Real-world application
Over at Right on the Left Coast, there's a post about the ubiquitous student question of "when are we ever going to need to know this?"
The author, Darren, a math teacher, opines:
He goes on to give the example of women in anti-aircraft artillery units during WWII who had to utilize advanced math skills and continues,
I remember, as a student, that this type of answer was never very convincing, and I went to excellent schools and had superlative parental support. I understand that as well-educated adults, many of us (Darren clearly included) have an innate love for learning and enjoy knowledge for knowledge's sake. That's great.
It seems to me, however, that it's a different beast for students, many of whom couldn't tell you why they are learning what they're learning. This isn't just an assumption I'm making; according to the High School Survey of Student Engagment, only half of high schoolers thought that school contributes substantially to "learning work-related skills" and only 45% thought that it contributed substantially to "solving real-world problems." As I noted in my first post on the HSSSE, "If you're in the other half, what precisely is your incentive for working hard?"
The rub is that most of the skills we want our students to learn DO have real-world application; very direct, concrete real-world application. We use analytical math when we're trying to logic out how long it's going to take us to get from one place to another; we use percentages to determine tips. Part of the problem is what we choose to teach -- I've never used a logarithm or integration in my life, but I use statistics all the time, yet that was hardly covered -- the other part is that we seem bad at communicating the 'why'. More than anything, math is important because it's a mode of rational thinking which becomes ingrained in how we go about our day to day business; we use the scientific method without even noticing; we read critically every time we pick up a newspaper or log on to a web site.
Quite frankly, if we can't answer the question "Why are we learning this?" then we shouldn't be teaching it. Knowledge for knowledge's sake is a love of learning we should always strive to impart in our students, but it's not something that can be hammered in. The curriculum should have explainable, tangible real-world applications, and when the students see that, they'll be a lot more apt to pay attention and care.
The author, Darren, a math teacher, opines:
I hear that question frequently in math. It grows old. Do they ask the same question in English class when studying the poetry of Emily Dickenson?
He goes on to give the example of women in anti-aircraft artillery units during WWII who had to utilize advanced math skills and continues,
So when are you ever gonna have to use this? Maybe when you're trying to defend your country from attack by a ruthless enemy!
Bottom line is, I don't know when you're "ever gonna have to use this stuff". But isn't it good knowledge to have, just in case? And why cut yourself off from fields you don't even know about yet? I'll bet the women in school in 1930s Britain never thought they'd be using math to help shoot down Nazi aircraft.
I remember, as a student, that this type of answer was never very convincing, and I went to excellent schools and had superlative parental support. I understand that as well-educated adults, many of us (Darren clearly included) have an innate love for learning and enjoy knowledge for knowledge's sake. That's great.
It seems to me, however, that it's a different beast for students, many of whom couldn't tell you why they are learning what they're learning. This isn't just an assumption I'm making; according to the High School Survey of Student Engagment, only half of high schoolers thought that school contributes substantially to "learning work-related skills" and only 45% thought that it contributed substantially to "solving real-world problems." As I noted in my first post on the HSSSE, "If you're in the other half, what precisely is your incentive for working hard?"
The rub is that most of the skills we want our students to learn DO have real-world application; very direct, concrete real-world application. We use analytical math when we're trying to logic out how long it's going to take us to get from one place to another; we use percentages to determine tips. Part of the problem is what we choose to teach -- I've never used a logarithm or integration in my life, but I use statistics all the time, yet that was hardly covered -- the other part is that we seem bad at communicating the 'why'. More than anything, math is important because it's a mode of rational thinking which becomes ingrained in how we go about our day to day business; we use the scientific method without even noticing; we read critically every time we pick up a newspaper or log on to a web site.
Quite frankly, if we can't answer the question "Why are we learning this?" then we shouldn't be teaching it. Knowledge for knowledge's sake is a love of learning we should always strive to impart in our students, but it's not something that can be hammered in. The curriculum should have explainable, tangible real-world applications, and when the students see that, they'll be a lot more apt to pay attention and care.
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, February 08, 2006 at 1:24 PM.
|
