Making Science and Math Kid Friendly? 620
mtspim asks: "I work for a non-profit organization that creates interactive math and science curriculum materials for kids and their instructors. Even though we have seen kids learn difficult topic more easily by using a computational approach to learning, most instructors are reluctant to introduce these new ways of thinking into their curriculum. What do Slashdot users think are the best ways to help revitalize math and science programs in our schools, or should we stick to the old conventional methods to learning?"
*sigh* (Score:5, Insightful)
Has anyone ever tried making the *kids* science and math-friendly?
Re:*sigh* (Score:5, Interesting)
Math and science *ARE* kid-friendly, and kids ARE science and math friendly. Inherently. You ever seen a six month old exploring her world, seeing what things feel like, taste like, what she can do with her hands? That's the seed of science, right there.
The problem is, science *TEACHERS* are not kid-friendly. Most of them, no matter how compassionate and pro-children they believe they are, are inherently vicious and sadistic people. They can't recognize this fact, of course, and neither can any of the other adults - but just ask an 8 year old sometime.
Re:*sigh* (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:*sigh* (Score:5, Insightful)
Somewhere around first or second grade, kids go from learning equals fun to learning equals work.
About that same time, learning goes from mostly experiential to mostly abstract.
In junior high and high school you'll hear a common rant - "Why do I have to learn this? I'll never use it in real life!"
I think that rant sums up the problem. The connection between real life and knowledge is broken very early on in our educational system.
Most adults are used to thinking in very complex (to students) abstract terms. They can't imagine or remember how to think with a more limited set of abstract tools.
Shoot, many adults treat children condescendingly because they feel that children cannot understand what is going on. How many times have you heard an adult (usually a parent) say, "That's just the way it is."
Sometimes that happens because an adult is just too lazy to sit down and explain things. However, a lot of the time is because the adult has NO CLUE about how to explain something in terms that are consistent, correct, and within the grasp of the audience.
That is of course, if the adult really knows. How many times have you heard an adult say to a child, "I don't know. Are you interested in finding out with me?"
I think one solution to this problem is to combine experiential learning and abstract learning. I used to do this on my own simply because I was interested in finding out what I could do with my new abstract tools.
However, helping kids make that connection is the key. In doing that, you actually foster creativity, problem solving skills, and encourage curiosity. Shoot - the teacher might even learn a thing or two along the way.
This concept shouldn't be restricted to math and science. How about history? If a teacher could relate historical and cultural past to the way groups of people act now, we might understand rather than hate. We might even move toward solving more difficult problems (sociological, psychological).
Nah - It'll never happen. However, I still remain the idealist.
Re:*sigh* (Score:4, Interesting)
"even if you do not use this in your job, this material exercises your brain. it helps you to think so you can cut through the garbage in the world and see what is really going on. by working at this, you will not be held hostage to the great manipulators in the world because you will have the thought processes in place that allow you to see that those people, groups, and companies are just giving you a bunch of lies"
Re:*sigh* (Score:2)
My science teachers, as far back as I can remember and with only one exception (HS Physics) have always been the uber-friendly, wacky, goofy type who suppliment their class notes with Far Side comments. Then of course, there was Mr. Woody who was fond of RedHotChiliPeppers references when discussing electrons and covalence.
Sometimes I wi
Re:*sigh* (Score:5, Interesting)
And why [paulgraham.com]
Re:*sigh* (Score:2)
Oh yeah, that's an unbiased opinion. Nobody'd ever be able to poison a kids perception.
Re:*sigh* (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, I wouldn't go *that* far but I agree with your general point that teachers are the key link. In my experience, both as a student and a teacher (college, graduate, some highschool), the single most important determinant of whether a kid pays attention in class is whether the teacher is excited about the material or not.
Enthusiasm is infectious, especially flowing from teachers, who are figures of authority even if they're not personally liked, to students. You could lecture about the most esoteric or objectly boring topic you can imagine, but if you (as a teacher) find it interesting, and convey this to your students, they'll come along for the ride.
Re:*sigh* (Score:5, Insightful)
Math and science *ARE* kid-friendly, and kids ARE science and math friendly. Inherently.
Science more so than maths alas. I agree that Maths has a lot to recommend it as something fun to learn, but there is a problem inherant in maths that doesn't exist in other subjects such as History, Art or English.
The problem is that [almost] everything you learn in Maths builds on the last thing you learnt and it's very easy to fall behind in a bad way. This is why many people think they're bad at the subject. They miss a step or two and suddenly nothing they're supposed to be learning makes sense. This is less so for Science and hardly a problem at all in other GCSE-level subjects (GCSEs are the exams you do in the UK at 16).
I'm helping out a school next week by teaching some supplemental maths. Personally, I like maths but I'm good at it. It's hard to say which came first. They go together.
Re:*sigh* (Score:2)
That's a terrible generalization. From experience in high school, there are good teachers and bad teachers. The best teacher I had (who was the head of department) had designed these laminated work cards that every student had access to. Each card contained all the instructions required to complete a complete lesson (copy thi
Re:*sigh* (Score:5, Informative)
Wow, that's a pretty heavy opinion. Of course, you make this statement based on exactly what experience you've had with science teachers? Having a couple bad experiences does not entitle you to denounce science teachers as a whole.
