"All the Real Math To Which School (Including College) Refused Yo u Access."

[Kim Rose]

Hi, John -

This is *so true*, and part of what makes "our job" that much more 
difficult.  We can try to educate today's children to be in a better 
position to become teachers/mentors and adults tomorrow...but since 
today's teachers (adults in general) are often "victims of *their* 
education" they too remain mystified when it comes to ideas like 
"vectors".  Many of today's adults never took a course in any 
physcial science, or as Alan likes to point out were never taugh 
mathematics, but only calculation.   So, this does make it rough as 
you point out.

I will confess that *my* use of etoys and work in this area, has 
*finally* brought understanding to *me* of a few math and science 
concepts that remained "mysterious" until not so long ago.  The good 
news with this experience is that I have personally seen how creating 
physcial models in this way can bring real learning.
  -- Kim



>Hello Alan,
>
>You hit it right on the mark with "vectors," but thinking back on it, the
>breakdown in communication may have been over the concepts themselves
>(despite claims to the contrary). I was discussing this with fellow computer
>club mentors and I seem to remember that even the illustrations you sent and
>your references to "weighing angle" and "'down track' forces" were greeted
>with blank looks. Without dwelling on this sad state of affairs, I simply
>want to point out that in "proselytizing" about Squeak we need to keep in
>mind that adults, even those in the biz, need the models just as much as
>kids; we can't assume an understanding even of simple math and physics.
>
>Best,
>
>J
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-squeakland at squeakland.org
>[mailto:owner-squeakland at squeakland.org]On Behalf Of Alan Kay
>Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 10:22 AM
>To: squeakland at squeakland.org
>Subject: RE: "All the Real Math To Which School (Including College)
>Refused Yo u Access."
>
>
>Thanks John --
>
>It would be great if you could list the "language stuff" that causes
>the glazing. Do you mean terms like "vectors"? What other terms are
>offputting?  One of the reasons this stuff works so well with the
>kids is that they just do the models, we don't employ terminology
>with them.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Alan
>
>At 8:29 PM -0400 4/16/03, John Voiklis wrote:
>>While I did not ask the original question, I thank you, Alan, for these
>>helpful hints to the pendulum problem.
>>
>>Getting back to the imagined book in the subject line and my earlier
>>question about whether such a resource exists: the reaction I have gotten
>>from all the people with whom I have shared this problem and the hints is
>>that they can understand the concepts but not the terminology...at least in
>>this instance, it is the language that makes their eyes glaze over. I don't
>>present this as a criticism, but, as someone concerned with explaining such
>>things to people, it is definitely an important observation; one at least
>  >that I should keep in mind.
>  >
>  >Best,
>  >
>  >John
>
>
>--


--