Re: What's "Developmentally Appropriate"?

[Larry Smith <larry.smith@SNOW.EDU>]

At 11:30 PM -0500 10/12/03, Jack Uretsky wrote:
>        I'm having a sense of deja vu all over again - going back to the
> new math of the 'sixties.  That started when some math profs discovered
> that they could teach youngsters to sound knowledgeable in set theory.  So
> they persuaded the elementary math teachers to start using the language of
> set theory - the reverse of Arons' concept first, name afterwards.  The
> curse is still with us, the elementary school textbooks still require the
> teachers to talk about "solution sets" instead of "answers" for problems.
> And my local elementary school district insists on emphasising math
> vocabulary as an important feature of math education, although those of us
> who live and work with the the stuff are happy enough to speak of "solving
> that mother" in lieu of "seeking solution seets".

I don't think it is disagreeing with Aarons to claim that correct language
helps pedagogy. I still like to use and teach correct language usage as an
aid to understanding.

Disclaimer:  I was one of the guinea pigs of the new math as a kid in the
'60's, and I liked it.

Larry