Let me give you a flip-side example. I am a science teacher, and I have been for six years now. My dad was a science teacher (now retiring), and I've worked with some really great science teachers at our high school. These are the kind of people that really make a difference in the lives of students, that stay after school to help students make up labs or work on problems they didn't understand. We have a science computer lab with loads and loads of exploratory and remedial software, and we bring in two extra science teachers twice a year to help tutor our students who haven't passed the science portion of the Ohio 9th Grade Proficiency Test. One of our chemistry teachers who retired last year had a 100% passing rate over nearly 20 years for her students who took the Chemistry AP exam. You can't achieve that sort of thing without dedication and trust, and certainly not if your students feel you are "vicious and sadistic".
While there is no question that there are bad science teachers out there, just as there are bad teachers in every subject, I can't accept a statement that most science teachers are not kid-friendly when I see our science department busting their asses to stay current, relevant, interesting and enthusiastic. Sorry, but I just have to call bullshit on you.
Re:*sigh* (Score:5, Interesting)
For the 9th Grade Proficiency Tests (which students are required to pass in order to graduate in Ohio), our students in higher-level classes take it early in 8th grade so they get it out of the way and can focus on college prep, honors and AP classes. Our high school in particular has a ton of activities and sports, from Honor Society to Wildelife Ambassadors, from a bible club to a step team (which is particularly popular). We even hold LAN parties in the cafeteria once a month. Our school certainly isn't perfect - by definition, no school can meet all the individual needs of every student; you'd need one teacher per student - but we do try to get every student involved in some way past just being another body in a seat. We even started making a list of all of our students and passing it around from teacher to teacher to find out who's involved in what activity, and see if there's any way we can reach kids who aren't involved. You'd be surprised, but this is generally the case at most schools, it's just that some schools are more successful and effective than others.
I agree that teachers aren't sadistic. Some teachers care about the education process. Almost none care about students as individuals.
Again, I have to call bullshit on this one too. Until you go through teacher training and have to put up with the infinite amount of paperwork, the unreasonable (and unfunded) demands of out-of-touch legislators, and experiences with parents that range from wonderful to strange to threatening, and all of these things outside of dealing with students, you simply can't make a statement like that with any degree of accuracy. Believe it or not, the vast majority of teachers I've met get into education because they care about kids. Fifteen, twenty, thirty years down the line, that original reason for getting into education tends to fade, but the really great teachers are able to keep it going and use their experience and expertise to truly master their craft. I can easily list many, many examples of our teachers caring about students as individuals; I'm sure similar things happen at schools all over the country, but we usually only hear about negative incidents on the news like shootings and drug busts and teachers fooling around with students, primarily because those things grab more viewers than "Local Teacher Gives Poor Students Rides Home After School So They Can Participate In After-School Activities." Two teachers bought one of our students a winter jacket because he had to walk about 2.5 miles to school every morning, but stuff like that doesn't (and won't) make the news.
If you're concerned about students getting more personal interaction, I would encourage you to stop by and volunteer at your local school and help out. Nearly every school needs help, even the ones that are financially well-off. Some of them have non-profit volunteer groups that come in and work one-on-one with kids; we have a group with us called City Conquest that will do anything from running copies for teachers to talking to kids with problems in private or even doing presentations in class. Immediately after the September 11th attacks, their group was called to New York to help out, and when they came back, they did presentations to social studies classes about how they helped.
Either way, it's one thing to claim that no teachers care about students as individuals, but it's another thing to go into a school and try to make a difference.
Re:*sigh* (Score:5, Interesting)
I think this type of thing is why "Beakman's World" and "Bill Nye the Science Guy" are popular, because they give the audience something besides an otherwise sterile subject to focus on. It would be good for more teachers to learn such techniques.
Re:*sigh* (Score:3, Insightful)
I think that far too much time is spent on the dull early parts, although you do need to learn them. It's funny, in a sad way, to look at people who can multiply numbers at incredible speeds but who boggle at a simple quadratic equation.
Re:*sigh* (Score:4, Insightful)
Unfortunately, now that schools are subjected to evaluation by paper and pencil tests, not long term success of students, it might be a survival skill to make rote learning more efficient.
Re:*sigh* (Score:5, Insightful)
People today have been brainwashed by MTV and all that crap into thinking you should grow up and want to be a rap star or a movie star, and that people that like math and science and engineering are rejects of society, in America, being dumb is good, look at all the idiotic business majors that all they can do is talk smooth.
It's interesting that everybody wants to have new cell phones or faster computers, however no one wants to engineer these products.
Another thing, get rid of calculators in school, make kids learn how to do math rather than relying on a calculator.
One thing to look into is Vedic math:
http://hinduism.about.com/library/weekly/aa062901
For a brief intro. It actually is quite interesting, I have studied it a little bit, it does seem to be an interesting approach to mathematics.
Re:*sigh* (Score:5, Insightful)
While you didn't state exactly to what degree you meant this, do you really think it's a good idea? I teach high school math, and while I might decry the lack of mental math skills that many of the students have (i.e. not being able to multiply 50 * 50, or 16 divided by 2), I wouldn't say lose the calculator.
The question is whether you think a student is learning math, or if a student is learning critical thinking (not that the two are mutually exclusive.) I'd rather have a student who can setup a word problem into the relevant equations and punch the relevant keys on their calculator, rather than a trained monkey who can multiply a and b in their head.
