Buehl Chapter 2
I enjoyed reading the section of Buehl Chapter 2 dedicated to Mathematics.
I would like to touch on one of Buehl's claims, which is that reading does not mean always processing written words. The author references reading human faces or paintings as examples of non-written texts. In math I would say there are a lot of reading and literacy skills that aren't treated as such because they don't take the form of traditional text reading.
I also see a connection from a line out of our in person reading last week for the math group “Teachers Subject Matter Knowledge Profound Understanding of Fundamental Mathematics” which says elementary students from the united states treat an equal sign as a “do something symbol” writing 3+3(4) = 12 = 15. This demonstrates a misunderstanding of equality because 3+3(4) is not 12 and 12 is not 15. One of the American teachers interviewed did not think this was wrong because they did the calculations correctly and found the right answer despite writing a false statement.
I recently graded a homework question where algebra students were given the function f(x)=7x-4 And were asked to find: f(3) and, f(x)=80 ... Most students got by the first question just fine while the second one had the highest fail rate on the worksheet because they would copy the process from f(3) despite being asked a totally different question.
Promoting math literacy will increase student self sufficiency. I'm not entirely sure what math education looked like before the internet and popularity of YouTube, but it seems like where our reading (and other) skills suffer can be filled in with alternative forms of content delivery. If a student fails to get something in class they likely have the tools to supplement themselves using free videos and online problems solvers. Some of those things help facilitate understanding on a students personal terms but over time I think they teach the idea that the quickest way from no points to more points is hunting the answers they need with google.
Through the course of this class and our assigned readings I've come to the realization that math literacy is commonly looked over. As you stated American students treat '=' as a do something sign, which is how it was taught to me. You have your problem and then you do something and get the answer.
ReplyDeleteAs a math teacher I think it's important to stress the true meanings behind all of the symbols we use in math, which may be hard because I'm still learning myself, nevertheless it's up to us to help students grow their visual literacy skills. The only practice students will have turning something visual into a cohesive sentence is in our classrooms, and that should be just as important as teaching them the math itself.
I agree with Julie, math literacy is very much overlooked and no one really explains the reasoning behind symbolic notation. I also had treated the '=' as a to do something sign and it wasn't until college that I fixed this habit. My TAs for Math classes would constantly correct me on why I was wrong with my symbolic notation and I always would check my symbols to make sure they made sense mathematically, even if it was a bit annoying.
ReplyDeleteIt is important that every person can independently understand math literacy such as symbolic notation, written words, and graphs. I say independently because not many can and later assume that they are 'the kind of people who cannot get math'. It is not that they can't get math but simply have not had someone teach them properly the connections between symbols, graphs, and written words contained in math. This is something as future math teachers we should strive towards so that students can successfully think through a mathematical lens.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading your guy’s comments on math literacy, but I’m unsure if I understand completely.. I wanted only to stress literacy, but there is a distinction between academic literacy, as many students read fine, there’s a lack of support and structure to support academic reading whereas the person who wrote them make them as hard to read as possible.. It’s almost as if they’re gatekeeping their information, and it’s not for the general public, but that’s another story, haha. I believe some students who are believed to be academically literate just understand what the professor is looking for.
I’m a history major, and I think I’m a decent reader, but I’ve really struggled to break down texts; the students who seem to “get it,” I don’t think, are not necessarily more literate in the general sense, but rather, they understand what’s being asked of them. Having clear goals and requirements for students may be one way of making academic literacy easier and more obtainable for students, as knowing what you’re looking for can eliminate confusion.