| ABOUT US | ARCHIVES | LINKS | RSS FEED | MONDAYS | |

3quarksdaily

An Eclectic Digest of Science, Art and Literature

« Amazing Hand Shadow show by Raymond Crowe | Main | "Methuselah" Mutation Linked to Longer Life »

March 05, 2008

Are our brains wired for math?

Jim Holt in The New Yorker:

Screenhunter_04_mar_05_1031

Dehaene has spent most of his career plotting the contours of our number sense and puzzling over which aspects of our mathematical ability are innate and which are learned, and how the two systems overlap and affect each other. He has approached the problem from every imaginable angle. Working with colleagues both in France and in the United States, he has carried out experiments that probe the way numbers are coded in our minds. He has studied the numerical abilities of animals, of Amazon tribespeople, of top French mathematics students. He has used brain-scanning technology to investigate precisely where in the folds and crevices of the cerebral cortex our numerical faculties are nestled. And he has weighed the extent to which some languages make numbers more difficult than others. His work raises crucial issues about the way mathematics is taught. In Dehaene’s view, we are all born with an evolutionarily ancient mathematical instinct. To become numerate, children must capitalize on this instinct, but they must also unlearn certain tendencies that were helpful to our primate ancestors but that clash with skills needed today. And some societies are evidently better than others at getting kids to do this. In both France and the United States, mathematics education is often felt to be in a state of crisis. The math skills of American children fare poorly in comparison with those of their peers in countries like Singapore, South Korea, and Japan. Fixing this state of affairs means grappling with the question that has taken up much of Dehaene’s career: What is it about the brain that makes numbers sometimes so easy and sometimes so hard?

More here.

Posted by Abbas Raza at 04:35 AM | Permalink

Comments

Fascinating, unsettling and far from conclusive...

Posted by: Felix E. F. Larocca MD | Mar 5, 2008 6:08:09 AM

offtopic, but I cringe when I read sentences like 'The math skills of American children fare poorly in comparison with those of their peers in countries like Singapore, South Korea, and Japan.' While it may be true that we do a poor job as a country of instilling broad mathematical competence according to some metrics, in fact, the goals of our educational systems are in some ways very different - particularly in terms of their perceived social purpose and degree of centralization. I would argue that the American system, while profoundly less democratic in some ways, is in fact much more successful at training children to do things that Americans value. The wisdom of this should not be easily dismissed.

As far as real Mathematics is concerned, is it possible to find a field in which the work of those professionally employed (other than in teaching the subject at primary level) is more disjoint with how and what is taught about the subject to children? To this end I think we might reasonably ask: why don't our peers in the middling-tier of mathematically competent nations, the Hungarians, aspire to rise to the level of Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan and China as measured by fourth-grade test scores?

Posted by: jb | Mar 5, 2008 1:03:19 PM

Post a comment






Subscribe to this blog's feed  

3QD ADVERTISING


3QD on Twitter


Miscellany

Lijit Search

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Add to Google


Recent Comments

Ken Pidcock on Debating Unscientific America

Louise Gordon on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Jim on Wednesday Poem

DavidG on Are the "New Atheists" are Right-Wing on Foreign Policy?

Jonathan on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Norman Costa on Wednesday Poem

Carlos on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

giotto on Debating Unscientific America

Jonathan on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Louise Gordon on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Dave Ranning on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Dave Ranning on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Chris Schoen on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

billy on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Christopher on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Elatia Harris on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Louise Gordon on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Jonathan on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Dave Ranning on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

giotto on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Christopher on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Dave Ranning on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Bill on zizek does iran

billy on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Louise Gordon on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton


Acclaim For 3QD


"I couldn't tear myself away from 3 Quarks Daily, to the point of neglecting my work. Congratulations on this superb site."—Steven Pinker, Johnstone Professor of Psychology, Harvard University.

"I have placed 3 Quarks Daily at the head of my list of web bookmarks."—Richard Dawkins, Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.

"Just wanted you to know I’m one of many who reads and enjoys 3 Quarks....almost daily."—David Byrne, musician, former lead-singer of the Talking Heads, artist, intellectual.


The 3QD Prizes

Logo designed by Vicki Winters

Subscribe to this blog's feed