Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

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


Math Forum » Discussions » Education » math-teach

Topic: Re: Kids understand multi-digit numbers as early as age 3 ???
Researchers' blunder.

Replies: 2   Last Post: Jan 25, 2014 10:36 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
GS Chandy

Posts: 5,951
From: Hyderabad, Mumbai/Bangalore, India
Registered: 9/29/05
Re: Kids understand multi-digit numbers as early as age 3 ??? Researchers' blunder.
Posted: Jan 25, 2014 7:04 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Robert Hansen (RH) posted (http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=9365547) - GSC's remarks follow:
>
> On Jan 16, 2014, at 6:50 AM, GS Chandy
> <gs_chandy@yahoo.com> wrote:
>

> > You really do need to think a little more deeply on
> issues.
>
> It doesn?t take much study at all to realize that the
> whole world uses the very common terms ?America? and
> ?American? to mean the USA and its citizens.
>
> The real issue here is insufferable stubbornness. How
> it progresses like a cancer and consumes one?s senses
> as fast as it consumes one?s prospects in life.
>
> This would have been my lesson for a very young GS
> Chandy.
>
> Btw, do they even have ?New Year?s Resolutions? in
> India? You seem to have completely missed the meaning
> of my (and other?s) most recent posts to you. If you
> you wish to continue your feud with me, you will have
> to do so in complete solitude.
>
> Bob Hansen
>

1. Regret delay in responding. Was off Internet for a while as was busy conducting a few 'OPMS Workshops'.

2. Yes, "they" do have "New Year's Resolutions" (NYR) in India. Exactly as occurs in the USA, many NYR are made, but few are kept. (A year or two ago, I had read a delightful [perhaps even profound] piece in, I believe, the New Yorker about NYRs - I don't have the link readily accessible right now).

3. If anyone has missed the point of anything, it is RH, who still persists in various follies. In particular, that:

"Children must be PUSHED (or GOADED) to learn math!" [and doubtless everything else] - a more dangerous and damaging 'philosophy of teaching' is difficult to conceive.

This philosophy is probably even more regressive than the other slogans put up by RH's cohorts and consorts:

- -- "PUT THE EDUCATION MAFIA IN JAIL!" (Haim, who is alas no longer with us);

- -- "BLOW UP THE SCHOOLS OF EDUCATION!" (Wayne Bishop, who has apparently taken up as his life's work the promotion of this silly slogan first given to us, I understand, by Reid Lyon [Reading Research Expert]).

It is simple enough to develop 'learning systems' from a more healthy underlying philosophy, i.e.:

"Children should be ENCOURAGED to learn math (and everything else). If the ENCOURAGEMENT is effectively accomplished, the children will themselves learn how to PUSH themselves (and even, perhaps, to GOAD themselves) to conquer the numerous difficulties and barriers they will surely encounter during the learning process".

But development of healthy learning systems (as opposed to the generally very unhealthy teaching systems of past and present) does require a far-reaching 'change of underlying philosophy' on the part of those controlling the 'learning+teaching systems'. Such needed change in underlying philosophy does not seem to be on the horizon at this point of time. If stakeholders in our systems were to exert themselves just a bit to learn how to design and implement effective systems, it is indeed possible (IMHO) to develop healthy and progressive learning + teaching systems - AND to have them implemented worldwide within just a few years.

However, I now accept that it may well be impossible for some people to learn. Such a condition often seems to afflict those adults who have been so influenced by our existing unhealthy systems that their minds have become hermetically sealed to the ingress of new learning. (My earlier position - which I've rather reluctantly given up - was that it is ALWAYS possible for all people to learn).

[The disagreement between RH and GSC about the linguistic usages "America"/ "American" Vs. "USA"/ "US Citizen" is not really terribly important - it is a rather trivial matter. However, the disagreement about the 'underlying philosophy of learning + teaching systems' as described above is crucially important for the future of educational systems - in India as well as in the USA). I must confess that, thus far, a sizable majority of people in power in the Indian educational systems seem to swear by RH's underlying 'tenet of teaching', as described above. (The previous paragraph and this concluding one may have constituted a lesson for a very young RH. Too late now, alas!)]

GSC
("Still Shoveling! Not PUSHING!! Not GOADING!!!")


Message was edited by: GS Chandy



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

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.