"Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:fh8r1u$6ui$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "metaperl.com" <metaperl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:1194785424.301854.205850@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> So my opinion is that children may have problems with mathematics
>> because they are forced into trying to do a bunch of things which seem
>> foreign to them.
>>
>
> That depends on the abilities of the person. I, for one, suffered
through
> two mathematics teaching styles in my elementary schoole years decades
> ago.
> The "standard" method was visual and algebraic in nature. The new
method,
> which they called "new math," was verbal and used written forms, like
long
> division. I grasped the first very quickly and naturally. It wasn't
> until
> the end of HS that I learned I had far above average spatial
relation****p
> abilities. However, many other students in elementary school preferred
> the
> "new math." I don't recall if they converted to the "new math" or not.
> Anyway, I think that learning math has much more to do with brain
> psychology
> than the "one size fits all" solution you've presented. For example, we
> now
> know that females do better in math in a cooperative environment than a
> competitive one that males prefer.
>
I suspect this is my case as well...
hmm, what about cooperation through competition?...
>> If instead, they simply were allowed to build physical models of the
>> math operations and then express these models in English,
>
> No. I did poorly with English based math. I didn't do as well in
> language
> related cl***** as I did in math and sciences. Yet, I grasped and
learned
> many programming languages very easily. To date, I've had experience in
> 14
> or so. It wasn't until I was much older that my spoken and written
> language
> skills began to approach the depth that I had in programming languages
> from
> very early on. I'm positive that this was due to the high correlation
> between visual symbols and the lower level of ambiguity in the
programming
> language. I can still do algebra based math in my head today, but I
still
> have difficulty with numeric math such as counting change to pay for
fast
> food.
>
yes, I suspect I am similar on many of these points.
programming, yay...
algebra and calculus, easy enough...
writing and speaking, not as good...
arithmetic, errm...
I am not some great writing master or anything, but I write good enough I
think.
scarily enough, I am native english speaker.
then again, I am hardly normal either (AS/HFA, I think also BP-2...).
I seriously disliked word-problems. in my case, I often ended up faced
with
both styles (annoyingly enough, this was the case in the first of the
calculus cl***** I took in college). it is a horribly annoying process of
extracting the math from this chunk of text so that I can work with it.
hardly a pleasant experience...
now, my problem I think was partly this:
I was infact so good at the math in HS and prior, that I didn't actually
learn it...
there was no point, when all of it amounted to little more than simple
reorganization and similar.
first time I took calculus in college (I had placed there), I actually had
to think about it, and was in enough of a mental shock that I didn't pass
(what do I do?... I actually have to do something to get the answer... oh
well, be emo and blow off HW, works real well...).
later on, I took another calculus class, and managed to get the top grade
in
the class (despite my tendency to blow off reading the book, or, for that
matter, do most of the homework...). actually, I had figured, if the
teacher
didn't bother to grade homework, not too much need to do it (do HW for
personal edification?... errm, too lazy for that...).
> But, I'm much better than most ca****ers. Try giving them change that
> requires them to give you back 15 cents or 35 cents instead of even or
50
> cents... Many times they'll be over or under. Say your order came to
> 6.72.
> You give them 10.97. What? It's penny reduction...I want a quarter
back,
> not 0.07 cents, see? Watch them give you 3.75 or 5.69 instead of 4.25.
> 3.75 is (10-6-0.25[0.97-0.72]). 5.69 is (11-6+0.69[0.72-(11-10.97)]).
> Admittedly, those numbers were made up, but I've seen numerous people
make
> mistakes just like those. It's frequently the result of rounding the
> dollar
> amounts or splitting the dollar and change amounts. Then they become
> confused about how the change is to be added or subtracted. Sometimes
> it's
> almost comical watching the ca****er try to figure out the change. I
> thought
> all modern cash registers tell them the amount to return, but that's
> apparently not the case. Both Taco Bell and McDonald's ca****ers have
> recently made mistakes like this on my orders...
>
> Here's another one. Taco Bell breaks out the order into sub-items. You
> see
> what you ordered plus all the individual items that comprise the order.
> McDonald's doesn't. So a meal (burger, fries, pop) are lumped together
on
> the receipt as a single item. Goto McDonald's and order a meal and then
> order _two_ extra burgers (three total). Watch them give you two.
Watch
> them be confused. Watch them reread the receipt. Watch them be
confused.
> Watch them reread the receipt, yet again. Watch them get the manager.
> Watch the manager be confused. Watch the manager reread the receipt...
> I've done this dozens of times at many McDonald's. At this point, I no
> longer order two extra burgers of the same type as the meal. It always
> confuses them.
>
hmm, yes...
>
> Rod Pemberton
>
|
