Slashdot Mirror


Teaching Calculus To 5-Year-Olds

Doofus writes "The Atlantic has an interesting story about opening up what we routinely consider 'advanced' areas of mathematics to younger learners. The goals here are to use complex but easy tasks as introductions to more advanced topics in math, rather than the standard, sequential process of counting, arithmetic, sets, geometry, then eventually algebra and finally calculus. Quoting: 'Examples of activities that fall into the "simple but hard" quadrant: Building a trench with a spoon (a military punishment that involves many small, repetitive tasks, akin to doing 100 two-digit addition problems on a typical worksheet, as Droujkova points out), or memorizing multiplication tables as individual facts rather than patterns. Far better, she says, to start by creating rich and social mathematical experiences that are complex (allowing them to be taken in many different directions) yet easy (making them conducive to immediate play). Activities that fall into this quadrant: building a house with LEGO blocks, doing origami or snowflake cut-outs, or using a pretend "function box" that transforms objects (and can also be used in combination with a second machine to compose functions, or backwards to invert a function, and so on).' I plan to get my children learning the 'advanced' topics as soon as possible. How about you?"

38 of 231 comments (clear)

  1. Mischaracterization of problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Doing the same thing 100x is only "simple but hard" if you can actually do it accurately. The point of that sort of practice is to make it easy.

    Any teacher handing that out to someone who can already do it isn't doing their job properly. However, handing it out to someone who can't do it and needs to practice is perfectly reasonable.

    1. Re:Mischaracterization of problem by seebs · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Up to a point, yes.

      I'd point out: I can't do single-digit arithmetic without errors. I never have been able to. I can do math in my head pretty decently; one time on a road trip I got bored, and came up with a km/miles conversion ratio starting from a vague recollection of the number of inches in a meter. I came up with 1.61. Google says 1.60934.

      But give me a hundred single-digit addition problems, and I will get a couple of them wrong.

      --
      My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
    2. Re:Mischaracterization of problem by Mitchell314 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes, it's called embryonic development. It affects millions of people around the world and leads to impaired math abilities, where the affected cannot handle hundreds of mental calculations before making an error. The only known cure is to spend years in a basement alone eating cheetos, while insulting others' trivial math and lingual mistakes.

      --
      I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
    3. Re:Mischaracterization of problem by khasim · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Doing the same thing 100x is only "simple but hard" if you can actually do it accurately.

      I agree. But I disagree with TFA's comment about "simple but hard".

      Repetitive != Hard

      Once you understand the concepts then doing 100 problems is no more difficult than doing 10. It just takes 10x longer to finish them all.

      And that is the purpose of assigning a large number of tasks. Someone who does NOT understand the concept can work through 10 problems in an hour. Someone who DOES understand the concepts can do 10 problems in a minute.

      So the 100 problem task is used to find those who did not finish because they did not have time because they did not understand the concepts.

      Any teacher handing that out to someone who can already do it isn't doing their job properly.

      Yes. Once they've completed the 100 problem task the first time they've shown that they've mastered the concepts so they can move on.

      But we've become so focused on getting a grade (A, B, C ...) for doing the work that we've lost sight of WHY we were doing the work in the first place.

    4. Re:Mischaracterization of problem by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Funny

      But give me a hundred single-digit addition problems, and I will get a couple of them wrong.

      You may find you're aided by taking off your shoes. it's worked for me for years. ;-)

      Very inconvenient at the grocery store though.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    5. Re:Mischaracterization of problem by Ken_g6 · · Score: 2

      Repetitive != Hard

      Once you understand the concepts then doing 100 problems is no more difficult than doing 10. It just takes 10x longer to finish them all.

      I disagree completely. Repetition leads to boredom. Boredom leads to difficulty concentrating. Difficulty concentrating makes it hard.

      And that is the purpose of assigning a large number of tasks. Someone who does NOT understand the concept can work through 10 problems in an hour. Someone who DOES understand the concepts can do 10 problems in a minute.

      When I started being home-schooled (for health reasons, not religious reasons), my Mom bought Saxon math books. They may still have a large number of problems, e.g. 100, but they mix up old types of math problems with newly learned types. That way I didn't forget old learning and I was less bored, while still learning new material.

      --
      (T>t && O(n)--) == sqrt(666)
    6. Re:Mischaracterization of problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I like you ideas, and would like both to subscribe to your newsletter, and build a train wreck of a web site where a multitude of these embryonically impaired people can co-mingle and share fantasies about Natalie Portman.

