I’ve been waiting for your take. I was recommended this book then given it to read as assigned PD. While I am only three chapters in, and have anecdotally tried a few ideas I can feel a lack of explicit teaching and not enough scaffolding for the learners in my classroom to feel confident and successful.
It's reassuring when you can just copy what someone else has already done... or just get AI to do it for you. An A student in an most advanced math classes is just really good at following instructions... Is that still what we consider advanced? Doing what we're told is not problem solving.
It is comical to think classrooms are not thinking classrooms. If they aren't then the administrator is not doing their job...Liljedahl and others are cashing on a myth perpetuated by school districts and education 'GURUS'. These individuals need to present themselves as reformers in order to be elevated to administrators. What drivel. Why can we not get beyond this nonsense that has plagued education. An administator told me that even if they disagree, they are required to implement these strategies. Really? Where is your ethical responsibility? In 10 years this method will be relegated to the trash heap along side learning styles. And where will Liljedahl be then after all the harm this has cause?
My take is that Liljedahl and other reformers are quite genuine. They truly believe that if their ideas are implemented, maths teaching would improve, students would learn more and so on. I just think they are wrong.
Agreed. Many are well intentioned and have a belief that their method works. If that is the case, then just like in medicine, the method should be thoroughly studied prior to implementation. From comments on his recent interview, they are inflammatory and do little to advance the discussion around best practice. Heterogeneous classrooms are extremely challenging to manage regardless of the method used.
In the meantime Liljedahl will continue to profit off the backs of unsuspecting teaches, harming even more students with his classroom experiments. Liljedahl is one of the top ed consultants hired across British Columbia. He's become rich by peddling his snakeoil, with no end in sight. No way he'll ever back down, regardless if he believes he's being genuine or not.
I have believed certain authors/consultants to be at least sincere if not correct, only to have that notion dispelled by their reactions to a direct challenge.
You've attacked Dan Finkel and Peter Liliejdhal. I would truly be grateful if you could find time to attack me and share your anachronistic pedantry with the world of 17 people and 43 cats(that all belong to Tara Houle). You do such a terrible job of hiding your white supremacy. Try to work on that, will you. Thanks!!!!!
Anyone reading your comments will be wondering why you are being so personally unpleasant about Tara Houle. They will be puzzled as to what an argument about teaching methods has to do with white supremacy. If they follow the link to your article, they will be none the wiser. Why would I spend time refuting you when your arguments, such as they exist, are essentially self-refuting?
Interestingly, the same person whose article he cited also wrote an article featuring Dave Wyndorf. And the same writer from that article often on X (f/k/a Twitter) calls anyone who disagrees with his view of math education as a "white supremacist" (Jelani Nelson only gets tagged by him as an "elitist"). What a coincidence!
One question I have is, how exactly does he measure thinking? What tools were used or measurement were made to be able to say that the students were thinking more?
Another would be is to ask him, how many years of classroom teaching has he done?
Mimicking vs Thinking is about System1 vs System2 (from “Thinking Fast And Slow”). System1 learns to imitate its teacher’s understanding. System2 tries to assemble its own understanding of everything.
In most students it is the System2 that is failing because we don’t teach them that art explicitly. Only few would figure it out in the blind, basically by accident — and those few would become the top of the class. The rest would never learn how to think and understand for themselves.
Good news is that we can make every student a straight-A student if we start teaching them how to think on purpose. And it shouldn’t be even that hard, if you know how.
This is an incorrect understanding of System 1 and System 2 thinking. System 2 is intuitive and relies on schemas that a person already possesses. For instance, in the 'bat an ball problem', a student is asked, 'If a bat and ball together cost $1.10 and the bat costs $1 more than the ball, how much does the ball cost?" many students are prompted to say 10c. That is System 1 thinking. A teacher demonstrating how to answer this question accurately would induce System 2 thinking in students. It is odd to suggest that students who are engaged in applying often counterintuitive, complex mathematical methods, whether obtained from a teacher or not, are somehow not thinking.
Tara Houle is here. That's all we need to know about the credibility of this horse and buggy discussion of 19th century mathematics, which centres whiteness in learning mathematics. Listening to "Dopes to Infinity" and this place comes to mind! Luddites unite!
I’ve been waiting for your take. I was recommended this book then given it to read as assigned PD. While I am only three chapters in, and have anecdotally tried a few ideas I can feel a lack of explicit teaching and not enough scaffolding for the learners in my classroom to feel confident and successful.
