"5-year-olds can learn calculus" interview at The Atlantic

27 views
Skip to first unread message

Maria Droujkova

unread,
Mar 3, 2014, 3:46:01 PM3/3/14
to mathf...@googlegroups.com
I hope this article starts some good conversations: http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/03/5-year-olds-can-learn-calculus/284124/

Cheers,
Dr. Maria Droujkova

David Chandler

unread,
Mar 3, 2014, 3:58:07 PM3/3/14
to mathf...@googlegroups.com
Great article!  Good publicity.

--David Chandler


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MathFuture" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mathfuture+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to mathf...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mathfuture.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Donald Cohen

unread,
Mar 4, 2014, 1:45:02 AM3/4/14
to mathf...@googlegroups.com
Fine job, Maria. 

Thank you for adding me! 

Would you ask the gal who interviewed you to make the link go to my website, instead of to Amazon and my $600 book?

Thank you Maria,

Don
--
"Learning, Living and Loving mathematics.."- the core of Don's teaching and books, observed by Seth Nielson.
The Math Program
Don Cohen -The Mathman
809 Stratford Dr.
Champaign, IL 61821-4140
Tel. 217-356-4555
Email: doncohe...@gmail.com   
Don's Mathman website URL: http://www.mathman.biz
See Don's new clickable  A Map to Calculus with student works and sample problems from Don's books at every node


 

Maria Droujkova

unread,
Mar 4, 2014, 8:15:36 AM3/4/14
to mathf...@googlegroups.com


On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 1:45 AM, Donald Cohen <doncohe...@gmail.com> wrote:
Fine job, Maria. 

Thank you for adding me! 

Would you ask the gal who interviewed you to make the link go to my website, instead of to Amazon and my $600 book?

Thank you Maria,

Don

Don,

You can reach Luba on Twitter, but it might be out of her hands by now: https://twitter.com/LubaSays

People are likely to find you by name, though. 

Cheers,
Dr. Maria Droujkova

Peter Farrell

unread,
Mar 4, 2014, 5:19:33 PM3/4/14
to mathf...@googlegroups.com
Great article! I like the film-making analogy. Too much emphasis placed on the technical aspects of math detracts from the pattern-seeking and -extending fun.

michel paul

unread,
Mar 4, 2014, 7:16:00 PM3/4/14
to mathf...@googlegroups.com
This is really great. It's definitely getting forwarded to some people.

- Michel 


On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Maria Droujkova <drou...@gmail.com> wrote:

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MathFuture" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mathfuture+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to mathf...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mathfuture.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



--
===================================
"What I cannot create, I do not understand."

- Richard Feynman
===================================
"Computer science is the new mathematics."

- Dr. Christos Papadimitriou
===================================

Mehmet Kayaalp

unread,
Mar 5, 2014, 3:58:56 AM3/5/14
to mathf...@googlegroups.com, Joshua Frye
On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Maria Droujkova <drou...@gmail.com> wrote:

Maria,
The article and your interview were indeed very well done--it is great to stir the pot and shake the status quo.

Although not as progressive as yours, here is another article along the same line. This also may give some inspiration to Ali, who in another thread asked our opinion on what mathematics really is.

--mehmet

latimes.com/opinion/commentary/la-oe-adv-frenkel-why-study-math-20140302,0,5177338.story

Rubik's Cube

You can use a Rubik's Cube to explain symmetry groups: Every rotation of the cube is a "symmetry," and these combine into what mathematicians call a group. (Jeffrey F. Bill / The Baltimore Sun)


Op-Ed

How our 1,000-year-old math curriculum cheats America's kids

By hiding math's great masterpieces from students' view, we deny them the beauty of the subject.

By Edward Frenkel

March 2, 2014

advertisement

Imagine you had to take an art class in which you were taught how to paint a fence or a wall, but you were never shown the paintings of the great masters, and you weren't even told that such paintings existed. Pretty soon you'd be asking, why study art?

That's absurd, of course, but it's surprisingly close to the way we teach children mathematics. In elementary and middle school and even into high school, we hide math's great masterpieces from students' view. The arithmetic, algebraic equations and geometric proofs we do teach are important, but they are to mathematics what whitewashing a fence is to Picasso — so reductive it's almost a lie.

Most of us never get to see the real mathematics because our current math curriculum is more than 1,000 years old. For example, the formula for solutions of quadratic equations was in al-Khwarizmi's book published in 830, and Euclid laid the foundations of Euclidean geometry around 300 BC. If the same time warp were true in physics or biology, we wouldn't know about the solar system, the atom and DNA. This creates an extraordinary educational gap for our kids, schools and society.