    7. Re:Mischaracterization of problem by avandesande · · Score: 2

      Much like music a strong grasp of basic arithmetic helps you learn to visualize problems and develop an intuitive sense for math. I don't think there is any other way to get this other than practice.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    8. Re:Mischaracterization of problem by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Funny

      my Mom bought Saxon math books

      Yf Hrthringmir haet twee battleaxen, uend Gwindmir haet neu een, hoewveel Waeolces cowd yeach slaythen in an qvartel hooer?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    9. Re:Mischaracterization of problem by civilizedINTENSITY · · Score: 2

      I am sorry, but if you think that repetitive arithmetic helps with intuitive sense for math, then I must admit I think you are stupid, or you fail to comprehend "intuitive" sense. I've done a lot of tutoring of Maths and Physics over the decades. Math majors have an inferior intuitive sense of probability theory than do business majors. The ability to parrot a proof, or calculate for an hour without making a sign error, has nothing to do with understanding. Sometimes understanding what something is, and what it is useful for, is more important than "arithmetic". If you want to teach visualization, then show them animations. Teach them about slopes by showing them. Then teach partial diff eq by showing them, not by making them solve them. The world would be different if kids who didn't know their multiplication tables could discuss intersections and linear programming concepts (and even solve them after being shown the graphs), even if they can't do enough math to draw the graphs by hand. That is the point.

    10. Re:Mischaracterization of problem by dgatwood · · Score: 2

      You're assuming that the speed at which the problems are solved is positively correlated with fundamental understanding of the concepts. For problems like multiplication, this isn't really the case.

      Not only is it not the case, in highly intelligent people, for large problem sets, it is often reverse-correlated. When I was a kid, if you gave me 50 math problems, I'd take longer to solve them than the folks who were making Fs in the class—not because I was struggling, but because after the first five or ten problems, I was so bored that I'd spend a few seconds working on a problem, followed by fifteen minutes daydreaming about anything else but the subject at hand.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    11. Re:Mischaracterization of problem by gIobaljustin · · Score: 2

      And I'm glad I didn't waste my time with multiplication tables. Math is not about speed, and making it about speed and memorization just gives people a fundamental misunderstanding of what it's about, and chases away some of the elite few who would otherwise be capable of truly understanding it. I happen to know that 9 x 9 = 81, but it's not because I made an explicit effort to memorize that; it happened naturally, simply because I saw the result many times.

      Repetition is often useless garbage. I often wouldn't even bother ever doing homework assignments when I was in school, because they were just repetition exercises that didn't even make one come to understand anything, and they were for things I already understand (unlike 99% of my other classmates, who didn't bother trying to understand any of it).

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
    12. Re:Mischaracterization of problem by LordNacho · · Score: 2

      There's an assumption that repetition will help recollection. I don't think it's entirely wrong, though of course you can overdo it.

      The reason why you need recollection is so you can see the patterns.

      Suppose someone tells you "multiply any integer by 5, and the last digit is always a 5 or a 0". How are you going to get a sense of whether that's true if you don't have at least few results to hand? Now, this isn't rigorous proof, but it is mathematical intuition. Any number of mathematical observations will start with something like that. "I tried to find x^3+y^3 = z^3, but I couldn't. Is that a law?". "All the solutions to this particular function seem to have real part 1/2. Is that a rule?"

      If every investigation had to start at the ground, it would take people a long time to find anything interesting. It's good to have a few results cached, and it appears that to cache them you have to go a bit of grinding. It's not even that much grinding these days before you can throw it over on a calculator or other device.

  2. I had something similar as a kid by machineghost · · Score: 2

    When I was a kid Mrs. Dunn (one of the parents of a kid at the school) taught an optional "math club" a half hour before school on Wednesdays. I don't remember exactly what we learned (it's since merged with all the "real" math classes I took), but I do remember learning sumnation and some other fairly advanced concepts.

    Kids are smart, and they are totally capable of learning a lot of advanced math.

    1. Re:I had something similar as a kid by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The trick is getting to kids before their idiot peers who casually go around saying things like "Math is hard", "I can't do math, it's difficult", "Math is only for really super smart people."

      Math is actually pretty easy, but once you've convinced yourself it's hard it becomes twice the battle, first to get past that mental barrier about how impossible it is.

      Same applies to many areas of study. I was coding like a coding fool on National Coding Day and my High School counselor wouldn't let me into the programming classes because my math grades needed to be higher. Pfft, like math is more prevailing than logic. Anyway, plenty of misconceptions on what people are really capable of, particularly at a very young age.

