4 ms·
This article reminds me very strongly of Lockhart’s Lament [0], which at this point I think should be required reading for every mathematician and teacher. The
by bradrn 4y ago
This article reminds me very strongly of Lockhart’s Lament [0], which at this point I think should be required reading for every mathematician and teacher. The essential message is the same: maths is itself intrinsically fascinating as the exploration of foundational logical reasoning, so teach that instead of the boring stuff taught in maths classes now! (Lockhart writes in a specifically American context, but the general philosophy seems much more widely applicable to me.)
[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20221201000000*/https://www.maa.org/sites/default/files/pdf/devlin/LockhartsLament.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20221201000000*/https://www.maa....
- edgyquant 4y agoThis has been my thinking for so long. Why teach a bunch of courses students say is boring? Can’t we instead teach basic logic and philosophy in early years and then start students on basic set theory (or some equivalent) in their second or third year and have them slowly derive mathematics themselves?
- zzedd 4y agosee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Math https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Math
- edgyquant 4y agoThis isn’t really related to what I asked though? I don’t think drilling basic arithmetic is “teaching the students the basics of sets and having them derive mathematics themselves” and you surely don’t either