[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xmca-l] Re: NYTimes.com: Why Do Americans Stink at Math?



Greg and all

       I could have stayed in K-12 teaching and I miss it; however, I decided to, in a sense, multiply myself by returning to the university/college because I felt a lot of teachers actually cared, but, perhaps because of pessimism (smile) or just unaware of possibilities (there are a lot of the latter at this workshop I'm attending), had gotten in a sort of rut. So I really wonder if the problems people are seeing aren't, to a degree, more with myself and others in teacher training. I do know some of my students (college students) are sometimes underwhelmed by us. 

Ed

On Aug 1, 2014, at 11:16 AM, Greg Thompson <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com> wrote:

> Lovely conversation about the possibilities of meaning-fully engaging
> students-in-their-lives with math(s)-as-discourse. Seems like the same
> could be said of science. Some of you may know Jay Lemke (who is somewhere
> on the list serve). I have often heard him speak of the playful, creative,
> storytelling practice that science is as well - and Jay got his PhD in
> theoretical Physics.
> 
> Unfortunately, with my kids (oldest is 12.5 year old boy), this hasn't been
> the case. With the exception of one year when we were at an affluent
> elementary school in San Diego where he had a particularly exceptional
> teacher, most of what my kids have been getting in school is the bad and
> lifeless math and science education that sees those fields ONLY as a set of
> skills to be mastered (i.e. Anna's "game to be played").
> 
> Thus far, I've been able to convince my son that this is a worthwhile game
> and that there will come a time when he will be able to play with the
> discursive genres of math and science, but I don't know how much longer I
> can keep up that argument when it flies in the face of everything he is
> learning in school. My son has some advantages b.c. as a boy, there are
> certain expectations that he will do well in math and science (and I have
> done a fair bit of proleptically interpellating him as an engineer, but
> that could easily have the opposite effect at any point in his life...). I
> have also tried to provide examples of
> science-as-story-telling-and-problem-solving as I did when we went on a
> hike last weekend and I told him the story of the discovery of pheromones
> (Martha McClintock was a prof where I was in grad school so I knew her
> personal story as well as her story of discovery and was able to tell it in
> a compelling manner). But I do wonder if those few conversations, few and
> far between, are really going to amount to much compared to the day after
> day drilling of skills that he is getting in school. I hope so. And I also
> have three more girls coming up through the ranks in my household who will
> not have the advantage of being a gender that is socially recognized as
> being "good at math and science" - hopefully I can learn something from my
> son's experiences. So I really hope so with them as well. But for now I'm
> very anxious...
> 
> -greg
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 5:57 AM, Bella Kotik-Friedgut <bella.kotik@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> I want to retell a personal story of a student who shared it in my M.A.
>> Vygotsky class at HU some years ago. (Today he has Ph.D in education).
>> He always was recognized as a talented writer and poet, receiving
>> different literary prizes as a teenager. But he had some problems with
>> math and somebody explained him that these talents do not go together, that
>> his struggle with math is because of his literary talent. And in addition
>> "You belong to the Moroccans and this is not a good sign for math
>> capacities"  So he received it verdict and graduated school without
>> matriculation exam in math, which is a serious obstacle for higher
>> education.
>> Being at the army service, he was lucky to meet a teacher who explained him
>> that who stopped him from studying math was just wrong: "A talented person
>> is talented in all he does"  This became his new slogan and he studied and
>> successfully made the matriculation test in math and made education his
>> professional field.
>> So the social-cultural aspect here was working clearly.
>> 
>> 
>> Sincerely yours Bella Kotik-Friedgut
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Helen Grimmett <helen.grimmett@monash.edu
>>> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Thanks Anna, for both the reassurance and the citations.
>>> 
>>> I've just been having a conversation with my kids in the car on the way
>>> home from school about this idea that maths is a form of story telling
>> and
>>> they both looked at me as though I was crazy! Yet when I mentioned the
>> idea
>>> at lunch to my maths education colleagues they both adamantly agreed.
>>> Clearly there is some secret here that mathematicians (and gifted maths
>>> educators) get that is not being passed on to the rest of us mere
>> mortals.
>>> I'm not saying that my kids and I are not "good" at maths (we've learnt
>> to
>>> play the old maths game quite well, but just don't like playing it) but
>> how
>>> interesting to think that there is a whole different way of seeing maths
>>> that could have changed our perspective of the game completely.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Helen
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Dr Helen Grimmett
>>> Lecturer, Student Adviser,
>>> Faculty of Education,
>>> Room G64F, Building 902
>>> Monash University, Berwick campus
>>> Phone: 9904 7171
>>> 
>>> *New Book: *
>>> The Practice of Teachers' Professional Development: A Cultural-Historical
>>> Approach
>>> <
>>> 
>> https://www.sensepublishers.com/catalogs/bookseries/professional-learning-1/the-practice-of-teachers-professional-development/
>>>> 
>>> Helen Grimmett (2014) Sense Publishers
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> <
>>> 
>> http://monash.edu.au/education/news/50-years/?utm_source=staff-email&utm_medium=email-signature&utm_campaign=50th
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 1 August 2014 17:03, anna sfard <sfard@netvision.net.il> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi Helen,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> My daughter made a similar decision, once upon time. I already knew
>> then
>>>> that what she liked more than anything else was art, so I did not try
>> to
>>>> dissuade her. And artist did she become. Or designer, to be precise.
>> And
>>>> see what happened: design does require some technical/
>>>> scientific/mathematical thinking (math was a condition when she applied
>>> to
>>>> the Academy of Art, but the amount she had done was deemed sufficient,
>>>> considering her other strengths), and she was perfectly able to master
>>>> whatever mathematics was necessary whenever this learning was for some
>>>> "real" purpose.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> This said, i understand your worry, and must admit it is justified.
>> There
>>>> is a game being played out there, and  either you play it or you may
>>> lose.
>>>> I do hope, though, that your daughter will only gain: first, she will
>>> earn
>>>> a few less stressful, happier years in school, and then she may find a
>>> way
>>>> among the hurdles just as my daughter did. And if she faces the real
>> need
>>>> for math latter in life, I'm sure she will cope. It will be a whole
>>>> different story then (it will be a story to begin with)! In any case, I
>>>> think the gains of your daughter's decision overweight the potential
>>>> losses, with one of the latter being her poor first-person identity,
>> lack
>>>> of self-confidence, etc, etc.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> And as to the refs you are asking for, the paper was originally written
>>> as
>>>> guest  editorial for a math ed journal edited by students in Univ of
>>>> Georgia, Athens:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Sfard, A. (2012). Why Mathematics? What Mathematics? - Guest editorial.
>>> *The
>>>> Mathematics Educator, 22*(1), 3-16.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Then it was republished as a chapter in a book (and what I've sent are
>>> the
>>>> proofs of the chapter):
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Sfard, A. (2013). Why Mathematics? What Mathematics? In M. Pitici
>> (Ed.),
>>> *The
>>>> best writings on mathematics* (pp. 130-142). Princeton, NJ ‎: Princeton
>>>> University ‎Press
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> anna
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> *From:* Helen Grimmett [mailto:helen.grimmett@monash.edu]
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, August 01, 2014 5:56 AM
>>>> *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; sfard@netvision.net.il
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: NYTimes.com: Why Do Americans Stink at
>> Math?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks for sharing this editorial Anna. Can you please post the
>> citation
>>>> for it? I would like to share it with my maths colleagues, but it also
>>>> provides interesting reassurance for me about letting my daughter
>>>> discontinue maths at the end of this year (Year 10). She is a very high
>>>> achieving student but detests maths and science (she already dropped
>>>> science at the end of year 9 despite winning the Yr 9 Science prize in
>>> her
>>>> selective entry school) and has often said that she is only interested
>> in
>>>> subjects that let her tell stories (she includes music as one of
>> these).
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I must admit I've never thought of maths as a form of story telling
>>> before
>>>> and I wonder if her schooling had taken this approach to maths whether
>> it
>>>> would have managed to spark her interest and keep her engaged in the
>>>> subject. In her early secondary school years when science was
>> compulsory
>>>> she often mentioned that she thought it was possible that 'real'
>> science
>>>> would be quite interesting, but that 'school' science was intolerable.
>>> Her
>>>> stress levels about school have dropped considerably this year now that
>>> she
>>>> doesn't have to suffer through endless (and in her eyes pointless)
>>> science
>>>> homework and assignments. I appreciate that dropping maths will lead to
>>>> another huge reduction in any remaining school dissatisfaction and give
>>> her
>>>> more space to pursue the wide range of subjects that do fascinate her,
>>> yet
>>>> I still keep telling her I worry about her closing possible doors for
>>>> avenues of study in the future.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Reading your editorial makes me realise that perhaps what I'm more
>>> worried
>>>> about is that "unofficial argument" that maths is a selection tool. In
>>> all
>>>> honesty my concern is perhaps more with what it says to others when she
>>>> says she dropped maths at Year 10, than with the doors it might close
>> or
>>>> with what she will miss out on knowing by not continuing maths into
>> Year
>>> 11
>>>> and 12. Naming this unofficial argument makes the hollowness of it very
>>>> transparent. I believe she is smart enough to have seen through this
>>>> argument (not just too naive to see it) and brave enough and gifted
>>> enough
>>>> to challenge it. I owe it to her to be brave too.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> It will indeed be a great day when school maths and science is
>> reimagined
>>>> in ways that do not do more harm than good for a huge number of
>> students.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> My thanks again,
>>>> 
>>>> Helen
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Dr Helen Grimmett
>>>> Lecturer, Student Adviser,
>>>> 
>>>> Faculty of Education,
>>>> 
>>>> Room G64F, Building 902
>>>> Monash University, Berwick campus
>>>> Phone: 9904 7171
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> *New Book: *
>>>> 
>>>> The Practice of Teachers' Professional Development: A
>> Cultural-Historical
>>>> Approach
>>>> <
>>> 
>> https://www.sensepublishers.com/catalogs/bookseries/professional-learning-1/the-practice-of-teachers-professional-development/
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Helen Grimmett (2014) Sense Publishers
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> [image: Image removed by sender.]
>>>> <
>>> 
>> http://monash.edu.au/education/news/50-years/?utm_source=staff-email&utm_medium=email-signature&utm_campaign=50th
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 31 July 2014 23:47, anna sfard <sfard@netvision.net.il> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> " Doesn't it make sense that somebody should stand up and ask "why are
>> we
>>>> teaching mathematics?"
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Already done, Michael - see the attached.
>>>> 
>>>> anna
>>>> 
>>>> PS. This is a fascinating conversation. I wish I could allow myself to
>>>> participate properly.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces+sfard=netvision.net.il@mailman.ucsd.edu
>>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces+sfard=netvision.net.il@mailman.ucsd.edu] On
>>> Behalf
>>>> Of
>>>> Glassman, Michael
>>>> 
>>>> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2014 4:25 PM
>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: NYTimes.com: Why Do Americans Stink at Math?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> So here is my question.  We have gone through basically a century of
>>> this.
>>>> We teach mathematics and some people get it - the people in my
>> experience
>>>> really love mathematics - but most people don't.  It's just something
>> you
>>>> do
>>>> to get some place else (I am reminded of my attitude towards statistics
>>>> courses in graduate school).  So we keep banging our head against the
>>> wall
>>>> again and again.  Doesn't it make sense that somebody should stand up
>> and
>>>> ask "why are we teaching mathematics?"  - as a subject I mean, it is
>>> still
>>>> an important field of study.  This is something we just made up mostly
>>> for
>>>> the sake of "efficiency" - although it is not very efficient.  But
>> there
>>> is
>>>> nothing to suggest that this is a good idea, and there are a lot of
>>> things
>>>> to suggest that maybe we're on the wrong track here as far as education
>>> in
>>>> concerned.  This was actually an argument about specific subjects in
>> the
>>>> 20s
>>>> and 30s, but we have been so unsuccessful and been so frustrated its
>>> pretty
>>>> amazing that it  hasn't come up again.  Why not let mathematics emerge
>> in
>>>> the course of what we do?  Is the type of mathematics we learn in the
>>>> classroom transferable anyway?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Maybe a bit heretical, but perhaps the idea should be raised every once
>>> in
>>>> a
>>>> while.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Michael
>>>> 
>>>> ________________________________________
>>>> 
>>>> From:  <mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>>> 
>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] on
>>>> behalf
>>>> of Ed Wall [ewall@umich.edu]
>>>> 
>>>> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2014 8:10 AM
>>>> 
>>>> To:  <mailto:lchcmike@gmail.com> lchcmike@gmail.com; eXtended Mind,
>>>> Culture,
>>>> 
>>>> Activity
>>>> 
>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: NYTimes.com: Why Do Americans Stink at Math?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Mike
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>        As I said I am not a blissful optimist.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>        Liping Ma made the point some time ago that, in fact, something
>>>> like
>>>> this would not be possible until a generation of students (perhaps two)
>>> had
>>>> been taught to reasonably (and what this means can be usefully debated)
>>>> understand what was going on (by the way, being able to do it in a rote
>>>> fashion indicates, at least, that one understands the procedure).