At the other end of the spectrum, graphing calculators are an awesome classroom tool. Being able to graph a function near instantly, rather than calculating five or more y values for graphs, finding some graph paper, and then plotting the points lets one actually teach. Using the old paper and pencil method you'll be lucky to get one done in ten minutes the first time you're teaching it, and then if you want them to actually learn to plot it by hand, it'll take a good 3 days or so of class time before most of your class has grasped it.
With the graphing calculators, you can easily get into really looking at the graphs. You can even write simple programs to teach concepts such as slope (i.e. have the calculator draw a line and the student is prompted for the slope), intercepts, etc. This isn't even looking at how useful the calculators are for illustrating derivatives, integrals, rotational volumes, etc etc
Like I said, you didn't state exactly to what degree you'd like to eliminate the calculator, but that's a pretty extreme position . . .
Rephrased (Score:5, Insightful)
Stop glamorizing the politican, sports player and musician, on orders of magnitude over the scientist, engineer and general tinkerer.
Re:*sigh* (Score:4, Interesting)
Math and science aren't kid friendly!? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Math and science aren't kid friendly!? (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly; totally agree. Of course, it goes for any other subject as well.
I think the biggest advantage that parents have over teachers is that they are there in the less formal moments when something sparks their child's interest, and can enlarge on it right then and there, in a much more interesting way. I think it is absolutely vital to make use of these opportunities if you're going to get kids to build on their own inate interest in things, and ultimately foster their ability to teach themselves about things they find interesting (and to keep finding things interesting).
No matter how good your kid's school is, they will eventually get an uninspiring teacher who can easily crush their spirit unless they have already become independently inquisitive and driven (I'm thinking of Mr. Cantwell on The Wonder Years [imdb.com], who could turn the most violent and interesting science into a droll monotone). And when this does happen, then provide backup and encouragement.
Here are some examples:
Teach the teachers how to teach... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's instructors who rely on only one presentation technique all year who connect with only the students who respond to that technique, and end up having no way to bring the ones who get lost back into the fold.
Re:Teach the teachers how to teach... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Teach the teachers how to teach... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Teach the teachers how to teach... (Score:3, Interesting)
Stigmas (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Stigmas (Score:4, Interesting)
Good point! I think that more important than any computational or non-computational tool, the key is motivation! It seems to me that kids learn easier with software tools because it's "cool" (as opposed to a boring class taught by a guy writing on a blackboard). But then, why is the class boring? This is an important point: after computers become very common and are not "exciting" anymore, will we have to find another way to trick students into liking math?
Just my 0.2... And I'm not really sure I believe what I just said.
Re:Thats just it, you cannot control people. (Score:2)
Math became more and more abstract, but then people started to neglect the concrete... There should be a balance between the two. See the preface to Don Knuth's "Concrete Mathematics": he graduated in Math and was frustrated beause although he knew a lot of abstract stuff, he couldn't do the concrete math necessary to
Special programs for the smart ones (Score:5, Insightful)
As more and more resources are being allocated to "special ed" for those who underperform because such spending is mandatory under various laws, I notice that the programs for the overperformers are being cut back repeatedly because they are strictly optional. I wonder how many future whiz-kids we're losing to the fact that they're getting bored in too-dumb-for-them mainstream classes and therefore goofing off with their extra time instead of being given work that's at their actual mental level rather than their age's level.
Re:Special programs for the smart ones (Score:3, Insightful)
Same here. It was perhaps the only redeeming thing about my pre-college education, that there was at least an "effort" to teach brighter kids. It seemed to be mostly directed at the gradescho
Learning stuff earlier does not mean smarter. (Score:2, Interesting)
To be defined as a whiz kid you had to have learned to read and do math earlier. Guess what, earlier does not mean you'll develop into a smarter individual as an adult. Kids who pick up on stuff earlier should get extra attention?! So what about the genius who is in a regular class who may not have picked up on things early but then surpasses everyone in class later on like during highschool?
The problem with the current system you mention is that everything depends on how well you do in the first few grade
Re:Learning stuff earlier does not mean smarter. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Special programs for the smart ones (Score:2)
Re:Special programs for the smart ones (Score:2)
For example, when I was in 2nd Grade, I had advanced to the 3rd grade test in English. One time, I fell one correct answer short of advancing... and I had missed a question on spliting sentances into a "subject" and "predicate", as I had never been taught that. When
Re:If you are a whiz kid, learn outside of class. (Score:3, Insightful)
My School (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:My School (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is that all people learn differently. I suck at learning from books and am fairly smart. A mixed approach is needed to catch all the students.
Ideally, the approach would be molded to each person, but we don't have enough teachers for that and too many parents are too dumb to teach their own children properly.
Math is taught exactly in the worst way possible. (Score:4, Interesting)
Usually when we teach or do stuff we try to be as efficient and simple as possible yet with math this is not the case. We currently teach math as "problem solving". We teach it by having people solve pointless problems which they will never face and never remember the solutions for unless they are one of the rare people who actually enjoy solving problems and who actually enjoy working through calculations.
I enjoy computer work, but if I were to teach computers assuming everyone who uses one enjoys it as much as I do, I'd make everyone learn C, everyone learn the linux commandline, and everyone learn what every single component in the computer does.
