Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

[Phys-L] Math phobia (Was: Legitimate Phys-L topics.)



Certainly the large amount of just drilling for the tests is a huge problem.
And this drilling is actually counterproductive. ETS found that when
computers are used for drill student understanding goes down, but when used
for exploration it goes up. The best schools do not do the drilling, but
the lower schools engage in it heavily. It does have an immediate effect in
improving test scores, at the expense of attitudes, and thinking ability.

A lot of foreign schools mix the curricula up, so that science and math are
taught together. Physics, chemistry and biology are not separate subject,
but are mixed together. So application and algorithms are taught both at
the same time.

One important factor in math phobia is the level of thinking. It has gone
down probably about 2 grades in the US. If students lack proportional
reasoning ability, they will not understand and be able to apply a lot of
math, including fractions. Just teaching ratios does not work for most
students. They dutifully memorize the alorithms, but don't really
understand them. They do not "see" when things are proportional, so many
simple ideas become opaque and force them to memorize each equation rather
than applying general concepts.

Going back to Shayer&Adey, they use applications to teach the thinking
skills. Essentially they apply the learning cycle where students explore
ideas using physical examples, and then they apply the new concepts to
applications. At NO time is there any drill, and the teacner NEVER tells
them the answer. Instead they figure it out. They use a combination of
applications which range over all science, and build the general
math/science ideas in sequence. The result is an increase in standarized
test scores several years later.

The other experiment which can show how to improve math teaching is the
Benezit experiment where the superintendant took memorized math out of the
early grades and instead engaged students in thinking exercises. Then the
memorized math was put back in around the 4th or 5th grade. The result was
a cohort of students who tested at grade level in 5th grade, but also had
the ability to think and reason much better. Unfortunately it was
terminated because the parents on the good side of the tracks did not like
it. It was not a failed experiment, but rather a terminated one. The big
problem with implementing this is that the state mandate prevents this type
of expermintation.

I submit that once students understand math, they will like it. But as it
is currently taught as a series of fixed recipes, only those students who
already have the thinking skills will like it. Most people like doing what
they are competent at, and dislike what they can not do. Certainly math
phobia is promoted by parents and others. That society has a big effect can
not be denied. The Welsh value male choirs and traditionally you are not
considered to be a man unless you are in a choir. As a result, every little
town has traditionally had an all male choir. In the US, singing and
dancing are often considered to be unmanly so choirs and dance troups tend
to be heavily female. Parents traditionally discouraged women from going
into science, so part of the lack of female scientists is due to this.
There is still stereotype threat in some fields of science, and I have
personally witnessed men who resented women who were better than them.

It turns out that research has shown teachers who are given good materials
and short inservices can implement changed methods of teaching, but teachers
given longer inservices of several days, but no materials can change. While
certification may help, it will be of no benefit if the teachers still use
the traditional methods. I had to fight with teachers who were certified,
but were dumb in many ways. We need teachers who are both competent in the
subject and also competent in the pedagogy which improves thinking. But
existing teachers can be retrained using extensive workshops a la Modeling.
In addition the others can be partially reformed by giving them good
materials and short term training in using those materials. The Modeling
approach may be better because it empoweres teachers to act like scientists
and figure out what is going on and how to improve the class. Shayer&Adey
use timed intensive training where the teachers get an inservice every month
on Thinking Science. In addition the teachers are observed and get
individual help along the way to implement the program correctly. There is
no substitute for good methods and materials.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX


"The math... the math... the math..." Oh...
My...God......Yes. A resounding YES! That's all I hear,
every day. "I HATE MATH. I CAN'T DO MATH."

It has to go back to several factors... the lack of certified
math teachers in elementary school + parents who transmit
that attitude to their children + the general anti-academic
attitude in this country in general + (and this is very
controversial...) the way math is taught nowadays to prepare
for high stakes testing turns them off from an early age.
(Yes, I know I will raise a few 'hackles' with that statement
and the previous one)

What say you all?



On Jan 6, 2014, at 11:37 AM, Bill Nettles wrote:

Richard,
Is there any required class that all students enjoy?

As one of my colleagues says regarding the gen-ed physical
science course, "My goal is to move them from antagonism to
apathy." Of course, he actually does much more than that.
What is interesting is that the students who had high school
outside the US have no trouble with the course (it's actually
a step below what they had in HS) while US students (public,
private, or home-school) whine about "the math."