We've just finished hosting a major East African mathematics education conference, bringing delegates from Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda, with visitors also from Botswana, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Italy, Sweden, France and Canada (think that's everyone!) Great pleasure to meet so many wonderful people as we look to explore what we can to support mathematics learning in this region, lots of ideas on how we can continue to network - including PAMC, this may now get off the ground, watch this space! So, not surprising that I've been thinking a bit about the learning and teaching of mathematics recently, more so than normal. I was very struck by one of the presenters who videotapes his undergraduate lectures and then uploads them to a website so that students can watch them again - or for the first time if the missed the lecture. One student wrote to him to thank him for doing this, and then continued to say this: After I watched your lectures through 3 or 4 times Irealised that you ask really simple questionsOn the face of it this makes no sense - surely if the lecturer is asking simple questions then that should be immediately obvious? But I would want to suggest that this makes a very profound point about mathematics: once the penny drops things become clear, until that point things seem impenetrable. I wonder how many people have had the experience when at school of going into a classroom after a mathematics class for an older group has happened, and to look in wonder and mystification at what was left behind on the blackboard? In my experience this continues up through undergraduate mathematics, in any one year having no real idea what was going on in the year above until we got there. As far as I can make out, this 'secret garden' aspect of the subject does not apply in quite the same way in other disciplines, but am very happy to be shown to be wrong on this point! A few related points: If you're doing mathematics right then you're doing a simplerversion of mathematics than if you're doing it wrongOne example of this is when I was tutoring a boy for an independent senior school entrance exam (non-calculator), and he was faced with a particularly hideous simplification of a fraction to do, with a large number of fractions within fractions to sort out. However, if the simplification was done correctly, then a huge amount of cancellation was possible, so the arithmetic involved was actually straightforward. One may consider that this makes it a good question in that it is testing only one skill, that of simplifying fractions. The problem here is that if you start to go wrong then the cancellations will not appear so you end up doing all kinds of long multiplications which the examiners had not intended. Maybe these questions should come with time limits? Most time spent studying mathematics is undertaken bypeople who do not understand what is going onThis is a similar point to that above. As long as things are making sense then mathematics can be done with relatively little effort. Once things make no sense any more then the going gets very tough going. So, I got my way through my undergraduate degree through a large amount of memorisation of theorems and proofs, spending hours before tutorials trying with limited success to work through the example sheets provided. Stephen Hawking, so the story goes, spent 1/2 hour before tutorials producing totally perfect solutions which he then put in the bin as he was leaving, simply because he couldn't see the point in keeping them. An awful lot can be achieved with a small amount of content knowledgeEvery now and again I wage a small war against standards of numeracy when I go shopping and calculate the cost of my purchases in less time than it takes the shop assistant to reach for a calculator. I then get treated like some kind of genius - but please, all I'm doing are basic calculations I learnt at primary school! To take a different example, consider the following multiple choice question, a solution to which is given at the bottom of this post: The probability that the next person you see will have an above average number of arms is: A: 0 B: nearly 0 C: 1/2 D: nearly 1 E: 1 You might like to consider this problem before reading on. I've used this problem many times, mostly with trainee teachers, and found it appropriately challenging, with almost everybody getting it wrong initially, discussing it, eventually getting to the correct answer with a level of 'Oh, yeah!' going on. Except for one occasion when I threw it out to a 12 year old boy whose family I met whilst on holiday, who subverbalised for about 10 seconds before getting the answer right with flawless reasoning. I make no apology for the fact that my jaw dropped open in amazement! What makes it an interesting question is that the content knowledge needed to do it is very basic - in principle, once you've met the concept of probability and average - typically at lower secondary level - you're ready to do it. But yet the reasoning skills here are quite complex which is what makes this a challenging question. So my final point: It is better to have mastery understanding of a small amount ofmathematics than a cursory understanding of a large amountMany times back in the UK, speaking with people in some cases with very high levels of seniority in mathematics education, I expressed the view that most graduate mathematicians would be better off with a thorough understanding of what is deemed to be further mathematics A level than with a very thin understanding of what is actually taught in Universities. I thought I was being highly contentious, but to my surprise, almost everybody to whom I have said that agrees with me. Yet, as far as I can make out, across the world and across the age range, mathematics is being taught as a subject to be memorised, has no relevance to reality, and is devoid of any fun or enjoyment. I sit here and weep. I'm pleased to say that my own contribution, looking at how algebra can be introduced keeping strong links with number, went down very well. So maybe I can make a small contribution here - although this coming week takes me back to my normal job of preparing documents for the Tanzanian Commission for Universities and other such jovialities..... Solution to the problem: The probability that the next person you see will have an above average number of arms is: A: 0 B: nearly 0 C: 1/2 D: nearly 1 E: 1 Assume that average here means mean average. The overwhelming majority of the people in the world have 2 arms, a small number have 1 or 0, the average is therefore slightly less than 2. In all likelihood the next person you meet will have 2 arms, which is an above average number of arms. The answer is therefore D: nearly 1. I'm aware that it's possible to pick holes in the logic, very happy to debate this if you'd like to comment! |

## 6 Comments to 14/9/14: some thoughts on the learning and teaching of mathematics:

Geoff on 17 September 2014 22:47

Samuel Bengmark on 21 September 2014 03:00

Geoff on 21 September 2014 10:06

Geoff on 22 September 2014 05:18

## Add a Comment

bold,italicand more with HTML tags. We'll show you how.