Look, we all can't like the same things and in my opinion schools should focus more on the math that matters in life. Statistics, Addition and Subtraction, perhaps even some logic and discrete math. All which are more useful to the common man than calculus, algebra, geometry (perhaps some people do need geometry)
Basic math and basic english should be the primary goals of school. The other classes are simply a complete waste of time and only harm a person by preventing them from doing as well as they would have done if they focused on the basics.
The math we actually use in life should not be decided by the math experts, it should be decided by surveys which the government should conduct. Once we find out the math people use most in daily life that should be what we teach in school. If we want to learn any other math then we specialize in math and learn it in college or in AP math.
The problem with the school system is we expect a jack of all trades, as if a human can be good at every subject. In reality only several thousand go to Harvard, Yale or MIT, the rest go state schools, community college, or they never go to college at all. The majority of people simply don't need the math and never will go to a college or have a job which requires it. Statistics, working with money, and logic are the only types of math people use. Discrete math may also be useful for scientific or technical fields involving computers.
Re:Math is taught exactly in the worst way possibl (Score:2)
Beyond that, I think you are mostly right.
In general, I think the matter would be aided by a little more focus on raw logic at some level. It's hard to teach, but learning a little raw logic allows you to understand the majority of math with ease, and is essential to most all
Re:Math is taught exactly in the worst way possibl (Score:2, Insightful)
There are three basic problems with the
I'd recomend... (Score:4, Insightful)
My $.02
SW
Re:I'd recomend... (Score:2)
SW
Make Sure You Never Imply It Is Bad (Score:3, Insightful)
Then, a little later in my schooling (fifth grade) someone asked me to write something outside of school unrelated to any assignments and I discovered I like writing. Since then, I was never bothered by essays. A similar thing applied to reading for me, and still does to some extent.
I'm naturally a writer and reader, but the point is still important to remember: Never tell kids work is going to be hard, they will believe you.
Simple Arithmetic (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Simple Arithmetic (Score:4, Insightful)
my experience as a kid (Score:4, Interesting)
Research matters (Score:2, Insightful)
Furthermore the foundation site speaks of "reform" not improvement. If you base your offering on the position that standard education is faulty don't expect open arms.
So in my opinion you'd be better off with some solid
What I do... (Score:2, Informative)
Motivational Problem (Score:5, Interesting)
So I'd say it's more-or-less hopeless in the current society with the current unionized system.
There's money to be made pretending to care though.
"methods of learning" are not the problem (Score:5, Insightful)
If we did, for some reason, decide to make an point of 'teaching' our kids, by somehow giving them a real reason to learn and the teachers a real reason to teach, it'd be amazing the knowledge that could be imparted. I don't see any reason why a 10 year old cant do calculus, other than they're "not prepared yet."
Better "curriculum materials" aren't the answer. I don't know what the answer is, but it should somehow involve rewarding kids for learning and rewarding teachers for teaching, which just doesn't happen in our current system.
Re:"methods of learning" are not the problem (Score:2)
If we did, for some reason, decide to make an point of 'teaching' our kids, by somehow giving them a real reason to
There is no solution to this problem. (Score:2, Insightful)
Child: That is soo cool!
Never gonna happen.
How Sci/Math can be Kid-Friendly (Score:3, Insightful)
2) This is more the case for math, but there should be an emphasis on investigating real things out there. In some book somewhere the lesson on circumference of a circle is taught with an activity involving cookies. Showing kids how their math applies to real life (instead of a boring jumble of numbers and symbols) will help to keep them interested in it.
3)In Science: More labs and investigations. I don't know how this is with other school systems, but I find in mine we do a very limited number of labs and a lot of sitting and listening in science classes. This may work wonders for visual and auditory learners, but for people who learn by doing (I'm one of them), there's nothing I like more than breaking out the lab equipment and doing the lab. This also ties to my second point - you can see how these things apply in real life.
There are many more points, I'm sure, but these are just three quick ones off the top of my head.
The state of Teaching... (Score:5, Interesting)
Schools are attempting to save money by doing such things as making classes 2 or even 4 hours long, so that the teachers for those classes can do other things on days that they no longer need to teach that class (usually taking classes themselves, or using those days for "inservice" work.)
This flies in the face of several decades of research that shows that instruction should be provided in 15 min blocks, and classes should not be more than 60 min long without breaks. Additionally if a student is ill one day, they loose a minimum of a week's worth of instruction in that class if that four hour block is all that is held on that course for the week. Missing that much material can easily make the difference between an A and an F in a course.
Yes. All of this is being done as part of cost cutting measures, and with a goal of meeting the "No Child Left Behind" mandate. The effect however is closer to "No Child Able To Keep Up".
Standardized test scores are going down, schools are loosing funding as a result, and some are even being forced to close their doors. Granted when they close their doors, the cost of that school goes to Zero. Supposedly that was not the intent however.
-Rusty
Whatever happened to CTW? (Score:5, Interesting)
- "The Electric Company" was a spinoff for kids who had just outgrown the muppets of Seasame Street, but still had more to learn. It was basically the same kind of show, but leaned just a little older.
- "3-2-1 Contact" was the science spinoff for middle school students. It presented some grade-level appropriate documentaries, followed by The Bloodhound Gang using those concepts to solve mysteries.