BTC has been an unmitigated disaster in our District....https://bhcw.substack.com/p/berkeley-heights-public-schools-btc-parent-survey-final-results
It's reassuring when you can just copy what someone else has already done... or just get AI to do it for you. An A student in an most advanced math classes is just really good at following instructions... Is that still what we consider advanced? Doing what we're told is not problem solving.
It is comical to think classrooms are not thinking classrooms. If they aren't then the administrator is not doing their job...Liljedahl and others are cashing on a myth perpetuated by school districts and education 'GURUS'. These individuals need to present themselves as reformers in order to be elevated to administrators. What drivel. Why can we not get beyond this nonsense that has plagued education. An administator told me that even if they disagree, they are required to implement these strategies. Really? Where is your ethical responsibility? In 10 years this method will be relegated to the trash heap along side learning styles. And where will Liljedahl be then after all the harm this has cause?
My take is that Liljedahl and other reformers are quite genuine. They truly believe that if their ideas are implemented, maths teaching would improve, students would learn more and so on. I just think they are wrong.
Agreed. Many are well intentioned and have a belief that their method works. If that is the case, then just like in medicine, the method should be thoroughly studied prior to implementation. From comments on his recent interview, they are inflammatory and do little to advance the discussion around best practice. Heterogeneous classrooms are extremely challenging to manage regardless of the method used.
In the meantime Liljedahl will continue to profit off the backs of unsuspecting teaches, harming even more students with his classroom experiments. Liljedahl is one of the top ed consultants hired across British Columbia. He's become rich by peddling his snakeoil, with no end in sight. No way he'll ever back down, regardless if he believes he's being genuine or not.
I have believed certain authors/consultants to be at least sincere if not correct, only to have that notion dispelled by their reactions to a direct challenge.
Not genuine; merely unscrupulous salesmen.
https://www.humanrestorationproject.org/writing/the-wrath-without-the-math-why-mathematics-wars-have-only-ever-been-class-wars
You've attacked Dan Finkel and Peter Liliejdhal. I would truly be grateful if you could find time to attack me and share your anachronistic pedantry with the world of 17 people and 43 cats(that all belong to Tara Houle). You do such a terrible job of hiding your white supremacy. Try to work on that, will you. Thanks!!!!!
Anyone reading your comments will be wondering why you are being so personally unpleasant about Tara Houle. They will be puzzled as to what an argument about teaching methods has to do with white supremacy. If they follow the link to your article, they will be none the wiser. Why would I spend time refuting you when your arguments, such as they exist, are essentially self-refuting?
Interestingly, the same person whose article he cited also wrote an article featuring Dave Wyndorf. And the same writer from that article often on X (f/k/a Twitter) calls anyone who disagrees with his view of math education as a "white supremacist" (Jelani Nelson only gets tagged by him as an "elitist"). What a coincidence!
https://sunilsingh-42118.medium.com/sonic-seducer-my-next-book-cd09a5f1214b
One question I have is, how exactly does he measure thinking? What tools were used or measurement were made to be able to say that the students were thinking more?
Another would be is to ask him, how many years of classroom teaching has he done?
Mimicking vs Thinking is about System1 vs System2 (from “Thinking Fast And Slow”). System1 learns to imitate its teacher’s understanding. System2 tries to assemble its own understanding of everything.
In most students it is the System2 that is failing because we don’t teach them that art explicitly. Only few would figure it out in the blind, basically by accident — and those few would become the top of the class. The rest would never learn how to think and understand for themselves.
Good news is that we can make every student a straight-A student if we start teaching them how to think on purpose. And it shouldn’t be even that hard, if you know how.
This is an incorrect understanding of System 1 and System 2 thinking. System 2 is intuitive and relies on schemas that a person already possesses. For instance, in the 'bat an ball problem', a student is asked, 'If a bat and ball together cost $1.10 and the bat costs $1 more than the ball, how much does the ball cost?" many students are prompted to say 10c. That is System 1 thinking. A teacher demonstrating how to answer this question accurately would induce System 2 thinking in students. It is odd to suggest that students who are engaged in applying often counterintuitive, complex mathematical methods, whether obtained from a teacher or not, are somehow not thinking.
Tara Houle is here. That's all we need to know about the credibility of this horse and buggy discussion of 19th century mathematics, which centres whiteness in learning mathematics. Listening to "Dopes to Infinity" and this place comes to mind! Luddites unite!
Thank you for your incisive commentary, Sunil. I am sure we can all now agree that you have completely refuted my analysis. Well done you.