If we are to give students the right tools to navigate an increasingly math-driven world, we must teach them early on that mathematics is not just about numbers and how to solve equations but about concepts and ideas.

It's about things like symmetry groups, which physicists have used to predict subatomic particles — from quarks to the Higgs boson — and describe their interactions. Or Riemannian geometry, which goes far beyond the familiar Euclidean geometry, and which enabled Einstein to realize that the space we inhabit is curved. Or clock arithmetic — in which adding four hours to 10 a.m. does not get you to 14 but to 2 p.m. — which forms the basis of modern cryptography, protects our privacy in the digital world and, as we've learned, can be easily abused by the powers that be.

We also need to convey to students that mathematical truths are objective, persistent and timeless. They are not subject to changing authority, fads or fashion. A mathematical statement is either true or false; it's something we all agree on. To paraphrase William Blake, mathematics "cleanses the doors of perception."

What distinguishes us from cavemen is the level of abstraction we can reach. Abstraction enabled humans to move from barter to money, and from gold coins to plastic cards. These days, what's left of "money" is often just an account record we read on a computer screen, and soon it could just be a line of code in a bitcoin ledger.

Today, abstraction is all around us — and math is the language of abstraction. In the words of the great mathematician Henri Poincare, mathematics is valuable because "in binding together elements long-known but heretofore scattered and appearing unrelated to one another, it suddenly brings order where there reigned apparent chaos."

For the next generation to operate effectively, they must gain proficiency with abstraction, and that means mathematical knowledge plus conceptual thinking times logical reasoning — all things that a wider view of math would bring to the math classes at our schools. 

I recently visited students in fourth, fifth and sixth grades at a school in New York to talk about the ideas of modern math, ideas they had never heard of before. They were young enough that no one had told them yet that math was impenetrable, that they wouldn't get it. Their minds were still uncluttered with misconceptions and prejudice. They hadn't yet been humiliated by poorly trained math teachers for making mistakes in front of their peers. Every question I asked them was met with a forest of hands.

I used a Rubik's Cube to explain symmetry groups: Every rotation of the cube is a "symmetry," and these combine into what mathematicians call a group. I saw students' eyes light up when they realized that when they were solving the puzzle, they were simply discerning the structure of this group.

We next studied the majestic harmony of Platonic solids using dice. And I told the kids about the curved shapes (such as Riemann surfaces) and the three-dimensional sphere that give us glimpses into the fabric of our universe.

These are portals into the magic world of modern math, starting points as surely as addition, subtraction and fractions are starting points. The added bonus is that they give us a perfect antidote to the common perception of the subject as stale and boring.

Of course, we still need to teach students multiplication tables, fractions and Euclidean geometry. But what if we spent just 20% of class time opening students' eyes to the power and exquisite harmony of modern math? What if we showed them how these fascinating concepts apply to the real world, how the abstract meets the concrete? This would feed their natural curiosity, motivate them to study more and inspire them to engage math beyond the basic requirements — surely a more efficient way to spend class time than mindless memorization in preparation for standardized tests.

In my experience, kids are ready for this. It's the adults that are hesitant. It's not their fault — our math education is broken. But we have to take charge and finally break this vicious circle. With help from professional mathematicians, all of us should make an effort to learn something about the true masterpieces of mathematics, to be able to see big-picture math, the way we see art, literature and other sciences. We owe this to the next generations.

If we succeed, we will stop treating this crucial subject as if it were the equivalent of painting a fence, and we will do away with the question, why study math?

Edward Frenkel is a mathematics professor at UC Berkeley and the author of "Love and Math: The Heart of Hidden Reality."

Copyright © 2014, Los Angeles Time

Maria Droujkova

unread,
Mar 5, 2014, 6:55:25 AM3/5/14
to mathf...@googlegroups.com, Joshua Frye


In my experience, kids are ready for this. It's the adults that are hesitant. It's not their fault — our math education is broken. But we have to take charge and finally break this vicious circle. With help from professional mathematicians, all of us should make an effort to learn something about the true masterpieces of mathematics, to be able to see big-picture math, the way we see art, literature and other sciences. We owe this to the next generations.

If we succeed, we will stop treating this crucial subject as if it were the equivalent of painting a fence, and we will do away with the question, why study math?

Edward Frenkel is a mathematics professor at UC Berkeley and the author of "Love and Math: The Heart of Hidden Reality."

Copyright © 2014, Los Angeles Time



Thank you, Mehmet! Now I am planning to read Edward's book!

