In our dialogue on mathematics education, I think we have to pay a lot of
attention to faculty attitudes and beliefs. We have been trying to invest
in professional development for our instructors to raise their awareness of
current issues and to develop their own understanding of our profession.
This process is not easy, but it's got to be done -- there is no such thing
as a "teacher-proof curriculum"; we could have "teacher-less curriculum",
but as long as a teacher is involved, they have a major impact on the
outcomes.
I hope this helps!
Jack
JanR@MONTCALM.CC.MI.US on 11/21/97 11:54:28
Please respond to JanR@MONTCALM.CC.MI.US
To: Jack Rotman/Math-Science/Student Academic Support/LCC
cc: mathedcc@archives.math.utk.edu
Subject: RE: [MATHEDCC] RE: Developmental Math Labs
My interpretation of RWW Taylor's post was not at all having to do with
the modes of teaching being used, rather it was the content of the
courses that were being taught using these modes. He seemed to be
taking issue with teaching procedural methods in place of conceptual
topics, a hot topic in math ed circles presently. If you're teaching
according to his definition of mathematics, "a process, as a way of
looking at and understanding the world...," in your "lab" setting, I
give you much credit. Most "labs" I've seen teach number-crunching.
I'd be interested in the textbook, the software, and the videos that are
being used if conceptual topics are being taught.
Jan Roy
Mathematics Instructor
Montcalm Community College
2800 College Dr., S.W., P.O. Box 300
Sidney, MI 48885-0300
(517)328-1235
janr@montcalm.cc.mi.us
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jack_Rotman@lansing.cc.mi.us [SMTP:Jack_Rotman@lansing.cc.mi.us]
> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 1997 3:42 PM
> To: RWTNTS@RITVAX.ISC.RIT.EDU
> Cc: mathedcc@archives.math.utk.edu
> Subject: Re: [MATHEDCC] RE: Developmental Math Labs
>
>
> RWW Taylor makes some observations about developmental math labs (see
> below
> if you did not read his note the first time). Having worked in a
> developmental math lab for over 20 years, I thought I would put a
> 'few'
> cents in to the discussion.
>
> 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/
> *
> **********************************************************************
> ******
***************************************************************************
*
* 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/ *
****************************************************************************