Re: What's "Developmentally Appropriate"?

[Jack Uretsky <jlu@HEP.ANL.GOV>]

Great!  Maybe, Larry, you will consent to continue your G/P role, for a
bit.  I'd like to know, for starters,
        1.  How much set theory did you remember when you entered college?
(that's not a very precise question, but perhaps you can give us a
flavor).
        2.  Have you ever had a course in: set theory, number theory,
probability theory or real analysis?  If so, can you estimate how much you
were helped by your early exposure to set theory.
        3.  Are you presently fluent in Boolean operations?  Can you
analyze logic circuits, for example?  If so, when you learned these skills
did you have a sense of deja vu going back to your elementary school days.
        4.  What do you consider is the highest level math text that you
can read casually (like a novel)?

        You will not be graded on this exam!

        My "deja vu" question was prompted by my experience in learning
Romanian, when I spent 5 months in  the country in 1970.  My high school
latin, from 32 years earlier, came flooding back to me.  It was an amazing
experience, because up to that time I had always thougbt of myself as
having very little propensity for languages.






On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Larry Smith wrote:

> 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

--
"Don't push the river, it flows by itself"
                                Frederick Perls