Date: Apr 20, 1995 9:08 AM
Author: A. Karassowitsch
Subject: Re: 5th grade activity

>>On Wed, 19 Apr 1995 roitman@oberon.math.ukans.edu wrote:
>>

>>> Re: Cathy Brady's "where's the math?": If surfaces and edges aren't math,
>>> what is? If geometric reasoning isn't math (see comment in first
>>> paragraph), what is?

>>
>>Somehow I don't think that's the answer that will sell someone without a
>>graduate degree in mathematics.
>>
>> Cathy Brady Math Specialist/Education
>>cbrady@umd5.umd.edu Maryland Science Center
>>Opinions are my own "Beyond Numbers" exhibit
>>or something I overheard Baltimore's Inner Harbor

>
>
>This is worrying. It means that somehow we (meaning the collective
>community of everyone who has taught K-16 mathematics in this country
>since, say, 1880) have managed to communicate that mathematics is extremely
>narrow. It also means that those of us in the trenches feel pressure to
>justify what is done in school mathematics by that narrow definition. How
>can we get out of this bind?
>
>
>
> ====================================
> Judy Roitman, Mathematics Department
> Univ. of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66049
> roitman@math.ukans.edu
> =====================================
>



Judy I think you are approaching this from the wrong angle. We have an
obligation to justify what we do in terms that are understandable by all of
those concerned, not just those with degrees in math. I'm not sure that
means that we have to narrow what we do - just improve the communication.

Andy
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
A. Karassowitsch
Learning Assistance Teacher
R.L. Angus Elementary
School District #81 - Fort Nelson, BC Canada
<akarasso@cln.etc.bc.ca>