents, we also have the greater experience and
> physical strength to FORCE them to do a great many
> things that may not be the best or the right things
> to do: this was the 'Victorian approach', one might
> say, to teaching.
>
> And a great many parents DO indeed use their greater
> strength and experience as adults in exactly such
> invidious ways.
>
> (However, 'child rearing' has since developed and
> progressed a fair bit beyond such antediluvian
> attitudes - though obviously such development is not
> universal. You might have heard of one Dr Benjamin
> Spock, who helped to educate many parents in the US
> of A and elsewhere out of those antediluvian
> attitudes - obviously he did not succeed with all
> parents. In case you are interested, there is a fair
> bit of quite useful information about Spock here -
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Spock.
> However, as you have I believe suggested elsewhere
> e in regard to the 'learning of math', one has
> actually to *feel it and experience it* in order to
> grow out of those antediluvian attitudes to child
> rearing. I observe that the worthy lessons that Dr
> Spock taught about child rearing have enjoyed a fair
> success in the US of A and elsewhere around the world
> - though his wisdom has obviously not been
> universally accepted. Some US parents still seem to
> feel PUSHING and GOADING are the p!
> rimary means available to them to teach children).
>
> As an analogy (metaphor?) of sorts, I note that
> precisely such antediluvian ideas also used to
> translate to whole nations and societies as well.
>
> For example, look at the British Empire at the height
> of its colonial hubris. The "colonies" were believed
> to be incapable of ruling themselves, they were
> 'children' that had to be 'looked after' by the great
> and wise British Empire, the 'father' and 'mother' of
> all those colonies.
>
> As I understand, people in the colonies of what later
> became the "US of A" (not "America"!) believed these
> fairy stories to be false and threw the great and
> wise 'father-mother Gt. Britain' out on their, pardon
> my French, royal 'arses' ('asses', in 'US speak').
>
> Much later, the Indian colony (in those days
> described as the 'Jewel of the British Empire') did
> just that - and many other colonies also followed
> suit. The erstwhile colony that later became the US
> of A developed, as you may be aware, to become the
> most powerful 'nominally democratic' nation in the
> world. (Note: It's only 'nominal' democracy; not
> true democracy).
>
> These 'children of Gt. Britain' - US of A; India;
> others - are still 'learning' (sometimes not very
> well; in fact, successful 'societal learning' has
> been rather rare - most such learning has been just
> fortuitous and happenstance).
>
> Anyway, these erstwhile colonies have grown a fair
> bit in the world - without a great deal of 'parental
> assistance' from 'father-mother Great Britain' (whose
> motives were never quite as pure as claimed by
> 'imperialist' supporters).
>
> But why has 'societal learning' been so rare? I
> claim that it is because of a lack of widespread
> understanding of 'systems' and how we may cope with
> them.

> >
> > And that
> > discipline usually wears off on them. Making them
> > more productive and accomplished adults.
> >
> > It?s parenting 101.
> >

> Ah, so THAT's where you got yourself stuck!
>
> Check out 'parenting 401', which goes approximately
> as tollows:
>
> "Children should be ENCOURAGED to learn. Should such
> ENCOURAGEMENT be done *effectively*, those children
> will also learn (teach themselves) how to PUSH
> themselves (and even to GOAD themselves when needed)
> to overcome the great many difficulties and barriers
> that they will encounter while learning".
>
> I observe that:
>
> PUSHING is done mainly 'from the rear', so to speak.
> (It may turn out to be a bit smelly for the PUSHER,
> , if the PUSHEE is afflicted by borborygmy and
> flatulence).
>
> ENCOURAGEMENT is done mainly 'from the front', so to
> speak. (To me, it appears to be entirely
> 'commonsensical' that parents should use their
> greater strength and experience to 'lead from the
> front' rather than to PUSH from the rear).
>
> I am fairly sure that ENCOURAGEMENT is better [in
> practically all 'favorable' circumstances] for
> practically all human beings than PUSHING or GOADING.
> It would take us too far afield at this thread to go
> o into the reasoning behind this contention of mine.
> Check out my OPMS website, which I hope will be up
> p and running during 2014. OPMS is based, one might
> say, on 'Parenting 401' - see below, for more
> information about OPMS. (It is possible that people
> who have grown up in a PUSHING and GOADING regime may
> never be able to adjust to a regime where
> 'ENCOURAGEMENT' is the norm [without PUSHING and
> GOADING]).

