The Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » Education » math-teach

Topic: Latest Devlin Article
Replies: 39   Last Post: Jun 19, 2010 11:44 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Robert Hansen

Posts: 10,229
From: Florida
Registered: 6/22/09
Latest Devlin Article
Posted: Jun 10, 2010 3:41 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Keith Devlin wrote this month regarding a topic that
comes up often in this discussion, that the teaching of
mathematics is too procedural and does not have
enough "real life" problems.

http://www.maa.org/devlin/devlin_06_10.html

He goes on to say that this has been proven in studies but the powers that be force
the curriculum to be rote and lacking in application. I am not sure where he is
getting his material because there are some serious validity issues in his
statements.

1. I have reviewed many texts this last year and the only text that I have
come across that could be considered rote and procedural was published in 1909! In
fact, if this were so widespread a problem (rote instruction) then why isn't Devlin (or others that make this claim)
holding up several texts to prove his point? I'll tell you why, because the point is
false. It is a myth repeated so often that people take it for granted
and believe it even though examples of such texts don't even exist and haven't
existed for some time, probably even before said people were born. Even if Devlin
searched high and low and found such a text, I could produce a dozen current texts
that are jam packed with examples of applied math.

2. He states that people don't believe the studies that this helps kids learn math
better. Well, as I said, texts have had these applicable examples for decades now
and we know the standing of our scores in TIMSS. What is there too believe or not
believe? It's right there in front of us. Of course, he states that it takes a
knowledgeable teacher to teach math via application rather than via rote procedure,
and I agree, but he states it in a half truth sort of way. He implies that teaching with examples doesn't work because the teachers don't know math. The fact is, even if you start with definition and lead to example OR start with example and lead
to definition (the Keith way), you need to know the subject to pull it off.
Yes, if you do not understand math then you will probably only be able to
regurgitate the steps for your students and not pull it all together. But the current curriculums are packed with examples. Examples we
got. It's the actual mathematical reasoning and language that we are missing.

3. Another reason that people don't buy this (as if the first falsity isn't enough)
is that we are familiar with successful math kids (yes they are out there) and they
know the math. They show up in the various clubs or competitions (and math rings)
and they are adorable to watch as they eagerly set out to solve the problems they
are challenged with. And they do all of this without even warming up on "real life"
examples. And there were more than likely real life examples in their teaching (since they abound in curriculums anyways). But what they have that other students do not (other than ability) is that they have an authentic mathematical understanding. They are PAST the example stage and own the math now. And these kids and the problems they solve don't resemble what we see in many classes, with or without nice applicable examples.

4. We have people like Dy/Dan showing
movies of water bottles (that never even get to the math) to middle and high school
age students. He claims that students learn better when shown real life examples of
math (except for some unknown reason he never actually gets to the math). And this is a big reason why
people (correctly) don't buy this. They don't understand that if this is so
successful then why the hell are you still doing it by high school? When using this
approach do the kids ever get the math? You would think not if you based everything
on Dy/Dan. I have never seen a math teacher talk so much and do so much without doing
any math. In my opinion Dy/Dan is somewhat of a fraud in this business. I don't
think he belongs teaching a math class and is more interested in self promotion, as
witnessed by his "other" home page I posted here recently.

But Devlin was not (I hope) writing with Dy/Dan in mind. And maybe Devlin should
check him out and realize what some people think of when he says "make math real".
What Devlin doesn't touch on is how bad some of these curriculums have become when
they focus on activities AND these activities become excuses to avoid the math rather than conquer it. This goes beyond teachers not being up to the task. Yes there are bad teachers, but they PASSED the very same math classes the students are in now. If you don't stop that then even if you replaced the current teachers (if that were even possible), you would have a fresh batch of poor teachers tomorrow. We lack (entirely in some cases) authenticity. If that is not fixed then even if there is a valid reform, you will never be able to implement it.

I challenge Devlin on two counts. First, show me a curriculum (in the last 20 years)
devoid of these real life examples. And secondly, after he exhausts
himself looking for those, find out how many curriculums use real life examples AND
lead into what we would call mathematics. I mean the reasoned and abstract
part that requires no example, just an interested brain. He is going to find that there are very few and he is going to find why there is so much push back on all of these ideas. It isn't the ideas, seriously, it is how they are implemented. For some odd reason, each and every one of these reforms was accompanied by a dumbing down factor. AP Calculus has lowered the cut scores so much that now they have to eliminate the guessing penalty in order to stop failing half the kids. Why even make a test with 4 times the number of problems necessary to pass? And AP Calculus is one of the better examples. When Achieve gave the algebra test to students last year they gave to students that had taken algebra and passed. Yet less than 15% passed the Achieve test.

Good examples are in the texts and have been for some time. But you won't see their effect on teaching math until you put the math back into the curriculum.


Date Subject Author
6/10/10
Read Latest Devlin Article
Robert Hansen
6/10/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Haim
6/10/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Dave L. Renfro
6/10/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Dave L. Renfro
6/15/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Domenico Rosa
6/15/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Joe Niederberger
6/15/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Dave L. Renfro
6/15/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Joe Niederberger
6/15/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
kirby urner
6/15/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
kirby urner
6/16/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Robert Hansen
6/16/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Joe Niederberger
6/16/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Haim
6/16/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Joe Niederberger
6/16/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Robert Hansen
6/16/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Joe Niederberger
6/16/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Robert Hansen
6/16/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Haim
6/16/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
kirby urner
6/16/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Joe Niederberger
6/16/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Dave L. Renfro
6/16/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Joe Niederberger
6/16/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
kirby urner
6/16/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
GS Chandy
6/17/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Joe Niederberger
6/17/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Joshua Fisher
6/17/10
Read Pithy Quote
Joe Niederberger
6/17/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Jonathan Groves
6/17/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Joe Niederberger
6/17/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Robert Hansen
6/17/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Jonathan Groves
6/17/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Robert Hansen
6/17/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Robert Hansen
6/17/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
GS Chandy
6/17/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Jonathan Groves
6/17/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Jonathan Groves
6/18/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Robert Hansen
6/18/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Pam
6/19/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Jonathan Groves
6/19/10
Read Re: Latest Devlin Article
Jonathan Groves

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2017. All Rights Reserved.