Haim's Challenge; The math-cs boundary in k-12

[kirby urner]

Greeting math-futurists --

Since my last visit to this Google Group, I've published a bunch of Youtubes on my pet topic:  the Bucky stuff.

Good example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTkwUslvYLc&t=6s

I mention the above in the context of what on math-teach (Math Forum) we call Haim's Challenge:  to convincingly show there's anything new under the sun in K-12 mathematics (or even K-6 as Haim believes public funding for education could end after 6th grade.

In other words, are all the debates really about how to teach the content, not what to teach? 

I tend to think we actually have some new content, even at the elementary school level, compared to say a hundred years ago.  To wit: some of this Bucky stuff.

http://controlroom.blogspot.com/2017/05/haims-challenge.html

(re Haim's Challenge)

Also (related topic)...

I continue to think about the boundary between math teaching and CS teaching. 

Is a teacher focusing on differences between the XY grid in MIT Scratch and inside the HTML <canvas> object teaching mathematics in any way?

What differences do I mean?

MIT Scratch: (0,0) and the canvas center and stretches to about (-240, 240) along both X & Y axes.

HTML: canvas anchors (0,0) at the upper left corner, with X, Y increasing horizontally and vertically respectively.

But is that all CS (computer science) because there's technology involved? 

So are kids getting more of their first-hand, hands-on experience using coordinates thanks to screens (versus graph paper)?

Is it the change of medium (from paper to screen) what defines the math versus CS boundary?

More meditation on this issue:

https://medium.com/@kirbyurner/the-plight-of-high-school-math-teachers-c0faf0a6efe6

My work has lately taken me into many schools around Portland, elementary and middle, public and private, where we've been learning MIT Scratch, Codesters.com and Codepen.io.

Kirby

[Joseph Austin]

The example you gave of Scratch vs HTML Canvas is of course a transformation of coordinates, and therefore it's "math".

I'd say the difference between "computer science" and traditional math is in the CS focus on algorithms.

From that perspective, traditional math is static, descriptive, axiomatic, deductive, and "CS" is dynamic, prescriptive, functional, inductive. Or, from a philosophical perspective, "math" is ontological (something first "is," then we find it) and "CS" is existential (nothing "is" until we build it).  

Math teachers have been teaching algorithms all along--e.g. the algorithms for computing arithmetic operations using the decimal number system. They just haven't been calling it "algorithms" or using a consistent language or system to describe the "solution" process.  Unfortunately, they have also been trying to teach students to solve problems without explicit algorithms--e.g. typical "word problems"--which might more usefully be addressed by (a) converting the word problem into an equation, (b) applying an algorithmic algebraic solution process to convert the equation to a formula, 

(c) evaluate the formula, or lacking a closed-form solution, apply a known numerical solution strategy.  IF the algorithms presently taught or presumed were made explicit, the need for a language to express algorithms, and for skill in reading and writing algorithms, would become apparent, and "CS" would sneak imperceptibly into "math" class.

So then the question becomes, Is it "computer" science if the "computer" is a student using pencil and paper?

The recent book/movie "Hidden Figures" reminds us that, prior to the moon landing, the word "computer" typically described a human being, often female, who did calculations according to algorithms.  The "science" is not new,

only the technology.  The website csunplugged.org offer several activities for learning "computer science" without "computers".

I've always told my students that "computer science" is a life-skill--it's the skill of following and giving instructions.
That skill is useful in most fields of human endeavor, whether or not "computing machinery" is directly involved.

Joe Austin

[Dave Fashenpour]

Plz checkout my website - OO-Math.com

Thanks,

Dave.

On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 6:09:38 AM UTC-4, kirby urner wrote: