Comments on: Skills-Based Math, Just in Time Learning, and Bad Habits of Mind http://www.educationnews.org/education-policy-and-politics/skills-based-math-just-in-time-learning-and-bad-habits-of-mind/ Education News Fri, 24 May 2013 17:56:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Do timed tests cause math anxiety? — Joanne Jacobs http://www.educationnews.org/education-policy-and-politics/skills-based-math-just-in-time-learning-and-bad-habits-of-mind/#comment-10425 Do timed tests cause math anxiety? — Joanne Jacobs Thu, 05 Jul 2012 13:40:28 +0000 http://www.educationnews.org/?p=215592#comment-10425 [...] can learn math skills and concepts in tandem, writes Barry Garelick on Education [...] [...] can learn math skills and concepts in tandem, writes Barry Garelick on Education [...]

]]> By: A Teacher http://www.educationnews.org/education-policy-and-politics/skills-based-math-just-in-time-learning-and-bad-habits-of-mind/#comment-10365 A Teacher Sat, 30 Jun 2012 17:52:16 +0000 http://www.educationnews.org/?p=215592#comment-10365 As a teacher of algebra 2 for 14 years, I am in complete agreement with Barry. In my 14 years of teaching, I have gradually seen diminishing skills in the students entering my class from one year to the next. Of particular concern is a complete lack of understanding of division -- how to do long division, which number is divided by which, when to do division, how it is related to converting fractions to decimals, etc. My students not only don't have the skills; they do not have the conceptual understanding. They are all products of Everday Math... As a teacher of algebra 2 for 14 years, I am in complete agreement with Barry. In my 14 years of teaching, I have gradually seen diminishing skills in the students entering my class from one year to the next. Of particular concern is a complete lack of understanding of division — how to do long division, which number is divided by which, when to do division, how it is related to converting fractions to decimals, etc. My students not only don’t have the skills; they do not have the conceptual understanding. They are all products of Everday Math…

]]> By: wintertime http://www.educationnews.org/education-policy-and-politics/skills-based-math-just-in-time-learning-and-bad-habits-of-mind/#comment-10355 wintertime Sat, 30 Jun 2012 04:58:09 +0000 http://www.educationnews.org/?p=215592#comment-10355 My three homeschoolers used Saxon Math. All were accepted to college at the ages of 13, 12 and 13. All finished Calculus III by the age of 15. Two earned B.S. degrees in math by the age of 18. Saxon Math was certainly superior to the irrational methods of math instruction I suffered as an elementary and high school student. My three homeschoolers used Saxon Math. All were accepted to college at the ages of 13, 12 and 13. All finished Calculus III by the age of 15. Two earned B.S. degrees in math by the age of 18.

Saxon Math was certainly superior to the irrational methods of math instruction I suffered as an elementary and high school student.

]]> By: SteveH http://www.educationnews.org/education-policy-and-politics/skills-based-math-just-in-time-learning-and-bad-habits-of-mind/#comment-10341 SteveH Fri, 29 Jun 2012 01:53:00 +0000 http://www.educationnews.org/?p=215592#comment-10341 So Barry, this silly strawman will not go away? Routine = rote and non-routine = understanding? Isn't the purpose of math to make as many things as routine as possible? I told students to let the math do the thinking. Of course, you have to understand why the math works in the first place. Is that only possible with non-routine problems applied top-down in a JIT manner? You study standard (routine) geometry proofs to learn why certain things are true. You practice on routine problems. You work from simple problems towards ones that are not routine. You learn to see right triangles and how to apply the proofs. There IS linkage between mastery of routine problems and understanding, and there are different levels of understanding and skill. Educational pedagogues are so lost in their pedantic world that they can't just get down to work. Back when I taught college algebra, nobody could pass with just rote skills, even if I never used non-routine problems. There are too many variations in standard problems that will trip up students. Non-routine problems are not causing the endless list of poor standardized math test scores. Students can't do the routine problems. You don't solve that by focusing harder on top-down non-routine problems that students are not prepared for. Math is not some sort of magic thinking process. It's a collection of tools that, if properly understood and practiced, allow students to solve all sorts of non-routine problems. If students are stuck at a rote level, the solution is not to just work harder on non-routine problems. Bottom-up, not top-down. There is also the basic competence issue that allows bright kids to get to fifth grade not knowing the times table, but that's easily overlooked when educators talk about fancy-pants pedagogical ideas of problem solving and critical thinking. They do that to take the focus off of low expectations. Then they blame students and claim that they just need more engagement. So Barry, this silly strawman will not go away?

