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: meaningful standards (fwd)
Replies: 0  

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List  
DoctorCHEK@aol.com

Posts: 67
Registered: 12/6/04
Re: meaningful standards (fwd)
Posted: May 30, 1995 6:07 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Harvey Becker wrote:
>
>Gary...I guess what I meant was....how can you find the volume of the
>following rectangular solid (having w=3, l=4, h=5.3) if you don't first know
>how to multiply? I'm sure most of us agree that in the second grade we were
>taught the multiplication tables before any need to know such knowledge was
>ever introduced. Later....applications were developed to show us why we
>needed to know multiplication (as in the volume of a solid etc). I like to
>teach my trigonometry kids what the definition of sine is BEFORE I ask them
>to find the sine of 30 degrees and certainly prior to asking them to solve
>any triangular problems involving sun's shadows and heights of trees etc....


Then Judy Roitman responded:
>This struck me as kind of strange. For example, if kids in first grade are
>sitting around taking twelve unifix cubes and rearranging them into three
>groups of 4 and four groups of 3 and so on, the notions of multiplication
>and division arise quite naturally. The notion of a sine can arise quite
>naturally too as, say, the hand of a clock sweeps out a circle and students
>make certain measurements.


>Why do we seem to think that mathematics must be justified in terms of
>practical immediate problems, most of which kids don't care about anyway?
>No other subject suffers from such a lack of belief in its intrinsic
>relevance.


And now Harvey Becker here again:

Judy....I agree with you! I absolutely don't believe that mathematic must be
justified in terms of practical immediate problems. My point above was in
response to Dan Hart's mentioning that he felt we should teach general
information before we ask kids to solve big complicated problems. I agree
with that notion. I think discovery learning has its place, but considering
the educational time constraints under which we find ourselves, I feel it is
fine to teach theory FIRST and then let kids use that theory to solve real
life problems SECOND............. OR just use the theory to use the theory.
Math has a beauty all to itself and need not be used to solve real life
problems.

Harvey Becker
Woodside High School
Woodside California





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.