Cheers,
Dr. Maria Droujkova
~~~*~~*~*

 

Julia Brodsky

unread,
Mar 5, 2014, 7:59:35 PM3/5/14
to mathf...@googlegroups.com
Mehmet,
thank you for sharing Frenkel's article! It is really good!
Julia


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MathFuture" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mathfuture+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to mathf...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mathfuture.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



--
Julia Brodsky
www.artofinquiry.net

roberto

unread,
Mar 7, 2014, 4:11:01 AM3/7/14
to mathf...@googlegroups.com
Awesome, read it. Congratulations!

Unfortunately I don't work with so young students. And sadly when they step into my classrooms, they've been hurt by about 8 years of old-fashioned Math education. I'm struggling to have them steering away from wrong mindsets about Math reasoning.

How to cope with it?
Cheers,
Robert




--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MathFuture" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mathfuture+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to mathf...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mathfuture.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



--
Roberto

Melissa T

unread,
Mar 7, 2014, 7:52:30 AM3/7/14
to mathf...@googlegroups.com
Reading through your article.  i know I rarely comment in here but i do look through ideas.  I am wondering what your views are on the common core math standards. 


--

Maria Droujkova

unread,
Mar 7, 2014, 7:58:08 AM3/7/14
to mathf...@googlegroups.com


On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Melissa T <jmtrh...@gmail.com> wrote:
Reading through your article.  i know I rarely comment in here but i do look through ideas.  I am wondering what your views are on the common core math standards. 



I like this part of CC - the eight Principles:

1. Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them.
2. Reason abstractly and quantitatively.
3. Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others.
4. Model with mathematics.
5. Use appropriate tools strategically.
6. Attend to precision.
7. Look for and make use of structure.
8. Look for and express regularity in repeated reasoning.


Cheers,
Dr. Maria Droujkova

Melissa T

unread,
Mar 7, 2014, 8:44:23 PM3/7/14
to mathf...@googlegroups.com
Thank you for your response.  I tend to like that part of the standards as well.  How well to you feel the actual standards themselves hold up to these eight principals?  Do you feel this can be better achieved than what is currently written?

I will admit, I am a member of a group that is anti-common core.  But I would like to work towards the creation of something that may perhaps be better then what is written, rather than just constantly blast what we have.  

I am not a mathematician.  I am a special education teacher that is currently in a math placement.  I would like to get the opinions of someone that is more knowledgable than I.

Melissa Tomlinson

PS If I become a pain - just tell me to stop!  I won't be offended!


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MathFuture" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mathfuture+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to mathf...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mathfuture.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Maria Droujkova

unread,
Mar 7, 2014, 9:29:04 PM3/7/14
to mathf...@googlegroups.com


On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 8:44 PM, Melissa T <jmtrh...@gmail.com> wrote:
But I would like to work towards the creation of something that may perhaps be better 


I'd like to focus on this part, because it gives me hope.

Let us use the internet as the analogy. It has the underlying protocols that make web pages work with different devices. Your browser may need extra help with things like Java or Flash, but underneath, there are standards of compatibility. 

I want to see something like that for math modules. Something that would make it easier to browse all the bounty - without restricting individual designers from building their own.


Cheers,
Dr. Maria Droujkova

Melissa T

unread,
Mar 7, 2014, 9:31:07 PM3/7/14
to mathf...@googlegroups.com
I definitely agree with your line of thinking.  Thank you for the wonderful analogy.  Mind if I share?


--

Maria Droujkova

unread,
Mar 7, 2014, 9:39:11 PM3/7/14
to mathf...@googlegroups.com


On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 9:31 PM, Melissa T <jmtrh...@gmail.com> wrote:
I definitely agree with your line of thinking.  Thank you for the wonderful analogy.  Mind if I share?



Any time, Melissa! This group is public for reading, anyway :-)

Mehmet Kayaalp

unread,
Mar 8, 2014, 3:04:21 PM3/8/14
to mathf...@googlegroups.com
Maria and Julia,
I am glad to hear that you enjoyed the article.

Here is another research results that is inline with Maria's interview.


Young children ‘solve for x’ using the Approximate Number System

The Approximate Number System (ANS) supports basic arithmetic computation in early childhood, but it is unclear whether the ANS also supports the more complex computations introduced later in formal education. ‘Solving for x’ in addend‐unknown problems is notoriously difficult for children, who often struggle with these types of problems well into high school. Here we asked whether 4–6‐year‐old children could solve for an unknown addend using the ANS. We presented problems either symbolically, using Arabic numerals or verbal number words, or non‐symbolically, using collections of objects while preventing verbal counting. Across five experiments, children failed to identify the value of the unknown addend when problems were presented symbolically, but succeeded when problems were presented non‐symbolically. Our results suggest that, well before formal exposure to unknown‐addend problems, children appear to ‘solve for x’ in an intuitive way, using the ANS.

--mehmet

 

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages