LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for MLMATHNET Archives


MLMATHNET Archives

MLMATHNET Archives


MLMATHNET@LIST.UVM.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

MLMATHNET Home

MLMATHNET Home

MLMATHNET  February 2000

MLMATHNET February 2000

Subject:

Math Myopia

From:

Jim Abrams <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Middle Level Mathematics Network <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 8 Feb 2000 16:27:28 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (82 lines)

**********************************************
 Forbes
 [magazine], January 24,  2000
See  http://www.forbes.com/forbes/00/0124/6502036a.htm
*************************************************
Math Myopia
By John Allen Paulos

An uproar over soft teaching methods shouldn't blind us to the fact that
mathematics does not have to be boring.

"Ambition, Distraction, Uglification, and Derision" is how Lewis Carroll
referred to addition, subtraction, multiplication and division. Although
most people resonate with this repugnance toward computation, most would
also grant its frequent necessity.

This tension underlies the latest skirmish in the simmering Math War. The
issue is the proper place of computation and algorithms (step-by-step
procedures) in the school curriculum. What, in particular, is their relation
to such often neglected skills as understanding graphs, interpreting
probability, modeling situations, applying mathematical
concepts in other domains or estimating and comparing magnitudes?

Textbooks and curriculums that attempt to foster the skills mentioned above
have been criticized as insufficiently rigorous. When the Department of
Education recently endorsed some of these new curriculums as "exemplary," a
group of prominent mathematicians published a letter to Education Secretary
Richard Riley claiming that many of the recommended books and programs
neglect basic algorithms.

This might seem a parochial controversy were it not for the social cost of
our arithmetical failings--clerks who are perplexed by discounts and sales
taxes, medical personnel who have difficulty reckoning correct dosages,
quality control managers who don't understand simple statistics, voters who
can't recognize trade-offs between contrary desiderata and journalists who
are sometimes oblivious to serious risks but apoplectic over trivial ones.

Although there is no real opposition between understanding concepts and
mastering algorithms, extreme positions are easy to parody. Assigning 500
 long-division problems to elementary school students is a sure way to
stultify them. So is requiring older students to factor 500 polynomials in
algebra class or to differentiate 500 functions in calculus class.

On the other hand, the reformist endeavor (with which I've been associated)
to tell stories, describe applications, play games and naturally embed
mathematical insights and ideas into everyday life can also be mocked.
Thoughtlessly implemented, it can lead to a feel-good,
wishy-washy ineffectiveness. A new "aha" experience and engaging vignette
can't be required for every problem, and a mere glimmer of the idea
generally isn't sufficient to secure numerical answers.

The proper balance depends on the student's age and background, and the
specific algorithm. There is no royal road to mathematical education,
certainly not one capable of being reduced to a column. Despite common
belief, arithmetic is not easy (see the problem at the bottom of this page);
nor are "higher-level" subjects necessarily difficult. Some
"elementary" algorithms, such as those for dealing with fractions, may be
drudgery if they are not presented well, but they are mathematically
significant and essential to real understanding. No stories about combining
parts of pies or salaries, for example, can replace the formal rules for
finding 2/7+3/11.

Acknowledging that there are glaring weaknesses in some of the new
recommended programs, I'm pleased that they stress applications and concepts
and do not place an undue emphasis on rote repetition. We should no more be
teaching our children to try to compete with  $5 calculators than we should
be training them to dig ditches with hand shovels.

In arithmetic the stories and applications should set the stage and provide
motivation for understanding the algorithms. The many good people on
opposite sides of the Math War should recompute their strategies.

Problem:  Imagine buying 100 pounds of potatoes and being told that they're
99% water. After the potatoes have been left outdoors for a day, you're told
that they're now 98% water. What is the weight of these slightly dehydrated
potatoes?

Answer:  50 pounds. Since 99% of the original 100 pounds of potatoes is
water, only 1 pound is "pure potato stuff." Hence this 1 pound must
constitute 2% of the P pounds of partially dehydrated potatoes remaining,
which means P equals 50 pounds.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

September 2016
June 2016
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
March 2015
October 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
June 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
August 2008
July 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
October 2006
September 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LIST.UVM.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager