3 ms·

My school rarely ever directed mathematics instruction in relation to another skill or problem. Sure math might be used in industrial arts, or in home economics

by ohiovr 5y ago

My school rarely ever directed mathematics instruction in relation to another skill or problem. Sure math might be used in industrial arts, or in home economics, but the instruction phase of the math is always 100% abstract. If people knew all the interesting things you can do with math they would be more likely to use math more often and remember what they learned. This was certainly the case for me and may have been the only thing that made me even care about math at all. I am referring to only one math class I took in high school which did this, and that was geometry. I loved my geometry teacher. He was the only math teacher I ever found likable. I loved the geometry class because it helped me a lot when thinking of practical considerations to 3D graphic arts I was creating on Amiga computers at the time not to mention the value of the discussion of area and volume. Did you know Pythagoras was a kind of cult leader? Geometry wasn't just abstract, it was practical. How much carpet do I need for a room? How much water will fit in this cylinder? If I have a disc that has to be one square foot, what would the diameter be? I had some enthusiasm for algebra one level math for solving an unknown variable using what is already known. I didn't learn the value in this at school. My dad was an electronic technician (Worked at Argonne Labs) and I was interested in what he did there. He taught me all there is to know about ohms law, finding resistance, conductivity, current voltage, using simple procedures. We did parallel circuits, tank circuits, ac theory. In less than a years time he gave me a complete 2 year associates degree understanding of dc and ac circuits. Most of us found our math teachers some of the most arrogant people in the school. They demanded that we show our work and show it going down the way they personally approached solving problems. If the result was correct but if they didn't like your preferred procedure they would lower your scores. They never could offer a sound reason for their demands. Perhaps they did have a sound reason. They just didn't bother to sell us on it. I suppose it isn't right of me to condemn all math teachers this way as my experience is kind of limited. This is just what I felt about it while being a student in high school and middle school 30 years ago.

RealityVoid 5y ago
My math teacher was not like the ones you describe, he really let me go off the reservation if I ever wanted to approach the problem in some wierd zany way. IMO, that's how it should be. On the other hand, mastery of the tools and methods requires repeating it and spending a lot of time with them untill they "make sense" or rather, you get used to them. So that is useful as well. Most people can apply mechanical methods well, but the part where I see a disconnect is applying them to new problems and new contexts. It's like... Most people don't even realize you can do that. Would love to find a scalable way that teaching can approach that as well. It is a crucial mental tool.
superfamicom 5y ago
I'm sorry you had so many less than awesome teachers. I had an Algebra 1 teacher in middle school (United States) that really made a huge difference. The way she taught was so different than every other teach I had up until that point. She approached everything in a meaningful and useful way. It really set me up for success then and now.
dataflow 5y ago
> If the result was correct but if they didn't like your preferred procedure they would lower your scores. They never could offer a sound reason for their demands. Perhaps they did have a sound reason. They just didn't bother to sell us on it. The reason was always "because the goal is to see if you've learned this technique, not if you can solve this specific problem". Which is a perfectly fine reason that I sympathized with, though I agree some were poor at articulating it. Where I had issues was when I didn't know what technique they wanted me to use, and then lost points for not guessing it correctly. That part is what always seemed unfair - if the goal is to test a technique, it should always be clear what the intended method is, and they need to explicitly specify it in the problem when it's unclear. The exercise is supposed to be in math, not ESP.
aaplok 5y ago
but isn't that the case with all instruction, not just maths? As a counterpoint to your example, I, too, learnt the basics of electronics when I was young - Ohm' laws, Kirchhoff's laws, etc. At the time I found it extremely uninteresting, and I certainly didn't apply it to my everyday life and still mostly don't. In phys ed. I had to play handball a lot. I never played handball as an adult. Running around a courtyard for 20 minutes? I don't do that, ever -- heck, why don't we teach kids to run behind a bus to catch it, or in a crowded airport to catch a connection? Now that would be usable skills... History, geography, literature (how often do you find yourself finding all the metaphors in a poem?), most of what we learn at school is not "used", nor is it instructed in relation to another skill or problem. And yet, when the issue comes up, it's always maths that is under scrutiny. There is a lot to review in the way we educate children, all the way to university. Not everything we teach has to be for utilitarian purpose, and yet we need to find a way to interest the kids into it, which we largely fail, in maths in particular, but in other disciplines too. Some of it is about helping them relate it to their every day lives, and some of it to expand their horizon. It's not easy, we don't do it well, and most suggestions I've seen are mostly cosmetic or superficial, and I'm not smart enough to have come up with anything clever myself either, sadly.

by ohiovr 5y ago

RealityVoid 5y ago

My math teacher was not like the ones you describe, he really let me go off the reservation if I ever wanted to approach the problem in some wierd zany way. IMO, that's how it should be. On the other hand, mastery of the tools and methods requires repeating it and spending a lot of time with them untill they "make sense" or rather, you get used to them. So that is useful as well. Most people can apply mechanical methods well, but the part where I see a disconnect is applying them to new problems and new contexts. It's like... Most people don't even realize you can do that. Would love to find a scalable way that teaching can approach that as well. It is a crucial mental tool.

superfamicom 5y ago

I'm sorry you had so many less than awesome teachers. I had an Algebra 1 teacher in middle school (United States) that really made a huge difference. The way she taught was so different than every other teach I had up until that point. She approached everything in a meaningful and useful way. It really set me up for success then and now.

dataflow 5y ago

> If the result was correct but if they didn't like your preferred procedure they would lower your scores. They never could offer a sound reason for their demands. Perhaps they did have a sound reason. They just didn't bother to sell us on it. The reason was always "because the goal is to see if you've learned this technique, not if you can solve this specific problem". Which is a perfectly fine reason that I sympathized with, though I agree some were poor at articulating it. Where I had issues was when I didn't know what technique they wanted me to use, and then lost points for not guessing it correctly. That part is what always seemed unfair - if the goal is to test a technique, it should always be clear what the intended method is, and they need to explicitly specify it in the problem when it's unclear. The exercise is supposed to be in math, not ESP.

aaplok 5y ago

but isn't that the case with all instruction, not just maths? As a counterpoint to your example, I, too, learnt the basics of electronics when I was young - Ohm' laws, Kirchhoff's laws, etc. At the time I found it extremely uninteresting, and I certainly didn't apply it to my everyday life and still mostly don't. In phys ed. I had to play handball a lot. I never played handball as an adult. Running around a courtyard for 20 minutes? I don't do that, ever -- heck, why don't we teach kids to run behind a bus to catch it, or in a crowded airport to catch a connection? Now that would be usable skills... History, geography, literature (how often do you find yourself finding all the metaphors in a poem?), most of what we learn at school is not "used", nor is it instructed in relation to another skill or problem. And yet, when the issue comes up, it's always maths that is under scrutiny. There is a lot to review in the way we educate children, all the way to university. Not everything we teach has to be for utilitarian purpose, and yet we need to find a way to interest the kids into it, which we largely fail, in maths in particular, but in other disciplines too. Some of it is about helping them relate it to their every day lives, and some of it to expand their horizon. It's not easy, we don't do it well, and most suggestions I've seen are mostly cosmetic or superficial, and I'm not smart enough to have come up with anything clever myself either, sadly.