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

[Xmca-l] Re: Maths and science in Russia



Thank you very much Ed.


2014-12-22 1:53 GMT+02:00 Ed Wall <ewall@umich.edu>:

> Ulvi
>
>          Yes, Russia has and I suspect continues to be more successful
> that the US in 8th grade and that, I think, might call in question seeming
> US success in 4th grade (there are perhaps complicating factors). At least,
> a number of people think so which is, as I said before, one reason for
> recent reform efforts in the US.
>
>          As regards the Russian mathematics curriculum, you might want to
> take a look at a 1980 4th grade Russian  mathematics text
>
>   ftp://math.stanford.edu/pub/papers/milgram/russian-grade-4-problems.pdf
>
> This is significantly beyond, in places, what is taught to US 4th graders
> and may, in part, speak to what happens by 8th grade.
>
> You might want to take a look at Russian Mathematics Education: History
> and World Significance (Schmittau has a chapter).
>
> Ed
>
> On Dec 21, 2014, at  5:09 PM, Ulvi İçil wrote:
>
> > Thanks Ed.
> >
> > The picture I attached earlier may have misled me. In the below link.
> >
> > You seem to be right, Russia does not seem to be particularly successful.
> >
> > But according to this
> >
> >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trends_in_International_Mathematics_and_Science_Study
> > .
> >
> > Countries' scores  with flags.
> >
> > Russia seems still to be successful than US at TIMSS2011 for eight grade.
> >
> > On the other hand, I suppose that there is a considerable deterioration,
> > decentralization and processes alike in Russia after 1990.
> >
> > About Piaget dominance in US and England;
> >
> > can it be thought that Piaget's dominance is hindering math curriculum to
> > be a developed one because it does not take into account early
> development
> > of abstract thinking in children?
> >
> > My question about  Russia's actual math curriculum is still open.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 2014-12-22 0:48 GMT+02:00 Ed Wall <ewall@umich.edu>:
> >
> >> Ulvi
> >>
> >>      According to the 2015 TIMSS, the average score of fourth graders in
> >> the US is 541 where that of England and the Russian Federation is 542. I
> >> know that, in general, the mathematics curriculum in the US and England
> has
> >> nothing much to do with Vygotsky (and yet a lot to do with Piaget). A
> >> number of mathematics educators think that the math curriculum in the
> early
> >> grades in the US is not particularly successful (hat is one of the
> reasons
> >> behind some recent reform efforts in the US). Why do you think, given
> these
> >> average scores (and, of course, there are questions about TIMSS), the
> >> curriculum in Russia is "quite successful?"
> >>
> >> Ed Wall
> >> On Dec 21, 2014, at  4:15 PM, Ulvi İçil wrote:
> >>
> >>> Thanks Huw.
> >>> Yes, I know in Davydov it is called learning activity but my question
> was
> >>> aimed at the curriculum situation in Russia, current math curriculum
> >>> applied in Russia's primary schools?
> >>> What is this curriculum? Is it the one proposed by Davydov or bearing
> >>> another name?
> >>> And to put it in terms of Vygotsky, is the curriculum currently
> applied,
> >>> and which seems to be quite successful, has anything to do with
> >> Vygotskian
> >>> theory in Russia and in other countries where maths seems to be a
> >>> successful discipline in primary years.
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>> Ulvi
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 2014-12-22 0:01 GMT+02:00 Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>:
> >>>
> >>>> Ulvi,
> >>>>
> >>>> The essential 'method' is to facilitate students'  own experimentation
> >> with
> >>>> methods.  This is called learning activity.
> >>>>
> >>>> Huw
> >>>>
> >>>> On 21 December 2014 at 12:15, Ulvi İçil <ulvi.icil@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I know there are some works comparing Russia (Davydov's curriculum)
> and
> >>>> US,
> >>>>> and even some works done in US with an application of Davydov's, e.g.
> >> by
> >>>>> Schmittau.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I would like to know, not in detail, but just in general, which main
> >>>>> factors lie behind this success in Russia, it is Davydov, or Zarkov
> or
> >>>> any
> >>>>> other scholar's method.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks in advance,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ulvi
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>