Abstract
E & A NTON. Curriculum modification in mathematics education has been largely a matter of installing new subject matter in an old framework. The framework consists of a fixed time structure which is called by various names: semester, quarter, trimester or term. Courses are designed to fit within these time units and all students in a given institution budget their academic programs on the basis of the same unit of time. Variable grades are assigned at the end of such a course and many students fail. A persistent student may repeat the course, but another may alter or abandon his educational goals on the basis of a single failure. Is it possible that our rigid procedures have adverse effects upon those students for whom our time schedule and method of instruction is not the optimum time schedule and method of instruction? Is it possible that a different and perhaps larger group of students would succeed if we operated within a more flexible time framework or if we employed different methods of instruction? We will not offer yes-or-no answers to these questions but will provide a sphere of reference within which the reader may consider the problem. Shulman [1] gave an analogy to traditional course structure which was originally due to Byers:
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
