Date: Feb 16, 1995 1:19 PM
Author: David Scott Powell
Subject: Re: Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II
>Date: Thu, 16 Feb 1995 12:19:43 -0600
>To:Rick Simon <SIMONR@ULVACS.ULAVERNE.EDU>
>From:firstname.lastname@example.org (David Scott Powell)
>Subject:Re: Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II
>>> >Does anyone know of any research dealing with the sequence of Algebra I,
>>> >Geometry, Algebra II?
>>Well, of course there is the work the van Hieles did in the Netherlands in
>>60s, which is to some extent responsible for current geometry practice in the
>>United States and elsewhere. Sorry I cannot give a specific reference, but
>>info should be readily available.
>Funny you should mention van Hiele levels. Zalman Usiskin did some work on
>that very topic in 1982 or 1983 in which he concluded that the learning of
>geometry does not depend on maturity but depends on how the subject is taught.
>So this would probably say that teaching geometry to 9th graders is o.k. as
>long as the teaching/learning model fits the van Hiele model. Does this help?
University Lab School
1776 University Ave.
Honolulu, HI 96826