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

*To*: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>*Subject*: [Xmca-l] Re: Maths and science in Russia*From*: Ulvi İçil <ulvi.icil@gmail.com>*Date*: Mon, 22 Dec 2014 02:18:14 +0200*In-reply-to*: <90CE9AFD-D8C1-4E6B-83E0-EF73FD343E54@umich.edu>*List-archive*: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l>*List-help*: <mailto:xmca-l-request@mailman.ucsd.edu?subject=help>*List-id*: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l.mailman.ucsd.edu>*List-post*: <mailto:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>*List-subscribe*: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l>, <mailto:xmca-l-request@mailman.ucsd.edu?subject=subscribe>*List-unsubscribe*: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l>, <mailto:xmca-l-request@mailman.ucsd.edu?subject=unsubscribe>*References*: <CABjfC8KQyGQiv=5pyRR6z8Jof0KroEdm03VwE43y_md0zzfN7Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAG1MBOH9B-yZVdu8N5BV157p4z9MpGxUsMQDtPrmgZDs2_Vyag@mail.gmail.com> <CABjfC8JUhGqkzh9hBLCwVvU_NV3c1yssVs77SNAZvMgZjpV9eA@mail.gmail.com> <626322EE-DC59-4C94-A4AD-5C54F6045589@umich.edu> <CABjfC8LxROkbW+FGwso3wxG2Q-B+KBwBmpvkbseYc88qZ=ELKQ@mail.gmail.com> <A35E4398-DC27-49C7-9953-83CEC7275D2D@umich.edu> <CABjfC8JrKw2FRuZmRpTm6qaai6diJypB=cPTB3VVJZ8eEvh=Qg@mail.gmail.com> <90CE9AFD-D8C1-4E6B-83E0-EF73FD343E54@umich.edu>*Reply-to*: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>*Sender*: <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>

Yes Ed, I noticed that 2nd volume's content, program and practices. Huw, you are right, "successful" is a wrong term, so the question is somewhat erroneous. 2014-12-22 2:13 GMT+02:00 Ed Wall <ewall@umich.edu>: > 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 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > >> > > >

**References**:**[Xmca-l] Maths and science in Russia***From:*Ulvi İçil <ulvi.icil@gmail.com>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Maths and science in Russia***From:*Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Maths and science in Russia***From:*Ulvi İçil <ulvi.icil@gmail.com>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Maths and science in Russia***From:*Ed Wall <ewall@umich.edu>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Maths and science in Russia***From:*Ulvi İçil <ulvi.icil@gmail.com>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Maths and science in Russia***From:*Ed Wall <ewall@umich.edu>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Maths and science in Russia***From:*Ulvi İçil <ulvi.icil@gmail.com>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Maths and science in Russia***From:*Ed Wall <ewall@umich.edu>

- Prev by Date:
**[Xmca-l] Re: Maths and science in Russia** - Next by Date:
**[Xmca-l] Re: Eduardo Vianna profile** - Previous by thread:
**[Xmca-l] Re: Maths and science in Russia** - Next by thread:
**[Xmca-l] Re: Maths and science in Russia** - Index(es):