- "Square One Televison" was the math spinoff, presenting skits, catoons, music videos, and games that all math concepts for grade school students.
However, all of those shows have since faded off of PBS, and CTW has now even taken on the name of Sesame Workshop which more-or-less indicates that they don't intend on ever expanding beyond Seasame Street again...
The entire PBS Kids lineup seems to have taken a turn for the younger, with babby-level shows like Teletubbies and Barney lining up with Seasame Street and still-timeless episodes of Mr. Rogers's Neighborhood. Shows aimed at middle schoolers have fallen off the board altogether... and I see that as a problem.
Anyone remember this? (Score:2)
Root of the problem? (Score:5, Insightful)
Most math and science teachers (US Elementary & High School) do not have degrees in Math or Science.
The problem is that it is very tough to get talented teachers to remain teaching. Moving into the private sector is much more profitable.
We need to overhaul the system so that Mathematicians and Scientists want to be teachers...
Re:Root of the problem? (Score:3, Insightful)
Second, the teacher must know how to set appropriate boundaries, and enforce those boundaries in ways that are natural to the t
Destroying stuff is always popular (Score:2)
After they've learnt enough engineering to build it, then let them learn enough ballistics to accurately destroy stuff.
(Yes, I'm emphasizing engineering over science; tinkering and getting one's hands dirty cements the memory a lot better than simply trying to remember something. More fundamentally, most people and nearly all kids learn to value scie
Use natural programming languages? (Score:2)
An interesting idea is (I don't know where I heard about it, possibly Nicholas Negropontes "Being Diital"), that if we could present scientific problems and issues to them in a "natural language", and they could interact with each other, d
Mathematics is a Language (Score:5, Insightful)
Too often I see teacher after teacher who treats math with disdain and as something you can just memorize a few techniques and have down cold.
These are the kids I see shake with fear when they have to synthesize to answer a problem... in an Advanced Engineering Mathematics course in college.
Teach it as if it were a language--through immersion; by teaching fundamental concepts and then building on those (rather than our current backwards system); and teach the rules before you teach the exceptions, special cases, and other things of that nature (e.g., how did you learn how to take the determinate of a matrix?). Teach application--teaching them about matrices is pretty much worthless unless you talk to them about systems of linear equations. Force them to apply this language in situations outside of the ones that you have taught.
Deemphasize memorization and emphasize understanding--Don't make them memorize trigonometric rules, teach them Euler's Equation and about imaginary numbers.
Respect the students ability to learn mathematics. E. B. White said the following: "No one can write decently who is distrustful of the reader's intelligence, or whose attitude is patronizing." This is a fundamentally true statement that applies to teaching--if the teachers hate the subject and don't know it all that well themselves, then they aren't going to trust the students ability to learn it.
Re:Mathematics is a Language (Score:4, Interesting)
I had a teacher for pre-calc (i.e. trig) and AP calc that was just amazing. I think the first technique that he got right was that he ran it more like a workshop than a traditional lecture. The days pretty much alternated between a lecture day and then an in-class "homework workshop." Through this, the kids who were learning at a slower pace would be able to ask the teacher and those around them for help, whereas the kids who picked up the ideas quickly could experiment with their own ideas.
Furthermore, we covered some decently advanced topics. I remember doing the Binomial Theorem, rotations and translations of conics, DeMoivre's theorem, and a bunch of others that I can't quite place right now.
I don't know if I lived in a community where the water was different or if it was the class that did it, but everyone in there really desired to learn. I think it might've been the combination of giving us some fairly difficult material along with allowing us free time to experiment with it. Most kids aren't going to try things out on their own time because they have more fun things to do: by giving them that time in class you give them that time. And it doesn't really impact on the material because you don't have to review things as much or slow down.
Re:Mathematics is a Language (Score:3, Interesting)
At least in my state, math education is turning away from what I consider math and towards a few (but growing) number of techniques to memorize. Witness schools' emphasis on how many students take AP calculus and then take the AP test. In elementary schools you're absolutely right. Teachers didn't have to learn much math for their major and didn't like having to do that.
I'm secondary ed. and I had to major in math. Because that was what I wanted. I would love to be able to teach in the way you describ
Reluctant Teachers (Score:2)
Maybe because your "studies" are flawed and biased, because you are peddling a money draining proposition to an already beset educational system?
Maybe because other studies have shown that "advantages" to calculator/computer based "learning" disappear when you remove said tool from the poor victim^Wstude
funny videos (Score:3, Insightful)
Now that I am in high school, I still think entertaining, funny videos are a great way to learn. The more sexual innuendos, the better. For example, thanks to the World of Chemistry video series, I'll never forget that pv=nrt. Hell, my brother won't ever forget because I have talked about it so much. Here is what happens: They are describing the gas laws and say how pv=nrt or, to help you remember it, "pervnert." Then they cut to a clip of a guy in a trench coat walking down the street. He approaches a women, "Excuse me miss." He flings open his trench coat wearing only a sign saying pv=nrt over his genetalia. As he makes a twirling motion with his pelvis, the woman shrieks and runs away. Now I'll never forget that equation. There are also sexual innuendos and hidden jokes in the series, which really keeps your attention. I imagine this would immensely help those that don't enjoy chemistry.
In conclusion: funny videos that keep kids' attention work wonders. Suit the videos to the age group.
