PC Math

[Baruch Menachem]

Michelle Malkin is on a little Jihad today against Mayan Math.
Mayan Math in US schools

The laudable goal is to get the kids more engaged, but this kind of thing works real badly in practice. My son was exposed to lattice multiplication in 4th grade, and it set him back a whole lot. He brought his home work, and it confused the heck out of me, and he lost ground for the year.

I am all for exposure to interesting varied ideas, but math is more important that fuzzy feelings of goodwill.

I am wiling to concede the Mayans were pretty good at astronomy. But I am not interested in astronomy at the 4th grade level, I am interested in understanding solutions.

 

[AkronGuy]

What use does Mayan math have in today's society ?

 

[Annie]

What use does Mayan math have in today's society ?

Nothing. How Not to Teach Math by Matthew Clavel

Matthew Clavel
How Not to Teach Math
New York’s chancellor Klein’s plan doesn’t compute.
7 March 2003
It wasn’t working. We’d gone through six straight wrong answers, and now the kids were tired of feeling lost. It was only October, and already my fourth-grade public school class in the South Bronx was demoralized. Day after day of going over strange, seemingly disconnected math lessons had squelched my students’ interest in the subject.

Then, quietly, 10-year-old David spoke up. “Mr. Clavel, no one understands this stuff.” He looked up at me with a defeated expression; other children nodded pleadingly. We had clearly reached a crossroads. How would Mr. Clavel, a young teacher, inexperienced but trying hard, react to David’s statement—so obvious to everyone in the class that it didn’t even require seconding?

“Look,” I began, sighing deeply. “Math isn’t half as hard as you all probably think right now.” A few kids seemed relieved—at least I wasn’t just denying their problem. “There are different ways to teach it,” I continued. “I don’t want to do this either . . . so we’re not going to—at least most of the time.” I was thinking out loud now, and many of the children looked startled. What did I mean? We weren’t going to learn math? “We can use these math books when we need them, but I’m going to figure out different ways to teach you the most important things.”

If school officials knew how far my lessons would deviate from the school district-mandated math program in the months ahead, they probably would have fired me on the spot. But boy, did my kids need a fresh approach. Since kindergarten, most of them had been taught math using this same dreadful curriculum, called Everyday Mathematics—a slightly older version of a program that New York City schools chancellor Joel Klein has now unwisely chosen for most of Gotham’s public elementary schools; the district had phased in Everyday Mathematics grade by grade, and it had just reached fourth grade during my first year of teaching.

The curriculum’s failure was undeniable: not one of my students knew his or her times tables, and few had mastered even the most basic operations; knowledge of multiplication and division was abysmal. Perhaps you think I shouldn’t have rejected a course of learning without giving it a full year (my school had only recently hired me as a 23-year-old Teach for America corps member). But what would you do, if you discovered that none of your fourth graders could correctly tell you the answer to four times eight?

The curriculum derives from a pedagogical philosophy that goes by several names—“Constructivist Math,” “New-New Math,” and, to its detractors, “Fuzzy Math.” I’ll stick with “Fuzzy Math,” since the critics are right. Nothing about Fuzzy Math makes much sense from a teaching standpoint.

...

 

[Annie]

Those in their 50's and 60's remember when 'new math' was introduced. Parents were unable to help their children, the processes in the books didn't match up with what they knew. Oh they could get the answer, they knew how to solve, but didn't have the right 'proofs.'

So, those kids for the most part couldn't help 'their children' with math, because they sucked at math. They memorized for tests but hadn't a clue to how they got there. The kids who 'succeeded'? Well they learned from their parents, they got math and by high school the teachers let them show the proof any way that worked, (those teachers having been raised with the parents' methodologies didn't hurt).

Now for the past 20 years or so, 'fuzzy math' has reared its head. Very popular in university education departments and textbook publishers. Every unit contains some basic math, algebra, trigonometry, and geometry. Have a 3rd grade unit on fractions? Throw in some algebra and geometry. Somehow the kids are going to 'pick up the processes' of all along the way. Guess what? 8th graders cannot tell you spot on what 8 X 7 is. Seriously.

 

[xsited1]

Michelle Malkin is on a little Jihad today against Mayan Math.
Mayan Math in US schools

The laudable goal is to get the kids more engaged, but this kind of thing works real badly in practice. My son was exposed to lattice multiplication in 4th grade, and it set him back a whole lot. He brought his home work, and it confused the heck out of me, and he lost ground for the year.

I am all for exposure to interesting varied ideas, but math is more important that fuzzy feelings of goodwill.

I am wiling to concede the Mayans were pretty good at astronomy. But I am not interested in astronomy at the 4th grade level, I am interested in understanding solutions.

Base 20. Now isn't that special? This should be reserved for the College level and be taught in the History department.

 

[Charles Stucker]

Ever see a kid who could not do algebra try to take a Calculus class?
If they cannot do masic arithmetic, they cannot (generally) do algebra, but the PC and progressive retards 'know' they are right and force crap like this onto the grade schools, then complain that no one knows math.
Who woulda thunk it?