> >
> > I am not sure if you are having a problem grasping
> > what parenting is like, or if you just wish there

> was
> > an easier way. I asked you before what your
> > experience was raising children and you basically
> > responded that it was none of my business.
> >

> I do recall something of the sort (though I will not
> now be able to access the specific mail where you
> asked this or my response to you). As I recall, it
> was the 'superior - in fact, objectionable and indeed
> highly offensive - attitude and manner' of your
> asking that led me to inform you that it was none of
> your business. I observe that there is a fair bit of
> such attitude and manner in this post of yours as
> well. However, be that as it may:
>
> My 'experience' is not large by any means: two
> children of my own, and my elder son's three adopted
> grandchildren (the eldest is now around 18 years of
> age) - all of whom are doing pretty well with their
> respective lives. In fact, after I fell ill a few
> years ago, I have been living with my elder son at
> his organic farm near Bangalore, and he and his wife
> have been taking very good care of me.

> >
> > Did you
> > have to make your kids study and do their homework

> or
> > not?
> >

> I certainly ENCOURAGED them to study, and I tried to
> make the learning as interesting as possible (within
> my limitations). I consciously tried never to PUSH
> or GOAD them (though it is possible that my adult
> weaknesses may have occasionally led me into such
> unrighteous ways; any instances of PUSHING/ GOADING
> that may have occurred came about because of the poor
> 'educational - and other - systems' that are rampant
> in India. Come to think about it: no, there were NO
> instances at all of PUSHING or GOADING in regard to
> their studies).

> >
> > Did you have to make them practice the piano or
> > did they naturally choose it over playing with

> their
> > friends?
> >

> No. I did not at all make them practice the piano
> (or their math). If they approached me for help with
> their math or with any other subject (apart from
> music), I gave it to them as best I could, or I got
> them the right books or the right tutors. If they
> got poor results in their exams, I made my
> disappointment clear (but NEVER via PUSHING or
> GOADING).

> >
> > If there was an easier way, we would be all
> > over it. We are intelligent and successful people.
> > And parents.
> >

> There is indeed a better way than PUSHING or GOADING.
> I believe you may not be in a position to apply it,
> without a fair bit of preparation. The prerequisite
> is a mind that is not hermetically sealed to the
> ingress of new knowledge.
>
> The 'righteous way' would be, for *intelligent*
> people, to ENCOURAGE instead of to PUSH or to GOAD.
> That would, I claim, lead to better success. It is
> s not difficult to do - but there is a very little
> learning required and a fair bit of 'unlearning'
> before one can successfully use this 'righteous way'.
>

> >
> > Maybe it?s the element of
> > competitiveness that makes us think differently

> about
> > these things.
> >

> It isn't. I have 'competed' all my life, quite
> successfully, by and large.

> >
> > I have always worked for a living and
> > you are aware that I had to climb up from extreme
> > poverty to get to where I am. On the other hand,

> you
> > seem to have come from money, travelled freely, and
> > attended school whenever and wherever you wanted.
> >

> Contrary to your falsehoods above, I have competed
> (fairly well) all through my life.
>
> True, I did indeed come from quite comfortable family
> circumstances - not from big 'money': my mother was a
> well-reputed doctor; my father was a very successful
> engineer. Those comfortable circumstances enabled me
> to get the books and stuff that I might have wanted
> or needed with no delay or difficulty at all. These
> were exceptionally fortunate circumstances that I was
> born and grew into (with no special effort on my
> part) - and I never cease to be thankful for these
> circumstances. I'm pretty sure I'd never have
> achieved what I've done without those circumstances.
>
> However, after high school, most of my education was
> through scholarships and fellowships (though I was
> supported to a sizable extent by my parents
> particularly in regard to books and stuff that I
> might have wanted to buy). Yes, my schooling was
> done at one of the 'top level' schools in South
> India. After high school, I attended colleges not
> quite "wherever I wanted", but generally at places
> that gave me needed financial support via
> scholarships and fellowships. Later, I won a
> scholarship + teaching assistantship to a prestigious
> US university.
>
> (ALL of this was won via fair competition, contrary
> to the falsehoods that you now appear to be trying to
> promote).
>
> [In this context, do recall your famous false
> statements about OPMS being "list-making and nothing
> else"!!! Check out the OPMS documentation to see
> just how utterly false this famous Robert Hansen
> claim is - anyone can find out from the attachments
> to my post heading the thread Democracy: how to
> achieve it?" -
> http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?threadID=2419536].
>

> >
> > Other than your failed venture with OPMS, I am not
> > sure that you ever had to work.
> >

> Question: WHY and HOW is it that Robert Hansen thus
> lies in his arguments with GSC? Does he believe that
> his lies will prevail?
>
> The above suggestion from Robert Hansen is one more
> instance of his well-known falsehoods: for instance,
> OPMS is an ongoing venture, which has enjoyed some
> quite remarkable success, though admittedly it has
> not yet enjoyed the dazzling worldwide success I had
> hoped for. But it has been entirely successful
> wherever and whenever it has been tried out.
>
> [I did fail to get my financiers at Interactive
> LogicWare, ILW, to use it in their work for ILW
> (which led to the demise of that Company). I have
> failed in quite a few cases to get various people to
> check it out in person: it does require a fair bit of
> 'intellectual discipline' to do that: many people
> are, by virtue of our incompetent educational
> systems, unable to put in sustained intellectual
> effort into the things that they do].
>
> Contrary to your falsehoods, I've been pretty
> successful in my career:
>
> - -- I have worked, largely (not entirely) supporting
> myself since the age of 17 or so. Not because I HAD
> to, but because I ENJOYED working. (True, I
> generally worked only at jobs I enjoyed doing - I was
> fortunate that way, too). Anyway, 'working' was the
> culture I was bred into, by the examples set by both
> my parents (this is contrary to your falsehoods);
>
> - -- first major, professional job in in advertising
> where I rapidly rose to be 'Creative Controller' in
> the leading advertising agency in India at that time.
> Gave up advertising as a profession because we
> e needed to tell a great many lies in support of our
> clients. As you may (or may not) be aware, I do
> strongly object to the lies that rule a great many
> parts of our society;
>
> - -- some freelance journalism all along (since my
> schooldays);
>
> - -- set up and very successfully ran a small scale
> industrial unit, which grew to be one of the largest
> units of its kind in the South. At one stage, I
> employed some 65 highly-skilled carpenters;
>
> - -- at this point, I got into 'systems science'
> primarily because of the very sorry state of
> f individual, organisational and societal systems in
> India and around the world (INCLUDING your systems in
> the US of A: elsewhere in your post, you have
> acknowledged the sorry state of the way things are in
> the US of A).
>
> My aim in 'systems science was, mainly, "to develop
> means to enable people create more effective systems
> for themselves". This became successful after I met
> the late John N. Warfield in 1979. (I have admittedly
> not been as successful as I would have liked to be in
> 'promoting' the OPMS as a concept worldwide. Mainly,
> this is because I always call a spadeful of crap
> exactly by that very name - while monied and powerful
> people would generally prefer to refer to it,
> perhaps, as 'Chanel No. 5' or something of that
> nature. Last month, I lost an investor who was
> looking to invest Rs 20 million in 'some project' -
> and I told him his ideas were worth less than
> nothing.
>
> I observe that you have elsewhere in this post of
> yours acknowledged the sorry state of the US of A -
> though you've been entirely unable to understand why,
> how and from where this sorry state arises: it really
> is because your societal systems are very badly
> screwed up [as are the societal systems in a great
> many nations around the world, including India]).
>
> The late Winston Churchill once came out with a
> saying that could be truly profound: "First, we shape
> our buildings", said he. "Then, our buildings shape
> us". (Just substitute the word "systems" for
> "buildings" and you will have a piece of wisdom that
> will be true for all time to come).

> >
> > At least Kirby has a
> > resume of odd jobs. I haven?t seen even that much

> from
> > you. I have worked, literally and continuously,
> since I
> > was 14.
> >

> Robert Hansen appears to be under the mistaken notion
> that he is the only person in the world who has
> successful worked!! I might usefully point out that
> there are quite a few other people in the world who
> have indeed worked (including GSC), some of them
> quite successfully; some of them have failed.
> (Because of mainly 'systemic issues', the number of
> f 'failures' is significantly larger than the number
> of 'successes').
>
> Question: WHY and HOW is it that Robert Hansen thus
> lies in his arguments with GSC? Does he believe that
> his lies will prevail?
>
> It is my belief (and hope) that ultimately the truth
> must prevail.

> >
> > I am only pointing this out because that would make

> a
> > huge difference in our experiences and thoughts on
> > how to raise children.
> >

> Question: WHY and HOW is it that Robert Hansen thus
> lies in his arguments with GSC? Does he believe that
> his lies will prevail?

