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

[Ulvi İçil]

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