Comments on: "Reform Math" Leaves Some Perplexed
Add a Comment
- carly710 writes:
"I've been in stores where, if the cash register goes down, the average teen can't even figure out much change to give... "
Logic meltdown there--an experience where a stressed-out clerk dealing with equipment failure fumbles with change, somehow generalizes to the "average teen." It doesn't work that way.
Logic can be included with math. Would remedial Everyday Math help here? - Reply to this comment
- The story is certainly incomplete. It would have been much more telling had they interviewed mathematicians and scientists, including college professors who do not support these types of methods. Progress is important but don't confuse these reforms with true progress. Progress is a step in a better direction while reform can simply be a change that is not necessarily a better one.
And as for Apollo... your point speaks for itself. Those scientists had a strong foundation in standard mathematics which is exactly what allowed them to free their mind for more creative and world changing thinking.
"A violinist who still worries about fingering positions cannot hope to impress with the beauty of tone or the elegance of phrasing, and an opera singer without the requisite high notes would try in vain to stir our souls with searing passion. In good art as in good mathematics, technique and conception go hand in hand." %u2013
Hung-Hsi Wu - Reply to this comment
- I've been in stores where, if the cash register goes down, the average teen can't even figure out much change to give when subtractng $7.99 from $10.00! If this is "Reform Math", please, teach old fashioned math also!
- Reply to this comment
- You're right that this is a badly researched and written article. Seems more designed to get reactions from people who will base their opinion on the limited and slanted ideas in the article alone. Sometimes I wonder if CBS does this for entertainment on holiday weekends, just to see what kind of frothing-at-the-mouth posts will be written?
Even the opening question is both silly and inflammatory: "Remember when there was only one right answer to a math problem?"
Of course for real math problems there is rarely a single right answer, then, now, or at any time. And "reasonably close" has always been the goal.
Again, seems the author intentionally confused math and arithmetic and throws in an anecdote about one student having trouble with subtraction and hopes readers will connect it all somehow and get riled up. - Reply to this comment
- In college I took (and made A & B grades) in upper level math courses through Calculus 3. Yet the stuff my middle-schoolers bring home often baffles me, and them too. Math should be about obtaining exact, reproducable answers. The methods they are using are crapp.
- Reply to this comment
- bobgee_1999 is right. We need reform journalism. This article does not come reasonably close to explaining "Everyday Mathematics." My kids learn using this method, and they still have to memorize basic math facts and come up with the exact answer.
Look at what this article actually says. It's an anecdote from one parent, followed by quotes from the textbook author, and statements saying that some disagree with her. There's not enough of substance here to make an informed judgment about the topic. - Reply to this comment
- Primary fact: math is not arithmetic. Math is a science, arithmetic is a skill. Everyone needs arithmetic. Traditional methods are failing--we graduate students who can calculate but not think or reason or estimate or form abstract models. In an era when machines do most of the calculation, this is a big problem.
Reform math has been around for centuries in the advanced thinkers (Einstein, Ford, etc.) and upper level courses, but now we need to get it to students earlier.
All inventors operate by estimation, abstraction, hunches, guesses.
The Apollo program was based solidly on guesswork--but very brilliant guesswork. The computers of the time were very limited, sensors were noisy, and components were large and heavy-- the engineers had to make many, many guesses, more importantly to understand what could be guessed, what could be trusted and how much. If exact calculations had been required, Apollo would have been impossible, same with almost any engineering project then or now.
Reform math is needed because computers are everywhere and both a blessing and a curse. A blessing because things that were very hard are now simple and a 1st grader today has access to more computer power than the space program had. A curse because punching buttons can mislead students into thinking that the numbers on the display all mean something, when often they do not.
Times change, education must change. Deal with it, don't hurt the students of today by undermining their educators. - Reply to this comment
- I have taught Everyday Math (EM) to first graders for the past 8 years. We were all hesitant to teach it at first because it was actually a lot more work. It would have been so much easier to give the students workbooks where they answered addition problem after addition problem. That kind of math only proves the student can memorize.
The video that showed the mother and son was extremely misleading. If in 2nd grade,using EM, that boy could not do that example, there is more of a problem than any math program can fix. In EM (in 1st grade) we show the students how to get 10-7 in multiple ways (including using fingers as the mother did). EM encourages memorization also. We have a game called "Beat the Calculator" which proves to students that it is a lot faster to know 10-7=3 than to push the numbers in the calculator.
Basically, Everyday Math encourages thinking. Many parents are against this type of Math because it is "different" than how they learned. These may be the same people who have trouble operating their cell phone but, yet, they still have one.
The test scores for NCLB may be lower because the government hasn't caught up with real-world reality either. The test items are not relevent to today's problems in today's world. - Reply to this comment
- Jonas Salk, Alexander Graham Bell, Albert Einstein, Henry Ford, Howard Hughes, just to name a few. Traditional math worked pretty damned good for them. Imagine where the Apollo program would be with "reform" math, they would be floating near the edge of the universe by now. Geez, we thought it was close enough.
- Reply to this comment
- One of the first comments I read here asked "Why is it that the older generation wants to be sure that current students are as badly educated as they were?"
I beg to differ with the contention that the "traditional" methods are inferior. My own considerable experience has proven time and again that the older, traditional methods are far superior to the methods taught during the past several decades.
The traditional methods produced a society capable of sending men to the moon, while the current "average" college graduates are all too often too math-challenged to even successfully accomplish something as simple as correctly balancing their check book. - Reply to this comment