Skeptical about teaching in general (Score:2, Interesting)
Throw out the calculators (Score:2, Insightful)
I have substituted in Algebra classes where kids didn't trust the provided answer key to a test
Mathematics is hard (Score:4, Interesting)
Mathematics is not natural. Children are natural learners of language - they pick it up as easily as breathing. Mathematics is not like that - we didn't evolve an innate facility with complex math like we did with complex language. We have to work at it. (Well, 99% of us do). Teching math the same way as teaching English is not likely to work well. With math, you need repetition and lots of examples until the students feel comfortable with each concept.
Math is relentlessly cumulative. If you don't master arithmetic, you will struggle with algebra. If you didn't grasp algebra, you're going to be lost with calculus. And so on.
Re:Mathematics is hard (Score:4, Informative)
But it does. Math is fundamentally unlike language in this respect. Children are hardwired to acquire language (see for instance, The Language Instinct [everything2.com] by Steven Pinker), and they can do so from a very young age with minimal profesional help. This is not the case with algebra. We have no math instinct in the way that we have a language instinct.
Back to old apple educational programs (Score:2)
Basicly the software was p
It's about the Method (Score:3, Insightful)
I must say that I am utterly disturbed by the conceptual poverty of pre-collegiate science education. The emphasis in many classrooms is on learning facts about the universe, rather than learning the methods which all us to obtain these facts, and understanding of what we see around us. Names of constellations, plant phyla, and obscure scientists help one "understand" science in the same way that memorizing the name of every Pope helps you "understand" history. In reality, science is about methodology and critical thinking moreso than anything else, and honestly it is that part of science education that truely benefits people in their everyday lives.
At my high school, we had a course called "reading" which was manditory for 7th and 8th graders (it was a junior/senior HS). My mother almost had me removed from the course because it was such an egregious waste of time... It was supposed to "encourage" people to read by forcing unimaginitve drivel down their throats rather than allowing them to explore books for themselves. Rather than spend 10% of my time at school on this nonsense, I owuld have much preferred a class for everyone in critical thinking.
Imagine how exciting such a class could be. Instead of spending time reading boring textbooks or doing busywork, the class would be given real-life problems to solve collaboratively. Also, it would be taught how to reason about arguments presented in scientific, political, and social arenas by disecting and debating current event topics. Throw in a dash of formal logic, and an emphesis on participation and thinking rather than getting points for giving teh answer the teacher wanted, and I think we'd have a real winner.
I believe that such a class would help science education more than spicing up material, or adding yet more pictures to the textbooks. More importantly, I believe that this kind of class would be much more generally useful to people in their everday lives. I believe that teaching people to make more rational decisions is good both socially and economically, and will allow people to be better citizens. Also it might cause people to take less of what the President/CNN/NY Times/Popular Science says as truth.
Maybe someone out there managed to take a class like this. If so, perhaps you could share your experience?
Cheers,
Justin Wick
I remember computer math (Score:2)
I played that for hours on end, it helped me through all my math up to Differential Equations.
Life is tough, get off your butt (Score:2, Insightful)
If you're not a prodigy, Math is difficult. Science is difficult. So what? Work hard and you'll get it eventually. Yes, its essential to have well designed curricula and competent teachers, but I think the primary problem facing educators today is the attitude of kids. A lot of them just aren't willing to put in the effort to learn. Why? Lots of reasons, but I'd say the biggest one is that affluence breeds complacen
more explosions (Score:2)
More seriously, I think that science education in public schools at the grade school level is appalling. In high school, the teachers are at minimum expected to have a college degree in the subject that they teach. I remember one woman telling us that she hated science, so we wouldn't be doing too many science units.
Soap bubbles
The best way (Score:3, Insightful)
Over-Memorization will produce better test scores, but worse educated students. I can get any computer to memorize a log table, but I cannot teach a computer what it means. If I teach a personwhat a log table means, they can go look up the values when they need them, or they can generate one themselves.
Okay, I feel better now, flame away.
Altering Perceptions of Math and Science (Score:2)
Rocky's Boot (Score:2)
I cast magic missile (Score:2)
No it wasn't exactly calculus but it put numbers into a less serious context and it really made it a lot easier in school to feel comfortable with math. I think that a
Relevance (Score:4, Insightful)
Simple. Make the information relevant.
For example, instead of teaching ratios in proportion, have students scale a cookie recipe to feed the entire class. Then have them make the cookies (off the top of my head; don't whinge about lilltle kids and hot ovens). Figure batting averages in gym class. Predict the max altitude of a water rocket.
From personal experience, I didn't appreciate algebra (polynomials in particular) until I studied calculus. Up until that point it didn't help me accomplish anything than arithmetic did.
I tend to think that someone should start at the goal of the task -- say, build a model rocket and predict its performance --and work backwards. Let the students build one without instruction in such a way that they are bound fail and the only way to succeed is to actually .... learn. I know, it's been done but it's often the exception rather than the rule. When was the last time you had several labs before your first lecture? Why bother with a dry boring lecture in the first place?
That's easy (Score:5, Funny)
How many megabytes before it's even?
What are your leech/seed ratio?
Math- and science-friendly kids? (Score:5, Insightful)
As a 14-year-old boy, I think this subject is very interesting from several points of view. I have to admit I rather disagree when it is said kids are math- and science-friendly, but then as has been said it is not surprising that the situation has turned out this way when you consider the sad culture the moronic majority of the population is plunging the country into here in France -- having seen several previous comments, I see the situation is not so different in America either. For example, in my class, a lot of the children are drawn to the idiotic reality TV shows (we even have a Celebrity Farm, a show in which one is able to view celebrities living in a farm and vote one out each week) and the teenagers seem to find the boring lives of others more interesting than theirs ever could be. This truely is sad, but this said group of people is the same which doesn't bother working much at school. Now I have not done a psychology major so I am not in the best position to ponder on how this crash in TV quality has affected childrens' work so much, but I would think this is due to a generalisation and banalisation of this moronic culture, developing into a way of life: doing nothing while watching TV to see others doing nothing. I would say that this tendancy to slack off has affected how the said children tend to percieve other activities in life, schoolwork included. I am pretty sure if one was to exclude children from watching such trash on television, they would not have such a tendancy to do nothing and not use their brain actively as is happening now.
In my opinion, math and science are already kid-friendly. It is just a case of the children being voluntary to approach these subjects in an optimistic way, something which is becoming rarer and rarer these days as the kids are becoming progressively less math- and science-friendly, as I said in the first paragraph. Any child willing to enhance his or her knowledge on these topics can do so easily, as I think there are an infinite number of resources suited to their capabilities which are available to them. In my case, for example, I was pushed to improve my math skills when I got interested in more serious programming (as I have currently started learning C++, which I find somewhat more interesting than just placing controls on a form as I did with Delphi). Of course, I am not omitting the fact that the motivation of the teacher can change everything in the stance of children towards math, but if we cannot change much, let alone anything, in the educational system, then the responsibility of changing the childrens' stance towards these topics rests in the hands of the parents; the latter can do so much more to get their children to be motivated in the instruction of math and science, and for example a good start is to raise the children in the omission of the wave of "crap" television -- but without an excess of tendancy towards elitism, which could get the children rejected at school. I believe parents should show the children at the youngest age how fun math and science can be, how vast these topics are and how important they are later on.
Math and science are already kid-friendly -- I think the balance has to reside on the other side, by having the children be math- and science-friendly; I believe that for this, kids have to understand the value of these subjects as soon as they can, and for the most part I should think the responsibility of having the children understand this is first and foremost in the parents' hands.
Many non-profit groups looking into this (Score:3)
We are working with PBS [pbs.org] on a professional development project aimed at improving Algebra content knowledge and teaching practices.
On a different note, Maine a few years back initiated the Maine Laptop program, where every year every school in Maine gets laptop's for all of its 7th grade students. Technicaly in 5 years time all Middle and High School students will have computers.
-Ben
Re:Not "stick to" but "go back to" (Score:2, Insightful)
Sock puppets screenplay (Score:2, Funny)
Sock Puppet 2: "Not so good... I'm kind of scared."
1: "Why is that?"
2: "Well, I've heard that there's a derive operator running around here somewhere."
1: "Oh, is that so?"
2: "Yes, and I'm just a constant function, if anyone derives me, I'm zero!"
1: "Ha! But I don't have to worry about that!"
2: "Why not?"
1: "I'm the exponential function e^x. You can derive me all you want, it doesn't hurt me at all!"
Sock Puppet 3: "Hello there. I'm the parti
Re:Hmm... (Score:2, Funny)
Under the current conditions, we won't have any teachers left. We might just have to outsource our kids to India for them to get a decent education.
Re:Hmm... (Score:4, Insightful)
Standardized tests are bullshit and you know it, otherwise you wouldn't have mentioned problems that exist with the SAT.
The problem with test, test, test is that you wind up with children who don't know how to think, but how to memorize and regurgitate on command. Brains are not widgets that you can put together on an assembly line with a "one size fits all" curriculum.
Educate yourself. A great place to start is a book called "Insult To Intelligence" by Frank Smith. The ISBN on the book is 0877958270. Anyone who cares about the current sad state of education needs to take a look at it. It's out of print now but can still be found at used book sites and at Amazon Marketplace.
Actually there is some splendid information in the book about how not to write educational software. I suggest the fellow who wrote the initial question for "ask Slashdot" should give it a read.
I won't even dignify the rest of your post with any further comment, except to say that the lesson plans that teachers are forced to teach from nowadays in the US are imposed on them from On High (ultimately from the Department of Education) and are almost without exception soul-sucking programmatic crap that neither teaches nor enlightens nor fosters a love of reading. Google for Open Court Reading sometime. This is but one example of the shit that is being forced on school districts across America. Then consider yourself lucky that you are out of school now.
Re:Make people/kids think (Score:2, Insightful)
The Problem with Math (Score:4, Interesting)
Throw away computers - bring back times-tables and logs - make people *think* again. Nick
On one hand, I agree with that, but there's a whole question of "marketing" math to kids.
Computers break the monotony of math classes, and that's essential as kids become more and more accustomed to high-stimulus activities like TV and video games.
The problem with math is that, before you get to anything interesting (like Calculus), you've already got to have a huge background knowledge. And, take it from me (6 university-level math courses later), the only way to do that is practice. Doing homework problems. Boring as sin, but essential - if you do all your homework, you should expect an A+ in the course.