>> Parents
>>>> can help and hinder (most, if treated respectfully, want to help).
>>>> 
>>>>        Perhaps a story will indicate where I'm at. A number of years
>>> ago,
>>>> I
>>>> was at a conference sitting next to a young graduate student with a
>>> policy
>>>> background who was sort of interested in the mathematics mess. Finally,
>>> she
>>>> could stand no more and blurted out something like , "I can't
>> understand
>>>> why
>>>> you people are fussing about all this math teaching business, the kids
>> in
>>>> the inner city schools will never appreciate it." I turned to her and
>>> said
>>>> sadly something like, "You are possibly right, but I can't act as if I
>>>> believe so. Does that make sense?" She nodded yes.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>       It is not just UCSD students who have problems with this. One of
>>> my
>>>> friends did something with fractions in his calculus class  at UM
>>> (smile).
>>>> Part of the problem, I think, is that fractions in general have little
>>>> practical meaning for many people (unlike the natural numbers); they
>> are,
>>>> in
>>>> a sense, somewhat of a historical artifact. It is moderately easy to
>>>> intervene on this at certain points in the school curriculum although
>>>> asking
>>>> why is useful.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Ed
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:01 PM, mike cole < <mailto:lchcmike@gmail.com>
>>>> 
>>>> lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> That all seems reasonable to me, Ed. But it strikes me as a real
>>>> 
>>>>> problem when the average "top 12% of California high school
>> graduates"
>>>> 
>>>>> cannot help a kid who has to figure out how to divide  one fraction
>>>> 
>>>>> into another. Or if they help its because they "teach the rule" (as
>>>> 
>>>>> in, invert and multiply) but cannot explain why they do this.
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> I think its a challenge to teachers and god bless those who can
>>>> 
>>>>> emulate your approach. But its a challenge to parents, even UCSD
>>>> 
>>>>> graduates aplenty, who cannot explain what they are doing in
>>>> understandable terms.
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> That good teachers can teach it, give the opportunity I believe. That
>>>> 
>>>>> this is, or is likely to become, the universally accepted norm for
>>>> 
>>>>> everyone, I fear I doubt. But oh my goodness, how happy I would be to
>>> be
>>>> wrong!
>>>> 
>>>>> mike
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Ed Wall < <mailto:ewall@umich.edu>
>>>> 
>>>> ewall@umich.edu> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>> Katherine
>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>      I think yes to your next to last question. However, what
>>>> 
>>>>>> sometimes concerns me (and we are perhaps back to optimism and
>>>> 
>>>>>> pessimism) is that looking for a future which may or may not occur
>>>> 
>>>>>> seems 'unfair' to the students of today. I'm for thoughtful baby
>>>> 
>>>>>> steps (and babies do stumble) now on all fronts and, unlike Carol, I
>>>> don't yet know the 'right' answer.
>>>> 
>>>>>> However, I would like to know (smile).
>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>> Ed
>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>> On Jul 30, 2014, at 3:32 PM, Katherine Wester Neal <
>>>> 
>>>> <mailto:wester@uga.edu> wester@uga.edu> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>> I think we're all on to something here--just different parts of the
>>>> 
>>>>>>> same
>>>> 
>>>>>> thing. To put it all together, I'm thinking of a spiderweb. On
>>>> 
>>>>>> individual strands, our spiderweb includes:
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 1. The differences in contact time and the difficulty of sustaining
>>>> 
>>>>>> meaningful (or really any kind of) change when one is teaching 1,100
>>>> hours.
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 2. The pressures of testing.
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 3. The cultural value of childhood, teaching in general, elementary
>>>> 
>>>>>> teachers, and testing as an educational goal in the U.S.
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 4. Making changes in teachers' practices, the way schools work, the
>>>> 
>>>>>> culture of testing, and how students' creative capacities are
>>> developed.
