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

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



Ulvi

     Actually, you might find the other volume in this series more useful for your question: Russian Mathematical Education: Programs and Practices (also edited by Karp.

Ed

On Dec 21, 2014, at  5:57 PM, Ulvi İçil wrote:

> 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
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> 
>>