-> SK>teach symbolic logic at our high school in an elective math course
-> for SK>our 11th and 12th graders called "Math for Liberal Arts
-> Students" which SK>follows Algebra II. I don't think the instructor
-> is real succesful with SK>it. It's hard for the kids, they don't
-> understand it, and they don't SK>like it.
-> I remember relating to you, quite some time ago, that in New York our
-> high school math curriculum abandoned the traditional progression of
-> algebra, geometry, advanced algebra, trigonometry, etc. in favor of
-> an integrated approach in the late 1980's.
Yes, I am familiar with the fact that New York State teaches an
integrated math curriculum. California is supposedly moving in that
direction. I believe that in the public schools it is official. However,
we have not yet made that transition at our school (I have not been
impressed with any of the texts that I've seen yet that attempt to
integrate the curriculum). My dept. head did suggest to me, though, a
couple of weeks ago, that we take another look at moving to such a
curriculum ourselves within the next year or two.
-> Our high school students now study symbolic logic beginning in 9th
-> grade, but focus on it quite heavily in 10th and 11th grade as
-> parallels are drawn between mathematical proofs and logical proofs.
It does seem to make more sense to introduce symbolic logic earlier,
rather than later. I find it interesting that Kathleen Weaver felt she
never really understood it until she worked with "breadboards". An
interesting idea to use manipulatives to teach this concept.
-> I haven't taught it, so can't draw the parallels very effectively
-> myself, but I did watch my daughter wade through it.
Did your daughter find it to be helpful? Did _she_ see the parallels?
Sheila
--- PCBoard (R) v15.22/M 10
---------------