Sophie write:

>As soon as `the teaching or grammar' crops
>up the `in isolation', `dead boring', etc.
>allegations also rise. Why does this not
>happen when people talk about teaching mathematics?
>
>We really ought to face the fact that grammar as a
>school discipline is an approach to Linguistics in no
>lesser measure than school maths is an
>approach to Mathematics.
>
>By the same token, do we ever doubt that school maths
>will result in students' better ability to count small change?
>Why then do we doubt that students' better ability to write
>will be the result of their being taught grammar?
>Sophie

Math is under attack for the same reasons as grammar: that it is taught in
isolation and it is boring, etc.

It's under attack because so many students fail to learn it. Just check out
the math scores. They are generally terrible, except among those with an
aptitude for math.

As for students' ability to count small change, you have only to notice
that cash registers now do all the figuring for cashiers--yet many cashiers
still have trouble counting the change to you.

So it comes about that, as with grammar, there is now an effort to reform
the teaching of math. The main proposal is that teach math in context and
in practical situations.

Bill

William J. McCleary
3247 Bronson Hill Road
Livonia, NY 14487
716-346-6859

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/