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 5. Resistance from parents, teachers, and teacher educators to new
>>>> 
>>>>>>> ways
>>>> 
>>>>>> of learning/new ideas, which is often a result of deeply ingrained
>>>> 
>>>>>> prior experiences.
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>> I probably didn't get everything that's been discussed, but these
>>>> 
>>>>>>> are
>>>> 
>>>>>> all issues that should be examined in concert because they are all
>>>> 
>>>>>> connected as part of the same larger system. Although "system" isn't
>>>> 
>>>>>> probably the word I should use with a Vygotskian framework (I'm
>> still
>>>> 
>>>>>> learning), I use to say that I'm not sure how an individual could
>>>> 
>>>>>> deal with one of these strands without affecting or needing to work
>>> with
>>>> the others.
>>>> 
>>>>>> Does it take the effort of a collective, working on multiple strands
>>>> 
>>>>>> simultaneously, to make more than a dent? Or to borrow Ed's words,
>>>> 
>>>>>> how do we reshape the dent or make it bigger?
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>> Katie
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>> Katie Wester-Neal
>>>> 
>>>>>>> University of Georgia
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>> ________________________________________
>>>> 
>>>>>>> From:  <mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
>>>> 
>>>>>>> < <mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>>> 
>>>>>> on behalf of Ed Wall < <mailto:ewall@umich.edu> ewall@umich.edu>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 3:00 PM
>>>> 
>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>>> 
>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: NYTimes.com: Why Do Americans Stink at Math?
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>> Greg
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>    I agree with much of what you write below. However, there may
>> be
>>>> 
>>>>>>> a
>>>> 
>>>>>> disjunct between what you think is happening (and in many instances
>> I
>>>> 
>>>>>> agree with you) and the shape of the denting I am speaking about. I
>>>> 
>>>>>> begin my methods courses talking about the commitments I bring to
>>>> 
>>>>>> teaching (stressing they are mine and that teachers and pre-service
>>>> 
>>>>>> teachers are welcome to push back)
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 1. I believe in promoting collective student and teacher engagement
>>>> 
>>>>>> i(and I meant both!)
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 2. I believe in having students do substantial mathematical work
>>>> 
>>>>>>> (and
>>>> 
>>>>>> that is where the constraints of the context can come into play -
>>>> 
>>>>>> don't necessarily read into this 'new math' or tedious computations)
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 3. I believe in taking my students' thinking seriously (this
>>>> 
>>>>>>> includes
>>>> 
>>>>>> (mis)understandings!!)
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>> I have yet, by the way, to find an instance (and that includes
>>>> 
>>>>>>> school
>>>> 
>>>>>> location and students, testing, whatever) where such commitments are
>>>> 
>>>>>> impossible or, in a pragmatic sense, even moderately difficult (most
>>>> 
>>>>>> often the difficulty is learning to value one's students which is
>>>> 
>>>>>> more of a choice although one needs to be aware of the possibility).
>>>> 
>>>>>> I would very much appreciate your suggesting some instances where
>>>> 
>>>>>> such commitments were situationally impossible. My students and I
>>>> 
>>>>>> (teachers and pre-service
>>>> 
>>>>>> teachers) then spend a semester (and perhaps more) together - with
>>>> 
>>>>>> feedback from classroom and field experiences - figuring out what
>>>> 
>>>>>> kind of  teaching (keeping in mind my commitments) can be sustained
>>>> 
>>>>>> (and it will differ and they need to know this and accommodate to
>>>> 
>>>>>> this). I am not unusual (perhaps read 'rare' - smile). In fact I
>> have
>>>> 
>>>>>> a number of colleagues who are considerably more capable.
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>   Philip Jackson (or was it Dan Lortie) used to talk about the
>>>> 
>>>>>> apprenticeship of observation. People, he argued, learn to teach -
>>>> 
>>>>>> for the most part - by observing as students in regular classroom.
>>>> 
>>>>>> That should give one pause for a variety of reasons. I have sat
>>>> 
>>>>>> through numerous faculty meetings where students are mentioned in
>>>> 
>>>>>> less than a respectful fashion (and have heard anecdotes where that
>>>> 
>>>>>> carried into the college classroom). I have heard elementary
>> teachers
>>>> 
>>>>>> spoken of quite disparagingly by faculty in Arts & Sciences and,
>>>> 
>>>>>> while I agree their expertise is not always of the highest
>> 'academic'
>>>> 
>>>>>> quality, it is not clear to me that, in their own field of study,
>>>> 
>>>>>> they are not more capable than their detractors. I have also seen an
>>>> 
>>>>>> instructor continually stress 'nice' or 'comfortable' rather than
>>>> 'challenging' or 'uncomfortable.'
