These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
On 30 June 2011 09:52, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote: > I don't really have an opinion on this matter, but I would be interested in > listening in on those who may have an informed opinion. > I see two different approaches to the teaching of mathematics. > > One takes the /Natural/ Numbers as the basic concept of the subject > The Other takes the /Rational/ Numbers as the basic concept of the > subject > The Davydov example, described in "Cultural-Historical Approaches to Designing for Development" describes quantity as the basic concept. Which seems sensible to me. Both magnitude and multitude are variants of quantity -- a concept that entails a number along with a unit of measure. > > One takes /counting/ as the basic Action > The Other takes /comparison/ of two lengths as the basic Action. > In both cases I would ascribe measuring as the "basic action", which includes the pattern matching found in counting apples. Huw __________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca