On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 3:21 PM, Joe Niederberger <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Kirby says: > > >Lets define two modes of learning: recall and recog (short for > > recognition). > > Joe N says: > > As you described (defined) these, they also sounded a lot like > performance > > versus appreciation to me. Appreciation, for many people means more than > > just the superficial, but coming to understand more deeply what makes > stuff > > work. Connecting the dots as you say. > > Kirby: > >I think that's a good analogy. > > > I was reminded, while musing about this, of a book I probably first saw > when in came out in 1963 (I was 7, 3rd grade.) > > http://www.amazon.com/Mathematics-science-library-David-Bergamini/dp/B0007G5WYG > > Yes exactly. We're about the same age. That book was important to me too. I put its picture here:
> Note the customer reviews! I would have to agree with all of them. I don't > have a copy now but I bet it would still be a great companion to a child of > the right age. It, along with many other things, helped convince me that > math was a good thing to learn about. >
Yep. That was a great "connect the dots" book. But when you go to "math class" do they have anything like it to study? No, the dots are all gone and its "exercise exercise exercise" and if you ask "why?" it's "because you'll need it on the next test".
So disrespectful of a mind like mine, that wants to see a bigger picture.
I was also reading Freud at the time, 8th grade, Overseas School of Rome). Should I be blamed for thinking "math teaching" was some kind of out-of-control shared mental illness -- just look at the contrast with what the sane people were writing!
> Cheers, > Joe N > > ------- End of Forwarded Message > >