A Reader Response for the Article, “Illuminating the Beauty, Humanity, Intrigue in Mathematics,” posted by Peter Pappas on November 29th.
Link: http://www.peterpappas.com/2011/11/illuminated-mathematics-students-find-beauty-humanity-intrigue.htmlAs I read, ““Everyone, open your books to chapter 7 section 2 as we will be learning how to factor degree 3 polynomials.”
I can imagine this statement being said, in some fashion, within the vast majority of high school math classrooms across our seemingly broken educational system. Almost all of us have at some point taught something that was completely irrelevant to the lives of our students. And we knew it!”
I can imagine this statement being said, in some fashion, within the vast majority of high school math classrooms across our seemingly broken educational system. Almost all of us have at some point taught something that was completely irrelevant to the lives of our students. And we knew it!”
I want to immediately take issue more than back up the argument. I do believe the system is broken, but primarily because of the economy, lack of parental support and null/lack of identity and care of students. They don’t understand their place in the world and don’t care to learn. They were not supported growing up in so many ways (including and especially educationally), don’t know how to get back on track and due to a lack of discipline over the course of their life would prefer the easy way out. China is successful where we are not because they easily counter these sentiments in ways both familial and governmental.”
Everything we learn in school is not always applicable immediately, later in life and may never in a million years be relevant. It is however important in this way. It teaches us to question, it teaches us to use previous knowledge in all situations, to be SKEPTICAL. It teaches us PATIENCE. We learn these things because we don’t know what we are going up against and may need to know, even when they were not things needed to be known by our friends, family and strangers which tell us otherwise. Irrelevant learning is seen in hindsight. As I teach certain concepts I don’t always have the answer as to how students will need to utilize it in the future, but don’t want to rob them of the opportunity of not teaching those concepts. If I had never been taught everything I thought was worthless for myself and for students I would not be in the position I am now. Every day I have a greater understanding for important concepts in math, as well as for concepts in daily life and application. A student asked me once why he needed to find the slope for a graph he was looking at when he would never need to do that in real life. I had the option of making up a reason, but instead said, “I’m not sure, but will get back to you.” In another class that year I realized that there was no way I could explain a Pre Cal concept regarding minimums and maximums related to profit for companies without the understanding of slopes because the idea of tangents related back to that concept and was necessary for finding these critical points on the graphs. Needless to say I now answer in a varying number of ways, “I will get back to you,” “Here’s how you may need it in college/higher math”, “Critical thinking depends greatly on this...”
The article rings true as I read:
“Deep vs. Wide
There was a study published recently in Science Education (2009) that made a comparison between teachers who “sprinted” to cover all of the standards with teachers who slowed down and went deeper into the material. The students who “sprinted” ended up scoring higher on the standardized test due to covering more material. But the students who learned through the slower, in-depth approach earned higher grades in their college classes.”
This is a huge concern for me and is another hard thing to balance in education.
I understand the article was intended to show that we need multi-media, 21st Century, DIVERSE ways for teaching students and I WHOLE-HEARTEDLY agree. I push forward with the innovative ways for teaching students I know will be beneficial if we all (teachers and administration) get on board and on the same page. Meaning, we figure out how to integrate it correctly and collaboratively. But every once in a while I picture a stagnant, an army-like, robotic-like Chinese classroom which by high school listens well and can cooperate with the explorative learning environment which we wish to create; through that our success would be as high as the Chinese. Unfortunately it may be at the risk of the creativity and innovation attributed to Americans.
Everything we learn in school is not always applicable immediately, later in life and may never in a million years be relevant. It is however important in this way. It teaches us to question, it teaches us to use previous knowledge in all situations, to be SKEPTICAL. It teaches us PATIENCE. We learn these things because we don’t know what we are going up against and may need to know, even when they were not things needed to be known by our friends, family and strangers which tell us otherwise. Irrelevant learning is seen in hindsight. As I teach certain concepts I don’t always have the answer as to how students will need to utilize it in the future, but don’t want to rob them of the opportunity of not teaching those concepts. If I had never been taught everything I thought was worthless for myself and for students I would not be in the position I am now. Every day I have a greater understanding for important concepts in math, as well as for concepts in daily life and application. A student asked me once why he needed to find the slope for a graph he was looking at when he would never need to do that in real life. I had the option of making up a reason, but instead said, “I’m not sure, but will get back to you.” In another class that year I realized that there was no way I could explain a Pre Cal concept regarding minimums and maximums related to profit for companies without the understanding of slopes because the idea of tangents related back to that concept and was necessary for finding these critical points on the graphs. Needless to say I now answer in a varying number of ways, “I will get back to you,” “Here’s how you may need it in college/higher math”, “Critical thinking depends greatly on this...”
The article rings true as I read:
“Deep vs. Wide
There was a study published recently in Science Education (2009) that made a comparison between teachers who “sprinted” to cover all of the standards with teachers who slowed down and went deeper into the material. The students who “sprinted” ended up scoring higher on the standardized test due to covering more material. But the students who learned through the slower, in-depth approach earned higher grades in their college classes.”
This is a huge concern for me and is another hard thing to balance in education.
I understand the article was intended to show that we need multi-media, 21st Century, DIVERSE ways for teaching students and I WHOLE-HEARTEDLY agree. I push forward with the innovative ways for teaching students I know will be beneficial if we all (teachers and administration) get on board and on the same page. Meaning, we figure out how to integrate it correctly and collaboratively. But every once in a while I picture a stagnant, an army-like, robotic-like Chinese classroom which by high school listens well and can cooperate with the explorative learning environment which we wish to create; through that our success would be as high as the Chinese. Unfortunately it may be at the risk of the creativity and innovation attributed to Americans.