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>    I admit my commitments have hooks in them; for instance, what
>> is
>>>> 
>>>>>> substantial mathematics (you need to know some mathematics to figure
>>>> 
>>>>>> this out); what is collective teacher and student engagement (you
>>>> 
>>>>>> need to know some pedagogy to figure this out) and what does it mean
>>>> 
>>>>>> to respect student thinking in view of the previous (you need to
>> know
>>>> 
>>>>>> some mathematics and some pedagogy to figure this out). However,
>> they
>>>> 
>>>>>> are a beginning and some of my students seem, in time, to grow into
>>> them
>>>> no matter the situation.
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>   Anyway, I can't say I'm blissfully optimistic, but I'm not
>>>> 
>>>>>> pessimistic either. I do know that culturally we often don't work
>>>> 
>>>>>> together; that we tend to get mired in the trivial; and we often
>>>> 
>>>>>> 'demonize' the stranger. I hate to think that we will never choose
>>>> 
>>>>>> otherwise. However, to choose otherwise seems very far from
>>>> 
>>>>>> impossible in the formal schooling context.
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>> Ed
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Jul 30, 2014, at 1:42 PM, Greg Thompson
>>>> 
>>>>>>> < <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com> greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Ed,
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Thanks for this wonderfully thoughtful reply. Very helpful.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> As for the teaching practices part, I entirely agree about the
>> need
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> for thoughtful attention to teaching practices and agree that
>> great
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> things
>>>> 
>>>>>> can
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> be accomplished locally. My sense, though, is that it takes great
>>>> 
>>>>>> effort to
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> sustain such smaller scale interventions (i.e. to make more than a
>>>> 
>>>>>> dent).
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> With regard to teaching practices, I would think that the way to
>>>> 
>>>>>> approach a
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> thoughtful teaching practice would be to start with the real
>>>> 
>>>>>> constraints of
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> context that teachers will regularly face and then try and figure
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> out
>>>> 
>>>>>> what
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> kinds of teaching can be sustained given those constraints.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> That's where I'm most pessimistic. It is difficult for me to
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> imagine developing responsible teaching practices that could be
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> sustained on a larger scale given the cultural, institutional, and
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ideological context
>>>> 
>>>>>> of
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> schooling in the U.S. [and I might add that it seems like the
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> history of teaching practice in the U.S. is a history where the
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> same good ideas
>>>> 
>>>>>> keep
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> popping up and then fading from sight almost as quickly as they
>>>> 
>>>>>> appeared].
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> But I'm certainly open to ideas/suggestions for thoughtful
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> pedagogical practices that are sustainable in the U.S. formal
>>>> schooling
>>>> context.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> -greg
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Ed Wall < <mailto:
>> ewall@umich.edu
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ewall@umich.edu> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Comments below
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Jul 30, 2014, at 11:33 AM, Greg Thompson
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I was hoping that somebody might be able to comment on the
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> situation
>>>> 
>>>>>> of
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> schooling in Japan and whether or not these hypotheses about the
>>>> 
>>>>>> Japanese
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> situation of schooling might bear out:
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 1. Teachers in Japan have time to develop their craft. 600
>> annual
>>>> 
>>>>>> hours
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> of
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> contact time for teachers in Japan vs. 1100 hours of contact
>> time
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>> 
>>>>>> the
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> U.S.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Yes
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 2. There is an ideology of childhood in Japan that values
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> childhood
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> greatly
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> and treats them as qualitatively distinct beings from
>> adolescents
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> and adults, and thus suggests that they should be protected from
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> the cruel
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> harsh practice of "testing". But this also means that elementary
>>>> 
>>>>>> school
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> teachers are held in high regard.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Yes. However, it doesn't necessarily follow that this is why
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> elementary school teachers are held in high regard
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I guess the first seems a bit more factual but the second is
>> more
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>> 
>>>>>> an
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> hypothesis, but if they bear out as important factors for
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> enabling the
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> kind
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> of learning that Green describes, then it seems to me that even
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> if
>>>> 
>>>>>> there
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> were to be a huge push for training teachers in the U.S.,
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> teachers
>>>> 
>>>>>> would
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> quickly revert to what we currently lament about teaching in the
>>>> U.S.