      I think there's a growing culture of morons who think you should molly coddle kids rather than get those little brains working during the time in their lives when they are capable of learning the fastest.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:I had something similar as a kid by lgw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Calculus, taught properly, is incredibly easy and intuitive because it's all geometry - you can teach it visually, with no numbers.

      Area under a curve? No harder to understand qualitatively than the area of any other shape. Slope of a curve at a point? Again, quite easy to understand with construction paper cut-outs of curves, and a ruler.

      And there are plenty of real physics problems that can be solved with simple geometry! Make a drawing of velocity over time that tells a story of a trip. With constant acceleration, all the shapes will be triangles and rectangles. Find the area to find the distance travelled.

      For actual curves, you can make them from wood and weigh them to find the integral. Awesome hands-on fun that completely de-mystifies calculus. Not sure a kid would be ready for it by 5, but 8-10, no problem.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    3. Re:I had something similar as a kid by CastrTroy · · Score: 2

      Doing hands on geometrical calculus is easy, and can be understood quite easily. What's I actually found difficult, was not the concept, but the memorization of how go obtain the integral or derivative of a functions. So many rules, that seemingly had no logic to them. The derivative of sin(x) is cos(x). Why? most students probably couldn't tell you that. Looking at a proof I found, it actually seems quite non-obvious, and not something most beginner calculus students could figure out on their own.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    4. Re:I had something similar as a kid by lgw · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Ahh. I have the answer to that one! The answer is the same as "why does e^(pi * i) = -1", in a very non-obvious way, but it's very simple.

      Why is the derivative of e^x = e^x? Because that's what makes e special - we picked 'e' to make that true. if you look at exponential curves for various bases, it becomes clear that somewhere between 2 and 3 this neat thing happens, and it turns out to be quite handy. If you play around with a graphing calculator it becomes obvious that it must be true for some number, and you can observe/discover "oh, that's e - so that's why its called the natural log".

      Why is the derivative of sin(x) equal to cos(x)? Because we use radians. If you measure angles in degrees or grads or whatever, it doesn't work out this way. But if you study simple harmonic motion (which back in the days if record players everyone did), or just think about a point moving around a circle as viewed edge-on, it you will observe/discover that there's this neat property something moving that way: it's velocity as seen edge on is the same as it's position as seen edge on, rotated 90 degrees.. This is really visually obvious with a toothpick stuck to the outside of the spinning platter of a record player!

      Once you grok that visually, then clearly there must be some way of measuring angles such that the derivative of sin(x) is cos(x), because that's what those functions mean: the position as viewed from the side, and the position as viewed from the side after rotating 90 degrees! It just so happens that choosing the range [0 2pi) for angles makes the math work out properly. Proving why it's 2pi and not some other value, like proving why it's e and not some other value, is a mess, but you can just observe that some such value must exist for both cases.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    5. Re:I had something similar as a kid by lgw · · Score: 2

      Sure, but by that point you're doing computation, not learning the principle involved. Few people find doing computation to be the fun or interesting part of math, which is why we automate it. Doing enough exercises to be good at it, like memorizing multiplication tables, is worthwhile eventually, but it's a terrible place to start.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    6. Re:I had something similar as a kid by Obfuscant · · Score: 2

      Why is the derivative of sin(x) equal to cos(x)? Because we use radians. If you measure angles in degrees or grads or whatever, it doesn't work out this way.

      I'm sorry, what? If you plot the two functions and look at the slope (derivative) of one compared to the value of the other, the relationship will be the same whether you label the x axis as "degrees", "radians", "grads", or "blutarskis", as long as the conversion is a simple multiplicative factor (as is degrees to radians, etc.)

      I.e., d/dx sin(nx) = cos(nx) because you can replace nx with y by assigning y = nx. Then you have d/dx sin(y) = cos(y) which we know is true.

      Your visual "90 degree rotation" is the same as "pi/2 radians" is the same as "100 grads" (is the same as "e blutarskis").

  3. How about me? by kruach+aum · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I plan to make sure my children understand what they're taught, and are taught new things based on what they already know. If that means teaching them complex ideas earlier than they would normally learn them then that's fine, but to make that a goal in itself is nonsensical.

    1. Re:How about me? by metlin · · Score: 2

      I have always wondered why puzzles were never included in any educational system. Logical puzzles, spatial manipulation, patterns, and lateral thinking challenges go a long way towards improving general intelligence and learning abilities. Much more so than, say, memorizing multiplication tables. It also helps them with those complex ideas that you spoke of.

      Instead, kids are taught to hate math and hate puzzles, and standardized tests are a joke.

