Math 20 Math 25 Math Tips davidvs.net |

If you are looking for my collection of math games, click here.

Here are convenient links to LCC and MyLane.

Be a Better Mather

Topics |
Lecture Notes |
Library |

Homework |
Achievements |
Practice Tests |

Study Skills |
Resources |
Syllabus |

Thanks to many people for the ideas and discussions that helped form these ideas, especially Scott Kim, Paul Lockhart, Gary Mort, Cathy Miner, and Karen Louise White.

Kids at a library know they are **readers**. They know how to read. They devour books for pleasure. Other people tell them they are readers. They feel done with "learning to read" and have moved on to "reading to learn". They use text to answer questions that arise naturally in their life and thoughts.

When do people become **mathers**?

Let's compare learning math to learning language.

Everyone knows that reading and writing are very different.

Everyone can read at a higher level than they can write. Of course this is normal!

Imagine if elementary schools tied creating and devouring language together. "Sorry, little Suzie. You cannot check out any Harry Potter books from the library until you can write as well as J. K. Rowling."

Absurd! But too familiar for math, where students are too the only math books shown to students are textbooks that tie together creating and devouring math at the same level. Too often students have never heard of the fun math books that people enjoy devouring. Here is just a sample of what is in our classroom library:

There are certainly aspects of literacy and studying the English language that go way beyond what Suzie and her friend at the library call being a reader.

Not everyone can diagram sentences.

Not everyone can read *The Canterbury Tales*.

Those activities, and other advanced use of language, are considered hobbies, eccentricities, and academic specialties. People can enjoy that others know those things without feeling incomplete as a reader without them.

On the other hand, society believes math has a sequence.

But people who treat the sequence as a ladder are believing three lies.

In truth, most branches of mathematics are almost independent. People can enjoy geometry, algebra, number theory, topology, and business math with minimal skill in the other branches.

In truth, people can understand and devour these branches of mathematics in both a pure form (thinking about shapes, groups, and patterns) and in applied settings (thinking about business, construction, science, finance, codes, health formulas, etc.) at a much higher level than they can personally create. Any student is truly at several places among the clouds, not at one place on a flowchart.

In truth, being "good at math" is not about moving up the sequence. Learning math well involves special study skills, the actual math topic skills, and strategies for using math to make informed real-life deicisions. Students who are taught all three (or who were not yet managed to figure it out by themselves) are seen as "good at math" by their classmates who might not even realize they are in a three-part curriculum.

Most students in this class can use math decently to balance a checkbook, compare prices at the store, do household carpentry, and lots of other things. Sadly, using math to answer problems that naturally arise in your life and thoughts is something that happens almost exclusively outside of the classroom. These activities have never been appreciated, assessed, or celebrated in the classroom.

Imagine a class about art where you learn about many famous paintings, and painters, and styles of painting, and historical influences for painters, etc. But you never picked up a brush and actually painted. That would be an "art appreciation" class, right?

And imagine a class about music where you listen to many famous songs, and learn about composers and orchestras, and styles of music, etc. But you never wrote notes and actually composed, or used an instrument to play a song. That would be a "music appreciation" class, right?

Now imagine a class about math problems where you learn about famous, old math problems that millions of other people have already solved, but you never actually create any new and original and personal math. That would be a "math appreciation" class, right?

Too many students have never taken a real math class! They have only had "math appreciation" classes, and were duped into believing these were real math classes. Only at college—maybe—do they finally see issues without right answers: personal decisions about budgeting priorities, retirement plans, renting versus home-ownership, dieting and exercise, business decisions, etc.

If I was an "painting appreciator" and someone called me an "painter" I would sense something was wrong, even if all my life people had mistakenly called painting appreciation "painting", because I had never picked up a paintbrush. If a new class finally guided me through using a paintbrush, I would so clearly see it as the most genuine painting class I ever had.

Too many students are in a equivalent predicament. They feel in a deep yet vague way that they are only "math appreciators" and so cannot call themselves mathers. The personal math they have done to make real life more successful has been undervalued, exiled from the classroom, and uncelebrated. Their unhappy efforts at math appreciation have been valued, central in the classroom, and celebrated with smiley faces, check marks, and letter grades.

This is how real math works:

First, a problem appears. It is not an classic problem in a textbook that generations of students have used to build fluency in a skill. Instead, someone is making a decision. Should they rent or buy a house? How much food should they buy when planning a party? Do they have enough money saved for a certain vacation? Is their higher BMR a big deal? Is it worthwhile to open a new credit card for the sign-up bonus?

Second, the complexity of real life is shrunk down to a few numbers on paper. Which numbers are used? How will estimating these numbers affect the trustworthiness of the results?

Third, the numbers are moved around on paper, using both algorithms and guessing, to discover results. This step does indeed include the broadest and deepest set of skills. But that does not excuse how too often it is the *only* part of real math done in a classroom.

Fourth, the results are evaulated. Are they actually helpful for making that real-life deicision? After all, any time we move numbers around on paper it poops out some kind of answer. What have we learned? How firm is our certainty? Is our margin of error acceptable? Need we start over with more or different numbers to improve our results or to come up with a backup plan that has redundancy or failsafes?

Finally, either the entire process or just a summary of the results is communicated to family, friends, or colleagues.

All five steps involve skills and strategies specific to math. In this class we will discuss all five steps.

(Using math in science or computer programming often involves a similar process. But the specific skills and strategies will be different when the application is physics, chemistry, or programming: different from each other, and different from pure real life math.)

Math is where natural laws are clearest, where patterns are most beautiful, where systems are most pure, where truth is most intuitive, and where big problems are most solvable.

So, what is a mather?

**1.** Can you participate in a math discussion? Can you follow what the instructor does on the board in class? Can you talk about planning a road trip? Do you pause the conversation when you need to ask for clarification? When it gets boring can you ask a question about a tangent that you find more interesting?

We all use language to talk. We are better at talking than reading or writing. Math shares some conversational skills with language, as well as having some specific math-conversation skills.

**2.** Can you enjoy devouring a math book? Not a textbook that teaches math appreciation, but a real math book about the issues and problems and decisions that other people have struggled with and used math to help understand. Can you use external resources when you seek clarifications or purse tangents?

We all use language to read. We are better at reading for fun than writing. Math shares some pleasure reading skills with language, as well as having some specific math-reading skills.

**3.** Can you use math to analyze your own issues and problems and decisions?

We all use language to learn. We are better at reading to learn than writing. Math shares some comprehension skills with language, as well as having some specific math-comprehension skills.

**4.** Can you use math to analyze other people's or business' issues and problems and decisions, and communicate about the results?

We all use language to write. We are best at writing about our own interests and hobbies. Math shares some composition and communication skills with language, as well as having some specific math-related skills.

**5.** Can you use people, videos, books, or other resources to refresh your rusty or forgotten math skills?

We all use language to write, and might become rusty with or even entirely forget a certain writing skill that we have not used in months or years. What is the rule for a possessive apostrophe on a plural noun that already ends with the letter s? What is the differences between the two major types of sonnets? Math shares most review and refresh skills with language, but there are some specific math-review skills.

**6.** Can you use math to do problems on a test?

We all use language to write. The most difficult writing is about language-specific tasks, such as composing a sonnet or writing an essay about the Great Vowel Shift. Math shares some advanced or eccentric skills with language, as well as having some specific math-related skills.

Can you do these six things? Some better than others? Then you are a mather!

Get ready to become a **better** mather.