Robert Hansen (RH) posted Jun 28, 2014 7:15 PM (http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=9505362) - GSC's remarks interspersed: > > On Jun 27, 2014, at 2:07 PM, GS Chandy > <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > > (GSC): It's the fact of the great majority of students > >developing a fear and/or loathing of math! > > I don?t see fear and loathing of math, I see fear and > loathing of math lessons. I mean, it isn?t that they > dislike math or people who are good at math, they > just personally don?t like to do it. > I see. Are you now claiming that Joe N. got the title of this thread wrong, that it should correctly be "Why do so many of us hate math lessons?" ??
I believe that the 'educators' got it pretty much right when they identified the 'Golden Triad' of the "Three R's" as essential for a person to be 'considered 'educated for the modern world'. The educators then needed to understand how (i.e., learn how) to get kids interested enough in doing those "Three R's" for X number of years before they could be considered 'fit to take their place in society'.
By and large (or to an extent at least), the educators seemed to succeeded, but 'rithmetic got a special place for itself as boring and/or fearful and/or loathsome (for the great majority of students). Or, as you've now discovered, it's only the 'rithmetic lessons (imparted in the 'traditional way') that they all dislike so intensely - it's not the 'rithmetic at all.
I have seen plenty of children in the 'Montessori system' - the great majority of them, as a matter of fact - finding quite as much interest in early math (i.e., "'Rithmetic") as they do in early "Reading and 'Riting". So that indicates to me that Maria Montessori (MM) had learned how to capture the child's interest, something that the traditional system of imparting math knowledge had not. Unfortunately (I claim; but see below for qualifiers) the educational system did not learn the needed 'lessons' from the Montessori system.
Of course, you have discovered that the Montessori system is all fake. Have it your way. It's a matter of "personal preferences", I guess. I "personally prefer" to believe that MM had achieved something quite spectacular in the theory and practice of education; you "personally prefer" to claim that MM was a fake and should be banished into the outer darkness. Let us see what happens in education over the next generation or two. (I would guess that I shan't be around to see). > > Pretty much the > same with music. Students that fear and loathe music > lessons don?t fear and loathe music or musicians. > They just fear and loathe the lessons. Parents learn > this when they have their children take music lessons > (which I encourage) but then at some point realize > that it isn?t in the cards. > I see. > > And the point remains, if the students are going to > the same school and the same classes and some of them > fear and loathe math lessons while others take to > them like candy, doesn?t that indicate personal > preference? I am not saying that some lessons aren't > poorly done. But when you look at a whole school and > the same kids and the same classes, it seems that it > is personal preference that determines how much a > student likes math lessons or not and I think we > would have to open up the discussion to what drives > personal preference in order to understand this > phenomenon. > Well, as earlier noted, I "personally prefer" to believe that the 'traditional educational system' does need to change itself just a wee bit (without suggesting that the ''reformers' have got it right: they clearly haven't). You "personally prefer" to believe that the 'traditional educational system' is just about perfect. As suggested earlier, have it your way. > > In India it seems that you are allowed > two choices in college. Engineering or medicine. > Not true at all!!
It used to be during the days when I was in school long ago; and for many years till quite recently) that the disciplines of 'choice' were engineering and medicine - that was because the 'best careers' (meaning best paid and/or most secure jobs) were perceived to be in engineering or in medicine.
Things have changed quite considerably of late, and it's 'business management' that's the 'in thing' now, though the competition for seats in engineering/medicine is still pretty fierce.
Business Management used to be available only as a post-graduate master's degree or diploma (earned in grad school) after a basic bachelor's degree in any field; now there's a "Bachelor's Degree in Business Management" that's very popular now, I understand. In fact, it's now becoming quite the rage, I believe.
(By the way, as a matter of interest, I note that it is in the schools offering 'Business Management' that the students are taught to 'manage' via what's known a 'Project Management', which teaches them all about PERT Charts which you now abhor but once adored enough to put up 30-footers all over the place. In my view, the idea of 'Business Management' does have much going for it, but the 'Project Management' part of it leads only to project MISmanagement, alas - all through the misunderstanding of the import of a single transitive relationship, "PRECEDES", in complex systems!!) > > So > in a way, personal preference has been removed. But > it seems that while some students succeed in that > system, many do not. What are your thoughts on that? > (IMHO), you've got it pretty much wrong - but I strongly believe you have the inalienable right to do that (i.e., to get it wrong and learn through experience to get it right - or even NOT to get it right). It's your 'personal preference'.