      My grandfather was a mathematician and he taught me that geometry and algebra were essentially the same when I was about 7. So, as I grew up, I could "visualize" every equation and that improved my problem solving ability. I cannot help but feel that teaching multiple complex ideas earlier will help children's creativity as they learn to combine them (i.e. spatially visualize a problem to look for patterns and use that to solve it as an algebraic equation).

  4. Rocky's Boots by Etherwalk · · Score: 3, Funny

    Rocky's Boots.

    'Nuff said.

  5. I agree with all of the things. by dicobalt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I remember being in grade school and being irritated that for the 3rd year in the row I was learning how to do basic math. Then when I got to high school I was pissed off that I was rushed though from algebra to trig in 4 years. I don't think they understood that basic math is easy and higher math is hard and your math level has nothing to do with your grade level.

    1. Re:I agree with all of the things. by NotDrWho · · Score: 2

      The reason that you were irritated is because you were one of the smart kids. I felt the same way in school, until one day a teacher told me that they weren't constantly reviewing the basics for *me*. They were doing it for the other 90% of the kids in the class who weren't like me.

      If my parents had been able to afford a private school, or if I had access to a "gifted" school, it would have been different (and much better). But in a public school, you can't fault teachers for having to teach to the lowest common denominator. They can't leave the dumb kids behind just because we're smart. We can't forget that just because we're an unrepresentative sample on slashdot.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
  6. Boolean algebra & number theory in 5th grade by david.emery · · Score: 2

    My school had a one afternoon per week gifted students program. Among other things we did programmed/self paced instruction and classroom work on boolean algebra and basic number theory. This was in the late 1960s in a middle class school district in suburban Pittsburgh (Avonworth.)

    The other thing worth noting is how most mathematicians make their breakthrough discoveries before age 30. (Sorry don't have the reference for this, but I've seen it widely discussed.) So that means the earlier we expose kids "with the math gene" to more complex topics, the greater the possibility that stuff will 'stick'.

  7. father of 4 year old, align with interest is key by trybywrench · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In my experience, with young children your best chance at teaching them these things is to relate it to their current interest. My 4 year old is really into maps right now, he draws me one every day at his preschool. I've been showing him different maps and trying to relate the concept of directions etc. With his interest in drawing hopefully I can work in the alphabet at some point too. It's a tricky task to put things in terms a 4 year old mind and attention span can digest without overwhelming them.

    --
    I came to the datacenter drunk with a fake ID, don't you want to be just like me?
  8. Clickbait Title by Capt.Albatross · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This article does not contain any description of calculus-like activities that five-year-olds are participating in. There's a lot of 'this is cool' commentary without any description of what 'this' actually is.

    1. Re: Clickbait Title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      "And I'm gonna be a really cool parent." Then reality sets in.

  9. Montessori trinomials by michaelmalak · · Score: 2

    Dr. Maria Montessori, who before becoming a doctor and then an educator, was an engineering major and loved the math portion of it. Thus in her method that she devised 100 years ago, five-year-olds learn the 3D-geometric equivalent of binomials and trinomials from high school algebra.

  10. Re:father of 4 year old, align with interest is ke by schlachter · · Score: 2

    u have to bury a treasure for him...

    --
    My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
  11. Introducing "advanced" concepts made it easier for by raymorris · · Score: 2

    For me, having been introduced to the basic idea of a "hard" concept made it a lot easier when the subject was taught in school ten years later. For example, basic cooking introduced me to a lot of math and a little chemistry. At age five, making lemonade was age-appropriate. It made sense that to make half as much lemonade, we'd use half as many lemons. (Ratios). Gee, we used one cup of sugar to make a big jug of lemonade, how much sugar should we use to make half as much? In school, fractions were easy for me - as easy as making lemonade, which I'd been doing for years.

  12. Re:Algebra in elementary school by dnavid · · Score: 2

    I've said it before, but kids already do simple algebra in elementary school.

    3 + [] = 5

    and you fill in the box.

    Yes and no. In one sense, that's an algebra problem, but not all elementary students are taught to solve it *as* an algebra problem.

    I've often seen that problem given to a child like this: "three plus what is five? Come on, three, plus something, is five. What's the something? I have three, and if I add this many more, I get five..." That's not algebra, that's guessing. The child is often thinking "is it one? No. Is it two? Three plus two is five. Yes, its two."

    Its only a real algebra problem if its taught this way: "Three plus what is Five? In this bucket I have five apples, and in this bucket I have three apples and some more apples, and they both have the same apples. If I take three apples out of this bucket and three apples out of that bucket, I should still have the same apples in both buckets right? Well this one has two apples left, which means that bucket must have...? How many?"