>>>> 
>>>>>> not
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> because they are bad teachers or don't know how to teach in the
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> more complex manner but rather simply because, with some rare
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> exceptions,
>>>> 
>>>>>> it
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> is
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> IMPOSSIBLE to teach in the more desirable manner given the
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> ridiculous amount of contact time and the fact that in the
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> American ideology of childhood, the teaching of children is not
>>>> valued particularly highly.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> This doesn't follow. It is possible and it is possible in highly
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> urban areas (and I amy misunderstand you use of the word 'rare').
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> That
>>>> 
>>>>>> doesn't
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> mean that it is necessarily valued or supported by the
>>>> powers-that-be.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> There are a few more things to add to your facts: There is a
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> national curriculum in Japan and there is a reasonably effective
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> mentoring
>>>> 
>>>>>> system
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> (largely teacher instigated). A 'fact' (and perhaps this is
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> anecdotal)
>>>> 
>>>>>> is
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> that when it was first realized that some interesting things were
>>>> 
>>>>>> happening
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> in Japanese schools (e.g. lesson study), the collegiate Japanese
>>>> 
>>>>>> community
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> was caught, to a large degree, unaware. 'Master' lesson are
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> published
>>>> 
>>>>>> by
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> teachers.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> In light of this, it seems a Sisyphean feat to try to change
>>>> teachers'
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> teaching practices without changing the cultural context in
>> which
>>>> 
>>>>>> those
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> teachers work. And changing cultural contexts is perhaps even
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> more difficult still.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> That was why I suggested a look at the Netherlands (which seem to
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> do as well or better than the Japanese). Of course, some of this
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> can still be explained because of cultural differences and how
>>>> teachers are viewed.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Maybe we should stop looking to teaching practices in formal
>>>> 
>>>>>> schooling in
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> the U.S. as a site of change?
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Maybe better to look outside and beyond schools altogether?
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Perhaps we should do as you suggest (and, to a limited extent and
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> in a sense, something like this has been done). However, it might
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> also be a
>>>> 
>>>>>> good
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> idea to look at teaching practices in a thoughtful way. I have
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> seen
>>>> 
>>>>>> very
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> little of this happening over the years. I was just talking to a
>>>> 
>>>>>> colleague
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> today and, although we love our work in urban areas, we admit to
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> making only a small dent. We also admit to being underwhelmed by
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> views of education prevalent in many schools of education. It is
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> getting
>>>> 
>>>>>> steadily
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> worse.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Too pessimistic?
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> -greg
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Pessimism is fine, but simply pessimism can be self limiting;
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> however, that is an opinion and not a fact.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Ed
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 6:02 AM, Ed Wall < <mailto:
>>> ewall@umich.edu>
>>>> 
>>>> ewall@umich.edu> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps something of interest re this thread.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Ed Wall
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>> <
>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/29/opinion/joe-nocera-teaching-teachin
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/29/opinion/joe-nocera-teaching-teachin
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>> g.html?_r=0
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Some general comments (and I apologize for being so late to
>> the
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> conversation as I have been out of email contact)
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Magdalen Lampert and Deborah Ball were both at Michigan State
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> in the
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> late 80s. They both taught what might, in part, be an early
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> version
>>>> 
>>>>>> of
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Common Core to their students. I also taught math methods
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> beginning
>>>> 
>>>>>> in
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> late 90s and also emphasized such an approach (I also did
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> similar as
>>>> 
>>>>>> a
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> K-12
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> math teacher before moving onto college teaching). There is
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> little
>>>> 
>>>>>> 'new'
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> math in the Common Core - perhaps a bit of 'old' math. However,
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> there
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> very strong emphasis on kids making sense out of what they are
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> doing
>>>> 
>>>>>> (I
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> apologize for being brief, but this is a moment between
>> meetings
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> at a conference devoted to such 'strange' notions as helping
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> kids making
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> sense).
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> There are problems with the Common Core as written down: it is
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> being
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> forced down teachers' throats; it has been tied into high
>> stakes
>>>> 
>>>>>> testing
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> (which, by the way, occurs at places in a student's life in
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Japan);
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> there
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> are some debatable differences in the age sequencing of topics;
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> teachers to
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> be have often not been prepared for such teaching in their
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> college
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> courses;
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> and more.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Some of these problems may be ironed out with time; however,
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> training and culture of teaching (see Jackson and Lortie, even
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> if
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> somewhat
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> dated) in the US is still a bit grim.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> So a few summary points:
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Teaching that is, more or less, in sync with the Common Core
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> has
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> been practiced for years in the US. Teacher training that is in
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> sync
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> with
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> the Common Core has been available for years in the US. Lesson
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> study Japanese style may be more possible with an agreed upon
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> core
>>>> 
>>>>>> (although
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> one
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> might look to the Netherlands to see what works well for them
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> rather
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> than
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Japan).
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> An interesting question for those of us who are involved in
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> teacher
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> training might be "Why do so many teachers find the Common Core
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Standards
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> so threatening - factoring out the forcing and testing)?" What
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> (from
>>>> 
>>>>>> the
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 4th grade standards, for example):
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>  . Use place value understanding and properties of operations
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> perform multi-digit arithmetic.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>  . Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> do some elementary teachers find difficult and threatening?
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Again apologies for being very, very short about a very large
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>> 
>>>>>> very
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> complex problem.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ed
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 28, 2014, at 2:25 PM, Katherine Wester Neal
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> < <mailto:wester@uga.edu> wester@uga.edu>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What an interesting article! I am thinking about the lack of
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> focus
>>>> 
>>>>>> on
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> specific contexts in the article's discussion of teaching and
>>>> 
>>>>>> learning
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> teach as a practicing teacher. Is it possible to go about such
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> change
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> (from
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> "old" math to new math or Common Core math) with little/no
>>>> 
>>>>>> consideration
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> for what kinds of teaching might work in a particular school
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> culture
>>>> 
>>>>>> or
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> social context of a given classroom? I think less of a
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> standardized approach (here, everyone do this) and more focus
>> on
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> what works
>>>> 
>>>>>> locally
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> (here are some ideas; now decide what might work for you) might
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> help teachers learn to teach Common Core math in a way that
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> actually
>>>> 
>>>>>> works in
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> their particular context. To adapt phrase from Magdalene
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Lampert, it
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> might
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> bring about more sustainable change as they are "re-learning
>>>> 
>>>>>> teaching"
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> in
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> their schools.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because Common Core math is so different, perhaps this
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> re-learning
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> teaching requires a radical new approach instead of the same
>> old
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> professional development. Learning through the Japanese
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> jugyokenkyu
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> method
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> sounds like it might be very useful, but there doesn't seem to
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> be a
>>>> 
>>>>>> push
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> for reforming how teachers learn once they are in the field.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> (Except
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> if enough of their students fail the Common Core-aligned tests,
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> will
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> eventually be out of a job.)
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It seems nonsensical to implement incredibly high-stakes
>> tests
>>>> 
>>>>>> without
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> significant investment in re-learning teaching and with, as far
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> as I
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> know,
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> no research on how to learn to teach Common Core as a
>> practicing
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> teacher.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> I, too, wonder about how these issues are handled in Japan?
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Katie
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Katie Wester-Neal
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> University of Georgia
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________________
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> From:  <mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd < <mailto:huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
>>>> 
>>>> huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 12:58 PM
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fwd: NYTimes.com: Why Do Americans
>> Stink
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Math?
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 28 July 2014 16:46, Greg Thompson
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> < <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
>> greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> These students had learned
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> incredibly well how to solve recipe Physics but they had no
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> idea
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> about
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> how
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the basic principles of Physics worked.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Greg,
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would say the ethics of the situation go deeper than simply
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> (un)learnt
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> capabilities, but rather to the development of the student's
>>>> 
>>>>>> creative
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> capabilities (or, rather, the stunting of them).
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Huw
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Assistant Professor
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Department of Anthropology
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Brigham Young University
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Provo, UT 84602
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> <http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson>
>>>> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> --
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Assistant Professor
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Department of Anthropology
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Brigham Young University
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Provo, UT 84602
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> <http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson>
>>>> 
>>>> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor
> Department of Anthropology
> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> Brigham Young University
> Provo, UT 84602
> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson