 This topic has 265 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 10 months ago by CA renter.

AuthorPosts

July 21, 2011 at 4:09 PM #18957July 21, 2011 at 5:23 PM #711679allParticipant
I am surprised to read that someone who teaches highlevel math at high school finds linear functions and matrix calculus exciting. I was expecting topology, predicate calculus or at least Euclidean geometry. After reading the article, my impression is that she was underqualified to sub in her son’s school when he was 6 and she was just as underqualified to teach highlevel math at high school.
July 21, 2011 at 5:23 PM #711775allParticipantI am surprised to read that someone who teaches highlevel math at high school finds linear functions and matrix calculus exciting. I was expecting topology, predicate calculus or at least Euclidean geometry. After reading the article, my impression is that she was underqualified to sub in her son’s school when he was 6 and she was just as underqualified to teach highlevel math at high school.
July 21, 2011 at 5:23 PM #712373allParticipantI am surprised to read that someone who teaches highlevel math at high school finds linear functions and matrix calculus exciting. I was expecting topology, predicate calculus or at least Euclidean geometry. After reading the article, my impression is that she was underqualified to sub in her son’s school when he was 6 and she was just as underqualified to teach highlevel math at high school.
July 21, 2011 at 5:23 PM #712526allParticipantI am surprised to read that someone who teaches highlevel math at high school finds linear functions and matrix calculus exciting. I was expecting topology, predicate calculus or at least Euclidean geometry. After reading the article, my impression is that she was underqualified to sub in her son’s school when he was 6 and she was just as underqualified to teach highlevel math at high school.
July 21, 2011 at 5:23 PM #712886allParticipantI am surprised to read that someone who teaches highlevel math at high school finds linear functions and matrix calculus exciting. I was expecting topology, predicate calculus or at least Euclidean geometry. After reading the article, my impression is that she was underqualified to sub in her son’s school when he was 6 and she was just as underqualified to teach highlevel math at high school.
July 21, 2011 at 5:44 PM #711684patientrenterParticipant[quote=captcha]I am surprised to read that someone who teaches highlevel math at high school finds linear functions and matrix calculus exciting. I was expecting topology, predicate calculus or at least Euclidean geometry. After reading the article, my impression is that she was underqualified to sub in her son’s school when he was 6 and she was just as underqualified to teach highlevel math at high school.[/quote]
You’re a little rough there, captcha. Isaac Newton wasn’t studying topology as a teenager. He did OK. The precise areas of mathematics you study are not as important as learning a goodly amount of important, challenging, and interesting mathematical ideas and techniques. (Full disclosure: I am a former mathematician.)
I liked her apparent enthusiasm for her subject and for her students, and her humility – she attributed her best teaching techniques to her students.
It is a shame that the best teachers don’t get paid a lot more than they do now, more in proportion to their impact on their students. And that the worst teachers, who waste their students’ precious potential, aren’t directed to other careers.
July 21, 2011 at 5:44 PM #711780patientrenterParticipant[quote=captcha]I am surprised to read that someone who teaches highlevel math at high school finds linear functions and matrix calculus exciting. I was expecting topology, predicate calculus or at least Euclidean geometry. After reading the article, my impression is that she was underqualified to sub in her son’s school when he was 6 and she was just as underqualified to teach highlevel math at high school.[/quote]
You’re a little rough there, captcha. Isaac Newton wasn’t studying topology as a teenager. He did OK. The precise areas of mathematics you study are not as important as learning a goodly amount of important, challenging, and interesting mathematical ideas and techniques. (Full disclosure: I am a former mathematician.)
I liked her apparent enthusiasm for her subject and for her students, and her humility – she attributed her best teaching techniques to her students.
It is a shame that the best teachers don’t get paid a lot more than they do now, more in proportion to their impact on their students. And that the worst teachers, who waste their students’ precious potential, aren’t directed to other careers.
July 21, 2011 at 5:44 PM #712378patientrenterParticipant[quote=captcha]I am surprised to read that someone who teaches highlevel math at high school finds linear functions and matrix calculus exciting. I was expecting topology, predicate calculus or at least Euclidean geometry. After reading the article, my impression is that she was underqualified to sub in her son’s school when he was 6 and she was just as underqualified to teach highlevel math at high school.[/quote]