So, what's needed is a way to make simple homework problems interesting, so that the student sticks with it.
That's a nearly impossible task.
I think math is one of those courses which requires a hugely good teacher or professor. A bad one will turn you right off the subject and make you dread doing the homework. A good teacher or professor will make the class interesting and be fun and friendly enough that you'll feel guilty if you don't do all your homework.
That was always the best motivator for me to get good math marks - liking the teacher enough that I wanted to do well for him.
Which is shit, because you're dependent on the quality of the teacher rather than internal motivation.
Re:The Problem with Math (Score:3, Insightful)
It also helps if the teacher can make the material not boring to the
Re:Make people/kids think (Score:5, Insightful)
I was one of the last people to do the non-calculator version of the O-level mathematics exam, and we learned little tricks involving finding common factors and cancelling out that calculator users never need to bother with. I even used to add up order forms in my head when we used paper forms {I have since written some software to computerise it} and would never have dreamed of using a calculator.
All the computer is really good for is the last step of solving a mathematical problem. It can't ever manage the first step, which is actually expressing the problem in mathematical terms in the first place.
Re:Make people/kids think (Score:3, Insightful)
The computer is a *tool*, it is not a substitute for thinking unless it is used as such. Look at the Rosetta Stone language software--it is possible to develop programs to aid students in learning just about any subject. It is when that tool is used *inappropriately* that there is a problem.
When I took Calculus II Honors in college I had a lab associated with it where we learned how to use Mathematica. This was not to be used in lieu of thinking, but
Re:Yes and lets also get rid of paper. (Score:3, Insightful)
Teaching is an inefficient process if you are measuring your progress by technological progress, which you are implying with your broken argument.
He's saying teach the subject to the kid on the mechanistic level. Using a slide rule is an enlightening experience. Far more so than is a calculator, and it gives you an immediate graphical sense of what you are doing.
Re:Computer use in Schools (Score:2)
Re:Computer use in Schools (Score:2)
Of course, the key thing is making sure the right content is loaded into either presentation aid...
Re:fun in school (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is, kids today think the world owes them something. Teachers aren't people who are trying to educate them and motivate them and prepare them for the real world; they're people who are trying to hold them back and 'cramp their style'. When a student is told that doing something is wrong, and then the student gets punished for doing it, it's never a matter of 'oh, shoot, i did something wrong and i got caught doing it' -- it's always 'ugh, this fucking sucks, this is bull shit, i don't have to put up with this'.
I hate to sound like a fascist or something, but rewards don't work with kids today. They're too 'punk' for rewards. What schools need is discipline. I don't mean dress codes and other 'pre-emptive' kinds of discipline that everybody seems to like -- those just hurt the people who aren't jerks. I mean real-world, reactionary discipline. When you do something wrong in the real world, you're generally get punished by being fired or fined or jailed. School should be the same way. When you call a teacher a 'fucking retard', you shouldn't just get an unexcused absence for that period. You should get a detention, and if you don't serve that detention, you should get suspended. If you destroy school property, you should be fully expected to pay for every last dime of it. Et cetera. :/
Re:fun in school (Score:4, Insightful)
It is the student's responsibility to learn.
Kids do not understand that they have to take responsibility for thier own education. If they don't understand something they blame the teacher, instead of taking the time to learn it. I know several teenage girls that think they are not very good at math. They get C's in high school level math classes and say its just because they aren't good at it. If they took half the time studying for math as they do shopping for clothes, they would understand the concepts ten times better and have As.
Re:fun in school (Score:4, Interesting)
In my opinion, the problem is a) classes are boring for most kids (even me, someone who loves to learn). If you're gonna teach to the middle, the top will be bored out of the minds and the bottom will be confused as hell. I don't know if tracking works better but in elementary school I always LOVED my enrichment class because it was fun and challenging and all my friends in it loved it also. b) academic stuff isn't "cool". It's cool to know every sports statistic about your favorite team and watch every sports game, but it's not cool to know anything about physics/math theories. This is a societal problem, until it's acceptable for someone to be interested in math/science and not be labelled as a nerd/dork/dweeb there wont be much interest in math/science by normal kids. The only people from my high school who were actually openly into learning about math/science were people in my math research class who were also two-sport varsity ATHLETES and could get away w/ it w/out being made fun of and labelled a dork.
I think the biggest problem is a) though. The classes are really confusing for a lot of people and too easy for those who truly understand it. Not to sound like an ass but I spent the first month of my AP physics course beating Super Mario brothers on my calculator. Why? Because it was more interesting than listening to my prof drone on and on explaining something I had understood for over a week. I still managed to get 100 on more than half of the exams so there was no incentive for me to pay attention.
Laslty, (this should probably be c) most people see no need to know physics/abstract algebra/topology because they don't see how it's applied. They don't understand that they're being taught how to think and that that's what's most important. And honestly, it often has no use because (in my inexperienced opinion) we don't live in a world that often requires critical thinking. Many jobs are designed to require the list amount of thinking possible so as to be easily picked up by the largest number of people.
Re:fun in school (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:fun in school (Score:4, Interesting)
B) There's no easy answer here. The best I can think of is to try to change the atmosphere one person at a time. My parents did this for me.
C) I have no idea. I liked Physics partly because it let us apply math to concrete things (like point masses ;-)).