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 » numeracy

Topic: How high was the horse?
Replies: 3   Last Post: Oct 14, 1997 4:56 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Jack Rotman

Posts: 22
Registered: 12/6/04
Re: How high was the horse?
Posted: Oct 13, 1997 8:00 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Mieke:
Thanks for the further reply. I'll just add a little.
> Jack,
>
> Sorry, I'm a bit slow.
>
> Thanks for your response
> We have also programs like 'developmental' math but we call them just
> 'basic programs'.

That label seems fine, though I have some colleagues who argue that the
initial college-level course is truly "basic".

>
> I think we could go on with this discussion for a while, but I would
> like to restrict it now to just one point:
>
> snip:-------------------------------------> >>

> >> Okay, but you don't need to do something 'different', you need to do
> >> something 'functional'. People must see what they are learning and for
> >> what purpose. How can they use it 'tomorrow'?

> >This may be one of the larger differences between the adult numeracy
> >population and the college developmental population: college students
> >are expected to learn material whether they can see an immediate
> >application or not. In whatever setting we find ourselves, if our goal
> >is to enhance "learning to learn", then we should not depend upon
> >immediate application as a motivation to learn all material. In other
> >words, sometimes we learn things that we can apply now -- but other
> >times we learn things that will develop more general skills.
> >

>
> Agree again, but I think people must know WHAT they learn and WHY,
> especially for adults and not only in adult numeracy education but also
> in 'developmental' math for college students.
> My experience is that people can be terribly frustrated, especially on
> math, when they have to learn things of which WE think it may be good
> for them but THEY don't see why they have to learn it, even when WE tell
> them that it is good for them and meant for more long term application.
>
> When we talk about 'learning to learn' then people also must know WHY
> and HOW and for WHAT. Learning to learn is not meant as a skill in its
> own.

Yes, sometimes students get frustrated when faced with a topic they
don't see an application for. However, some of these students
eventually recognize their frustration as being a barrier to their
success, and they just 'do it'. They may not have enthusiasm, but they
often will succeed (I try to provide the enthusiasm).
We have an honest difference of opinion of the "learning to learn"
skill; to me, I'd place this towards the top of the priorities in each
of my courses.

Thanks
Jack
--
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Jack Rotman phone (517)483-1079
Math Professor ROTMAN@ALPHA.LANSING.CC.MI.US
Lansing Community College Lansing, MI
"Like all art & science, mathematics surrounds us."
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Math Success ! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
dept web page http://www.lansing.cc.mi.us/sas/mathsci





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.