You’re a little rough there, captcha. Isaac Newton wasn’t studying topology as a teenager. He did OK. The precise areas of mathematics you study are not as important as learning a goodly amount of important, challenging, and interesting mathematical ideas and techniques. (Full disclosure: I am a former mathematician.)
I liked her apparent enthusiasm for her subject and for her students, and her humility – she attributed her best teaching techniques to her students.
It is a shame that the best teachers don’t get paid a lot more than they do now, more in proportion to their impact on their students. And that the worst teachers, who waste their students’ precious potential, aren’t directed to other careers.
July 21, 2011 at 5:44 PM #712531patientrenterParticipant[quote=captcha]I am surprised to read that someone who teaches highlevel math at high school finds linear functions and matrix calculus exciting. I was expecting topology, predicate calculus or at least Euclidean geometry. After reading the article, my impression is that she was underqualified to sub in her son’s school when he was 6 and she was just as underqualified to teach highlevel math at high school.[/quote]
You’re a little rough there, captcha. Isaac Newton wasn’t studying topology as a teenager. He did OK. The precise areas of mathematics you study are not as important as learning a goodly amount of important, challenging, and interesting mathematical ideas and techniques. (Full disclosure: I am a former mathematician.)
I liked her apparent enthusiasm for her subject and for her students, and her humility – she attributed her best teaching techniques to her students.
It is a shame that the best teachers don’t get paid a lot more than they do now, more in proportion to their impact on their students. And that the worst teachers, who waste their students’ precious potential, aren’t directed to other careers.
July 21, 2011 at 5:44 PM #712891patientrenterParticipant[quote=captcha]I am surprised to read that someone who teaches highlevel math at high school finds linear functions and matrix calculus exciting. I was expecting topology, predicate calculus or at least Euclidean geometry. After reading the article, my impression is that she was underqualified to sub in her son’s school when he was 6 and she was just as underqualified to teach highlevel math at high school.[/quote]
You’re a little rough there, captcha. Isaac Newton wasn’t studying topology as a teenager. He did OK. The precise areas of mathematics you study are not as important as learning a goodly amount of important, challenging, and interesting mathematical ideas and techniques. (Full disclosure: I am a former mathematician.)
I liked her apparent enthusiasm for her subject and for her students, and her humility – she attributed her best teaching techniques to her students.
It is a shame that the best teachers don’t get paid a lot more than they do now, more in proportion to their impact on their students. And that the worst teachers, who waste their students’ precious potential, aren’t directed to other careers.
July 22, 2011 at 12:39 AM #711824allParticipantThe body of knowledge available to Isaac Newton was not as large, but I doubt he was finding any excitement in linear functions. Also, the person discussed is a teacher, not a student. And I did offer Euclidean geometry as an option π
I assume highlevel math at high school includes topics like infinitesimal calculus and numbers theory and I would expect good teachers to get excited about Newton vs. Leibniz controversy or Fermat’s last theorem. I suppose I should assume less.
July 22, 2011 at 12:39 AM #711920allParticipantThe body of knowledge available to Isaac Newton was not as large, but I doubt he was finding any excitement in linear functions. Also, the person discussed is a teacher, not a student. And I did offer Euclidean geometry as an option π
I assume highlevel math at high school includes topics like infinitesimal calculus and numbers theory and I would expect good teachers to get excited about Newton vs. Leibniz controversy or Fermat’s last theorem. I suppose I should assume less.
July 22, 2011 at 12:39 AM #712518allParticipantThe body of knowledge available to Isaac Newton was not as large, but I doubt he was finding any excitement in linear functions. Also, the person discussed is a teacher, not a student. And I did offer Euclidean geometry as an option π
I assume highlevel math at high school includes topics like infinitesimal calculus and numbers theory and I would expect good teachers to get excited about Newton vs. Leibniz controversy or Fermat’s last theorem. I suppose I should assume less.
July 22, 2011 at 12:39 AM #712670allParticipantThe body of knowledge available to Isaac Newton was not as large, but I doubt he was finding any excitement in linear functions. Also, the person discussed is a teacher, not a student. And I did offer Euclidean geometry as an option π
I assume highlevel math at high school includes topics like infinitesimal calculus and numbers theory and I would expect good teachers to get excited about Newton vs. Leibniz controversy or Fermat’s last theorem. I suppose I should assume less.

AuthorPosts
 You must be logged in to reply to this topic.