3 ms·

"Dumbing down" and "discovering age-old principles on their own" are not necessarily the same. There is definitely value in learning to do creative work in math

by lutorm 17y ago

"Dumbing down" and "discovering age-old principles on their own" are not necessarily the same. There is definitely value in learning to do creative work in math and science, beyond just rote memorization and learning to regurgitate what the teacher tells you. It pretty clear that many people with high grades in school are poorly prepared for situations where you actually have to do original work, like grad school. Of course, there has to be a balance between base skills and that. Also, for another take on math education, see http://www.maa.org/devlin/devlin_03_08.html http://www.maa.org/devlin/devlin_03_08.html

cabalamat 17y ago
> "Dumbing down" and "discovering age-old principles on their own" are not necessarily the same. Indeed not. I'm writing an interpreter for a Lisp-like language right now (does Lisp count as "age-old"? I guess in computer terms it does), but I don't consider that a dumb thing to do.
bitwize 17y ago
The problem with rote memorization is that it gets results. You cannot do algebra until you know your times tables by heart, and how did kids learn their times tables in ages past, when men were men and went to the moon without the aid of calculators? Drill, drill, drill. Going on and on about the beauty of math is all well and good if your brain is wired that way, but when 90% of America's high school grads are stymied by making simple change, you fall back on what works.
- lutorm 17y ago
  The point is that if all you do is drill, by the time you get to the beauty, your students have already made up their mind that math is the most useless crap in the Universe. Motivation is a powerful force and unless people see that there's any point to what they are being ordered to do, they will comply with the smallest amount of effort they can get away with. And to say that they want to fall back on "what works" sounds a little funny given how dismally American students in general are doing. If people are so afraid to make the mediocre worse, they'll never discover what works better. Besides, I'm not even sure I agree that you need to be able to multiply numbers before doing algebra.
  - bitwize 17y ago
    Saxon Math is getting kids numerate to a high school level where constructivist horseshit is not. Saxon Math is largely drill and repetition based, with some practical applications like counting money and so forth. Therefore, you're wrong. QED. As for what American students in general are doing, drill and repetition were how it was taught in the mid 20th century, when America led the world in science and technology. (My father was given a pencil with no eraser in the second grade; the teacher told the class "You're second graders now. You shouldn't be making mistakes.") We abandoned that sometime in the sixties and it's been downhill since.

by lutorm 17y ago

cabalamat 17y ago

> "Dumbing down" and "discovering age-old principles on their own" are not necessarily the same. Indeed not. I'm writing an interpreter for a Lisp-like language right now (does Lisp count as "age-old"? I guess in computer terms it does), but I don't consider that a dumb thing to do.

bitwize 17y ago

The problem with rote memorization is that it gets results. You cannot do algebra until you know your times tables by heart, and how did kids learn their times tables in ages past, when men were men and went to the moon without the aid of calculators? Drill, drill, drill. Going on and on about the beauty of math is all well and good if your brain is wired that way, but when 90% of America's high school grads are stymied by making simple change, you fall back on what works.

lutorm 17y ago
The point is that if all you do is drill, by the time you get to the beauty, your students have already made up their mind that math is the most useless crap in the Universe. Motivation is a powerful force and unless people see that there's any point to what they are being ordered to do, they will comply with the smallest amount of effort they can get away with. And to say that they want to fall back on "what works" sounds a little funny given how dismally American students in general are doing. If people are so afraid to make the mediocre worse, they'll never discover what works better. Besides, I'm not even sure I agree that you need to be able to multiply numbers before doing algebra.
- bitwize 17y ago
  Saxon Math is getting kids numerate to a high school level where constructivist horseshit is not. Saxon Math is largely drill and repetition based, with some practical applications like counting money and so forth. Therefore, you're wrong. QED. As for what American students in general are doing, drill and repetition were how it was taught in the mid 20th century, when America led the world in science and technology. (My father was given a pencil with no eraser in the second grade; the teacher told the class "You're second graders now. You shouldn't be making mistakes.") We abandoned that sometime in the sixties and it's been downhill since.