In the article about Benny's understanding of mathematics, Erlwanger is suggesting that IPI Mathematics is an ineffective and harmful way to teach math to students. Erlwanger explains the goal of IPI is that students can progress learning objectives in a chronological order. He then describes the process taken by the instructor and student: learning the objective, then being quizzed on it. Erlwanger criticizes the focus on test scores, with an 80% being required for the student to "pass" an objective. In his interviews with Benny, Benny tells him how he feels the key to the test is bad because there are more right answers than are on the key. Benny never thinks he is wrong because of this. As his conclusitory point, Erlwanger gives an interview in which he tried to correct Benny's knowledge and did not succeed because of Benny's previous years of incorrect learning. Erlwanger portrays that IPI was very damaging to Benny and implies it has the potential to be damaging to many other students, he advises against its use.
The overall idea of IPI teaching students individually could be useful today because it allows each student to progress at their own level. This type of individual progress is accomodating to many students because students of all different levels of math can progress individually and therefore better understand the material. Erlwanger strongly discourages the use of IPI, so an alternative style of individual assistance would need to be used to thus accomodate students. The use of many different examples can also be valid in mathematics today, but there needs to be more explanation behind each example. Move slower and allow the student to ask questions. Also, tests are a good examination of students' knowledge, but it is better to do different styles of tests to make sure the student understands. One idea could be having a student create a problem and then explain how he/she would solve it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Good job, I had a question throughout your second paragraph but you answered it in the end. I didnt quite agree with tests being a good way to make sure of understanding but then your answer at the end where you have them explain it would help much with their understanding. Ineracting and as Erlwanger said, sharing ideas with others, I believe is a veyr good way to trap understanding within.
ReplyDeleteyour summary of Erlwanger's main argument was good, however, I couldnt really follow your paragraphs. perhaps, be more straight to the point. It was probably just me, but thanks for your thoughts!
Rachelle,
ReplyDeleteI found your perspective in the second paragraph very refreshing! I liked how instead of going for or against Erlwanger, you chose to just invent a whole new median between the two sides. I had never thought about how individualistic learning could be beneficial, if tweaked a bit from what IPI did. Thank you for sharing that with me! One thing that could maybe help me understand it better would be more connections with how your views are different and how they are alike with Erlwanger. Thank you for your post!!
I really liked your take on things in the second paragraph. It was different than anything I thought of or anything that I read. I like that instead of completely going against all of the IPI approach, you thought of ways in which it could be better implemented and enhanced to create successful learning.
ReplyDeleteI think if you identify this main idea more explicitly within the first paragraph, then your second paragraph would seem even more convincing. That way I think the connection between Erlwanger's arguments and their validity today would be more apparent to the reader.
I like the clear, strong topic sentence that you use to start out this entry. I also like your scholarly tone throughout the entry. I think that you have identified Erlwanger's main point. However, I wasn't sure that Paragraph 1 adequately captured the arguments that Erlwanger used to support his claim. For example, the student's and teacher's roles are mentioned, but it is not clear exactly what these roles are and what part they play in making IPI ineffective. Your paragraph might be strengthened by being more specific about the points you are talking about.
ReplyDeleteYou sounded very porfessional and you brought up points that most people didn't, good job. I like that you didn't completely go against the IPI system, only certain methods that they used. I was slightly confused in your second paragraph at the beginning. You addressed everything toward the end, but maybe stating what you point was in a topic sentence would have caused less confusion.
ReplyDelete