    That's teaching rudimentary algebra to elementary students. The other version is twenty questions.

  13. I saw a presentation on Squeak by MpVpRb · · Score: 2

    ..Alan Kay's educationally oriented programming language

    They said...

    Most kids who take math don't learn math

    Most kids who take French don't learn French

    But, kids who grow up in France, have no problem learning French

    We want to create "Mathland" where learning math is natural

  14. People are missing the point by rabtech · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The article didn't make this terribly clear, but people seem to be missing the point.

    If you teach the concepts through hands-on interactive play, kids as young as five can understand the concepts underlying Calculus without too much difficulty. This also happens to be one of the best times in your life for learning, when the brain is rapidly forming new connections.

    Her point is teach the concepts, teach the patterns, teach kids how to find patterns, and how to internalize mathematical knowledge.

    The mechanical drudgery of formal language, writing out and solving equations, etc comes later on but builds on the fundamental understanding developed much earlier in life.

    --
    Natural != (nontoxic || beneficial)
  15. 3 Words: Life of Fred by artisteeternite · · Score: 3, Informative

    As the homeschooling parent of a 5 year old we have learned this first hand. We stumbled upon a set of books called Life of Fred that are "story books" that incorporate math. They were written by a math professor tired getting students that didn't know math and thought it was "hard". He incorporates basic algebra using x from almost the very beginning. They cover many topics that most think of as "advanced math" in simple, natural ways. As the story unfolds Fred has to use math in a variety of situations. It shows that math is practical and teaches it in an accessible way. Even better, the stories are silly and ridiculous and fun for all ages.

  16. Or not teach them maths at all by GKThursday · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I recalled an /. article from 4 years ago with a completely different view of maths for children.
    Here it is
    Basically, during the depression Boston needed to make cuts to the public schools, so they cut maths from all of the schools in the poor neighborhoods until 6th grade. By 7th grade all of the students who only had 1 year of maths were at the level of the students who had 6 years.

    It makes some sense to me, math is really just logic, and a child's brain is not wired for logic. Though, part of me also thinks that "math is a young man's game" and you need a way to identify the geniuses before it's too late.

  17. Re:Introducing "advanced" concepts made it easier by Anubis+IV · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Exactly. One of the best things my parents did for me while I was growing up was provide "out-of-band" education of that variety. They'd introduce a concept without any of the trappings that typically surround a math lesson, giving me nudges and having me intuit how the concept worked, without putting any pressure on me to learn it right then. If I did, great, but if I didn't, no worries. It made the in-class lessons that came later on significantly easier, since they were just a formalized restatement of concepts that I already understood.

    Aside from basic arithmetic, the stuff I pull out of my math toolbox the most often would have to be the way that geometry and calculus taught me to view the world. There aren't many opportunities to FOIL binomials in everyday life*, but if I have some scrap wood and need to figure out how to get the most out of it for a project, geometry has taught me a load of different ways to dissect that shape. If I have a problem that needs to be broken down for an algorithm, the basic idea behind integration (that you can take infinitely small cross sections and sum them together) has numerous applications. If I need a rough approximation of a volume, that same concept can be applied in my head in a few seconds, without any need for busting out a pen and paper or for remembering all of the dx/dy specifics.

    And, really, much of that can be taught to kids at a young age. They don't need the "math" of it, so much as they need that way of viewing the world, and you can teach people at a young age how to break down things in those sorts of ways so that they can have an intuition for how things add up, without having to explain sigma notation or whatnot. When they learn integration by parts later on, they should have an "well of course it works that way" attitude, rather than the "wait, you can do that?!" attitude most people learning it seem to have.

    * Funny story. I was at a Thanksgiving get-together a few months back, and a high schooler I know came by to ask me for help with her algebra II homework, since her parents hadn't been able to help and I was one of the people there with the most math lessons under my belt. I was able to help her to a point, but a lot of that stuff was just beyond my recollection since the last time I had used it was 15 years prior when I learned it, and without a textbook or other reference guide there, I wasn't able to help. In swoop about a dozen college students to the rescue...or so I thought. In talking it over with them, however, all of them either got stuck at or before the place that I got stuck, so I found myself working with them to try and reformulate the problem using calculus. Finally, a college freshman saved the day, since she had taken algebra II just a year or two prior and still remembered the thing we were all missing. Point is, it was pretty obvious that none of us had used that part of algebra II in the years since we were taught it, whereas calculus was something we all felt much more comfortable applying, despite the fact that it's supposed to be harder.