[Edu-sig] a non-rhetorical question

[kirby urner]

On 7/9/07, Andrew Harrington <aharrin at luc.edu> wrote:

<<SNIP>>

> I also hypothesize that some students who are capable of learning symbol
> manipulation, but need practice, do well getting that experience in
> algebra, and then are less overwhelmed taking geometry later by the
> added  requirement to have spatial intuition.
>
> As to the natural order of brain maturation for processing symbols vs
> spatial relationships, I leave that to others.
>
> Andy Harrington

Yes indeed.  And I think many of us are making the point that
students develop differently, such that they might use their
strengths to address their weaknesses (with guidance from a
teacher/mentor should they be lucky enough to have one).

Lexical:  algebra, computer programming, models, controllers
Graphical:  geometry, (interactive) views of models

Going back and forth between the two, seeing how intensively
lexical expressions, of polyhedra in terms of edge-connected
vectors say, relate to purely geometric views of same (in a
ray tracer, game engine or VRML viewer), is a way to help the
brain mature I'd say.

We're connecting the dots across the lexical and the graphical,
building a bridge strongly anchored on both sides.

This was a major theme in my presentation at Europython in
Lithuania yesterday:

http://controlroom.blogspot.com/2007/07/connecting-dots.html

Kirby