Authors were preoccupied by/what anxieties were discernible in the 3 articles from 1980-1981? - the concept of raising mathematicians, scientists, physicists - bringing different perspectives to mathematical education - applying the human concept to mathematical education - differentiating themselves from the field of mathematics
Why did these authors have these anxieties? - justifying their existence as scientific and not fluffy
Are these still our anxieties in math education? What if anything has changed? - supply and demand has completely disappeared … too much supply and not enough demand for mathematicians - still lacks a supply of mathematics educators … or shall we say passionate mathematics educators - applying the human concept to mathematical education is still a huge anxiety … the need for your students to achieve a certain level at a certain time despite learning differences and social, psychological, and philosophical context - daily mathematics educators are challenged by critics and students who have fears or can't see the application, value or personal connection to these studies
What references were unfamiliar? (Let's delve into these!) - MAPS-tetrahedral model however the article did a good job of explaining - new mathematics vs. back to the basics - theories of the 1980's - lack of teachers in the mathematics educational research
How does our knowledge of math education at that period ground our work today? - focusing on the whole child, the human aspect - there are now multiple acceptable strategies for students to explore their path to solutions of problems - educators now use an interdisciplinary approach
The main anxieties we found in the three articles all revolved around the theme of Identity. Higginson focuses on this in his article, trying to provide a model with which to frame mathematics in so that future teachers and researchers can ground their practice. This anxiety is also reflected in the other two articles, which discuss such concerns about how to teach mathematics, how to research mathematics, and the importance of mathematics in our increasingly technological society.
Through our discussion we feel as though many of these anxieties persist today. Some quotes to support this: "we know that most of what is taught is not learnt," "the failure in learning mathematics is well documented and is in sharp contrast to the growing need to our technological society for adults who can handle math fluently", "the math teacher does little more than flash mathematical facts at their pupils"
Some unfamiliar references we found were; Piaget, New Math, Gulliver's Travels
1. What anxieties are discernable in these 3 articles in these 3 articles from 1980-1981? Why? - Anxieties that students are developing a universal mathematical language - Kilpatrick: Research in math education not objective (can’t be applied elsewhere) - Higginson mentions that math knowledge is emphasized during MAPS, but the remaining factors are ignored (at that time) - Similar in flavor to types of learners? - Teachers not included as partners in research
2. Are these still our anxieties in math education? What (if anything) has changed? - Still a concern that researchers are doing this top-down
3. What references were unfamiliar? (Let’s delve into these!) - New Math - “Stressing” and “ignoring” are the two components of the act of abstraction: stressing one characteristic while ignore another (ignore that a cabbage is uneven, but stress that it is round)
We questioned student motivation to learn mathematics, and whether this is the same as parents'. Isolating aspects of mathematics may be more scientifically justifiable (may be easier to come up with theory), but de-contextualizing learning creates a host of other problems.
We also discussed the concerns around the validity of research which arose and began discussing anxieties we see in our students. There is a great emphasis on attaining a grade, and we wonder how we could inspire curiosity.
Language, we concluded, was also very important in efficient math communication, although many are guilty of using words without sufficient information to produce mathematical results (such as "cancelling"). "Borrowing" (when subtracting) is silly; it doesn't mean we will be "giving back" any numbers.
Some references which were unfamiliar included "New Math" and "stress"/"ignore", which we were able to investigate. We can share this during the class discussion.
Vanessa, Keri, Ozlum and Philippa
ReplyDeleteAuthors were preoccupied by/what anxieties were discernible in the 3 articles from 1980-1981?
- the concept of raising mathematicians, scientists, physicists
- bringing different perspectives to mathematical education
- applying the human concept to mathematical education
- differentiating themselves from the field of mathematics
Why did these authors have these anxieties?
- justifying their existence as scientific and not fluffy
Are these still our anxieties in math education? What if anything has changed?
- supply and demand has completely disappeared … too much supply and not enough demand for mathematicians
- still lacks a supply of mathematics educators … or shall we say passionate mathematics educators
- applying the human concept to mathematical education is still a huge anxiety … the need for your students to achieve a certain level at a certain time despite learning differences and social, psychological, and philosophical context
- daily mathematics educators are challenged by critics and students who have fears or can't see the application, value or personal connection to these studies
What references were unfamiliar? (Let's delve into these!)
- MAPS-tetrahedral model however the article did a good job of explaining
- new mathematics vs. back to the basics
- theories of the 1980's
- lack of teachers in the mathematics educational research
How does our knowledge of math education at that period ground our work today?
- focusing on the whole child, the human aspect
- there are now multiple acceptable strategies for students to explore their path to solutions of problems
- educators now use an interdisciplinary approach
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe main anxieties we found in the three articles all revolved around the theme of Identity. Higginson focuses on this in his article, trying to provide a model with which to frame mathematics in so that future teachers and researchers can ground their practice. This anxiety is also reflected in the other two articles, which discuss such concerns about how to teach mathematics, how to research mathematics, and the importance of mathematics in our increasingly technological society.
ReplyDeleteThrough our discussion we feel as though many of these anxieties persist today. Some quotes to support this: "we know that most of what is taught is not learnt," "the failure in learning mathematics is well documented and is in sharp contrast to the growing need to our technological society for adults who can handle math fluently", "the math teacher does little more than flash mathematical facts at their pupils"
Some unfamiliar references we found were; Piaget, New Math, Gulliver's Travels
For Alex, Murugan, Shan, Kevin, David H
ReplyDelete1. What anxieties are discernable in these 3 articles in these 3 articles from 1980-1981? Why?
- Anxieties that students are developing a universal mathematical language
- Kilpatrick: Research in math education not objective (can’t be applied elsewhere)
- Higginson mentions that math knowledge is emphasized during MAPS, but the remaining factors are ignored (at that time)
- Similar in flavor to types of learners?
- Teachers not included as partners in research
2. Are these still our anxieties in math education? What (if anything) has changed?
- Still a concern that researchers are doing this top-down
3. What references were unfamiliar? (Let’s delve into these!)
- New Math
- “Stressing” and “ignoring” are the two components of the act of abstraction: stressing one characteristic while ignore another (ignore that a cabbage is uneven, but stress that it is round)
We questioned student motivation to learn mathematics, and whether this is the same as parents'. Isolating aspects of mathematics may be more scientifically justifiable (may be easier to come up with theory), but de-contextualizing learning creates a host of other problems.
We also discussed the concerns around the validity of research which arose and began discussing anxieties we see in our students. There is a great emphasis on attaining a grade, and we wonder how we could inspire curiosity.
Language, we concluded, was also very important in efficient math communication, although many are guilty of using words without sufficient information to produce mathematical results (such as "cancelling"). "Borrowing" (when subtracting) is silly; it doesn't mean we will be "giving back" any numbers.
Some references which were unfamiliar included "New Math" and "stress"/"ignore", which we were able to investigate. We can share this during the class discussion.
Math 9 Curriculum Draft:
ReplyDeletehttps://curriculum.gov.bc.ca/curriculum/mathematics/9
Core Competencies:
https://curriculum.gov.bc.ca/competencies
Curriculum Drafts:
https://curriculum.gov.bc.ca/curriculum