It is true that the original model for a learning lab was very skill
oriented; often, programmed learning-style texts were used. If you are
committed to mathematics as process (or as communication), you might
conclude that learning labs are inappropriate at any level. However, do
not be too hasty.
A "learning lab" is not one method; a given learning lab can involve only
one method ("study the textbook until you've got it, or watch these tapes,
or use these computer programs, or ...). However, there is no reason why a
math lab has to be based on one learning style any more than a classroom
has to be based on one style.
Our own math lab uses these learning styles:
Study a textbook
One-on-one instruction
Group work in a classroom
Watch and listen to mini-lecture in a classroom
View video tapes
Use computer programs
Group work in the Math Lab
(These are listed in an approximately decreasing order of use by
students in our program.)
Of course, it is a challenge to encourage students to treat mathematics as
process/communication in a math lab -- but this is probably true in any
format. (If you have a 'magic method' that always gets students to deal
with mathematics at deeper levels, PLEASE share the secret!)
We remain committed to our Math Lab because of our ability to respond to
individual needs. We are committed to helping students with unusual work
hours, learning disabilities, and study skill improvement; our format
allows us to do things for the student that would not be possible in a
classroom environment. (We also can allow students to complete two courses
in one semester, a difficult feat in a classroom.)
In my view, the biggest drawback to a math lab has nothing to do with
mathematics education -- the flexibility provides many opportunities to
procrastinate. We continue to look for policies and procedures that help
our students achieve the benefits of our program.
Thanks for reading.
Jack
RWTNTS@RITVAX.ISC.RIT.EDU on 11/20/97 08:56:22
Please respond to RWTNTS@RITVAX.ISC.RIT.EDU
To: mathedcc@archives.math.utk.edu
cc: RWTNTS@RITVAX.ISC.RIT.EDU (bcc: Jack Rotman/Math-Science/Student
Academic Support/LCC)
Subject: [MATHEDCC] RE: Developmental Math Labs
Perhaps I can contribute some historical perspective on the issue of
learning math by independent study. During the 70's and 80's we
ran a large "Math Learning Center" through which we delivered all of
our mathematics instruction at NTID (NTID is roughly the equivalent
of a small community college in many respects). At times we had
enrollments of over 500 students in our learning center, all being
taught out of a single large room with instruction being provided on
a shared basis by a cadre of trained faculty, augmented by student
assistants. The basic arrangement was for students to study provided
materials on their own until they could pass a test, then move on.
Ten years ago we dropped this idea entirely in favor of classroom
instruction. In retrospect I would have to call our efforts during the
learning-center years, however earnest and well-intentioned, essentially
a disservice to the students that we worked with. Our whole faculty is
much happier with the relationships that can be developed in the
small-class model we follow now. Whether we would be sufficiently happy
with a large-class model I don't know.
The basic point at stake is the view of what needs to be learned.
If one views mathematics as just a collection of techniques to be
mastered (as many of our colleagues in the technical departments
our courses serve did) then there might be some argument for
simply providing access to methods for learning to apply these
techniques to standard problems, and call that mathematics
education. If, on the other hand, one wants to view mathematics
as a _process_, as a way of looking at and understanding the world,
as a way of coping with the non-standard problems that really
make up life, then mastering a collection of canned techniques
is a sterile exercise and of little use to students in the long run
(especially as it is clear that the standard techniques can better
be applied by using technology).
The actual thinking and recognition of pattern that make up what we call
"mathematical modelling", as well as appreciation of the subtle points
that lead one to deeper levels of understanding and provide the real basis
for further learning, cannot be addressed in a situation where the
responsibility posed to the student is simply to learn how to solve a given
set of problems of a particular type. I would pose an analogy to piano
playing here. You have to learn how to position your hands at
the keyboard, and to build up strength and dexterity by pursuing
finger exercises. But all of this will buy you nothing if you are
not paying attention to the _music_.
RWW Taylor
National Technical Institute for the Deaf
Rochester Institute of Technology
Rochester NY 14623
>>>> The plural of mongoose begins with p. <<<<
***************************************************************************
*
* To post to the list: email mathedcc@archives.math.utk.edu *
* To unsubscribe, send mail to: majordomo@archives.math.utk.edu
*
* In the mail message, enter ONLY the words: unsubscribe mathedcc
*
* Words in the Subject: line are NOT processed! *
* Archives at http://archives.math.utk.edu/hypermail/mathedcc/
*
***************************************************************************
*
****************************************************************************
* To post to the list: email mathedcc@archives.math.utk.edu *
* To unsubscribe, send mail to: majordomo@archives.math.utk.edu *
* In the mail message, enter ONLY the words: unsubscribe mathedcc *
* Words in the Subject: line are NOT processed! *
* Archives at http://archives.math.utk.edu/hypermail/mathedcc/ *
****************************************************************************