It was just an example, but one in inches might have been better: Say I want to evenly space holes 1/2" apart across a 1 3/4" wide board for some fancy jig I'm making. How many holes would I end up with, and what's the remainder that I would split on either side of them? (Four holes, and 1/8" from each edge -- four holes because one is at "zero", and 1/8" because that's half of 1/4, which is the remainder, or 1/2 of 1/2" -- gosh, that hardly makes any sense at all when I try to write it out. :lol: But again, the specific example isn't really my point.)
My point is, really, that it seems easy to figure these out in context but it's not so easy out of context unless you remember the procedure. And, I think a part of the problem is that it's not so easy for us to come up with a "story" or context that matches the procedure. If the research is valid, then it seems like that link from procedure to story isn't being taught or learned -- for whatever reason.
I completely agree. It's clearly a small sample, and if the teachers don't teach it, then why would they be expected to know it?
But again, it seems like maybe it *should* be easier to create a conceptual story out of a problem like that, especially if the conceptual story is more intuitive or easier to solve.
My point is, really, that it seems easy to figure these out in context but it's not so easy out of context unless you remember the procedure. And, I think a part of the problem is that it's not so easy for us to come up with a "story" or context that matches the procedure. If the research is valid, then it seems like that link from procedure to story isn't being taught or learned -- for whatever reason.
I completely agree. It's clearly a small sample, and if the teachers don't teach it, then why would they be expected to know it?
But again, it seems like maybe it *should* be easier to create a conceptual story out of a problem like that, especially if the conceptual story is more intuitive or easier to solve.
Comment