Routine = rote and non-routine = understanding?

Isn’t the purpose of math to make as many things as routine as possible? I told students to let the math do the thinking. Of course, you have to understand why the math works in the first place. Is that only possible with non-routine problems applied top-down in a JIT manner?

You study standard (routine) geometry proofs to learn why certain things are true. You practice on routine problems. You work from simple problems towards ones that are not routine. You learn to see right triangles and how to apply the proofs. There IS linkage between mastery of routine problems and understanding, and there are different levels of understanding and skill.

Educational pedagogues are so lost in their pedantic world that they can’t just get down to work. Back when I taught college algebra, nobody could pass with just rote skills, even if I never used non-routine problems. There are too many variations in standard problems that will trip up students. Non-routine problems are not causing the endless list of poor standardized math test scores. Students can’t do the routine problems. You don’t solve that by focusing harder on top-down non-routine problems that students are not prepared for. Math is not some sort of magic thinking process. It’s a collection of tools that, if properly understood and practiced, allow students to solve all sorts of non-routine problems. If students are stuck at a rote level, the solution is not to just work harder on non-routine problems. Bottom-up, not top-down.

There is also the basic competence issue that allows bright kids to get to fifth grade not knowing the times table, but that’s easily overlooked when educators talk about fancy-pants pedagogical ideas of problem solving and critical thinking. They do that to take the focus off of low expectations. Then they blame students and claim that they just need more engagement.

]]> By: Catherine http://www.educationnews.org/education-policy-and-politics/skills-based-math-just-in-time-learning-and-bad-habits-of-mind/#comment-10339 Catherine Fri, 29 Jun 2012 00:17:58 +0000 http://www.educationnews.org/?p=215592#comment-10339 "Teachers guiding the student would ultimately give hints about supplemental lines, and would provide the needed knowledge in a 'just in time' basis." Barry's observation about 'just in time' is one of the most important points he's made over the years, and I hope others will pick up on it. "Just in time" learning is the opposite of the learning produced by a coherent curriculum that allows students to absorb a great deal of material as efficiently as possible. The reason a coherent, sequential, **efficient** curriculum works is that the brain requires a great deal of repetition over time to 'consolidate' learning in long term memory. Here is John Medina: "It takes years to consolidate a memory. Not minutes, hours, or days but years. What you learn in first grade is not completely formed until your sophomore year in high school." Brain Rules http://www.brainrules.net/long-term-memory?scene= “Teachers guiding the student would ultimately give hints about supplemental lines, and would provide the needed knowledge in a ‘just in time’ basis.”

Barry’s observation about ‘just in time’ is one of the most important points he’s made over the years, and I hope others will pick up on it.

“Just in time” learning is the opposite of the learning produced by a coherent curriculum that allows students to absorb a great deal of material as efficiently as possible.

The reason a coherent, sequential, **efficient** curriculum works is that the brain requires a great deal of repetition over time to ‘consolidate’ learning in long term memory.

Here is John Medina:

“It takes years to consolidate a memory. Not minutes, hours, or days but years. What you learn in first grade is not completely formed until your sophomore year in high school.”

Brain Rules
http://www.brainrules.net/long-term-memory?scene=

]]> By: Lynne Diligent http://www.educationnews.org/education-policy-and-politics/skills-based-math-just-in-time-learning-and-bad-habits-of-mind/#comment-10338 Lynne Diligent Thu, 28 Jun 2012 22:50:47 +0000 http://www.educationnews.org/?p=215592#comment-10338 The way I see it, skills-based math keeps every student from having to reinvent the wheel on their own. The way I see it, skills-based math keeps every student from having to reinvent the wheel on their own.

]]>