> >
> >I want my son to be the best
> > he can be because I feel he will need this as an
> > adult in order to make a life for himself.
> >

> And your underlying 'philosophy' to "make your son
> the best he can be" is is to PUSH and GOAD him into
> learning math (and doubtless other stuff)?
>
> His personal interests and wishes have little or no
> bearing on what he does and how he does it?
>
> Congratulations to you!
>
> OK, that is Robert Hansen's famous 'philosophy of
> teaching and life'. Let's check out, in say, 10-15
> years' time whether the PUSHING and GOADING is better
> than the ENCOURAGEMENT that I recommend.
>
> Of course, this would be only a single case, not
> amounting to a 'scientific proof' whichever way it
> may turn out.

> >
> > Especially with how our nation is now.
> >

> Yes indeed. ESPECIALLY that!
>
> Though I must accept that the world as a whole is in
> truth in no better shape than is Robert Hansen's US
> of A.
>
> There are several good and very profound
> investigations of WHY your nation and the world
> around are in the manifold message they are in now.
> I believe you may not understand any of them, given
> n your current attitudes and approach to life. Joseph
> Stiglitz, winner of the Economics Nobel Prize, has
> some useful ideas on the matter
> (http://www.josephstiglitz.com/). Howard Zinn also
> has many useful insights to provide as well.
>
> However: Most of these messes have arisen, I
> believe, because of the grievously mistaken notion
> that "Humans are the MASTERS OF THE UNIVERSE!". (They
> are not, by any means, and we may be about to arrive
> at this realisation).

> >
> > And I have never seen
> > this to be as easy as just asking him to be the

> best
> > he can be. It involves a competitive spirit, a
> spirit
> > you are likely not going to understand if you have
> > never had to compete. I am the coach, he is the
> > player, the game is life.
> >
> > Bob Hansen
> >

> There is 'constructive competition' and there is
> 'destructive competition'. The USA has long been the
> home of 'destructive competition'.
>
> I shan't at this time go into the details of the
> differences between 'A' and 'B' - as that would
> require 'prose + structural graphics' (p+sg) to
> discuss effectively (and interactively).
>
> But let's check out, in say 10 to 15 years' time just
> how successful you have been, "Coach". At that
> point, do check out the OPMS also. Of course, I
> realise that a sound scientific evaluation would
> require a statistical study of many more cases than
> one - OPMS will have plenty of case studies for you.
>
> (It is, however, rather unlikely that I shall be
> around at that time).
>
> GSC
> ("Still Shoveling! Not PUSHING!! Not GOADING!!!")



Date Subject Author
1/26/14
Read A question about straight lines
Neighbor
1/26/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
kirby urner
1/27/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Neighbor
1/27/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
1/27/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Bishop, Wayne
1/27/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
kirby urner
1/27/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Neighbor
1/27/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
1/27/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Neighbor
1/27/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Neighbor
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Neighbor
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Neighbor
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Neighbor
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Neighbor
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Gary Tupper
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Louis Talman
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/28/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/29/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
1/29/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Bishop, Wayne
1/29/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
GS Chandy
1/29/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Domenico Rosa
1/29/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Neighbor
1/29/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/29/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Neighbor
1/29/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Domenico Rosa
1/30/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Bishop, Wayne
1/29/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/29/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Neighbor
1/29/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
1/29/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/29/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/29/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
1/30/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Neighbor
1/29/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
1/29/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/30/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Louis Talman
1/29/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/30/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Neighbor
1/30/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Jonathan Crabtree
1/30/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/30/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
kirby urner
1/30/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Neighbor
1/30/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Neighbor
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Neighbor
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Neighbor
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
GS Chandy
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
GS Chandy
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
GS Chandy
1/31/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
2/1/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
GS Chandy
2/1/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
2/1/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
kirby urner
2/1/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
2/1/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
2/1/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
2/1/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
2/2/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
2/2/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
kirby urner
2/1/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
2/2/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
2/2/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
James Elander
2/2/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
GS Chandy
2/2/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
2/2/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
GS Chandy
2/2/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
2/2/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Joe Niederberger
2/2/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
GS Chandy
2/2/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
Robert Hansen
2/2/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
GS Chandy
2/4/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
GS Chandy
2/4/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
GS Chandy
2/4/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
GS Chandy
2/8/14
Read Re: A question about straight lines
GS Chandy

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.