You are here:

Let’s Abolish Pencil-and-Paper Arithmetic
Article

, SUNY at Buffalo and Imperial College, United Kingdom

JCMST Volume 18, Number 2, ISSN 0731-9258 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

This article proposes that paper-and-pencil arithmetic no longer be taught in elementary school and that it be replaced by a curriculum which emphasizes mental arithmetic much more than at present, and in which calculators are used for instructional purposes in all grades including kindergarten. The article analyzes and refutes the arguments made by "back-to-basics" proponents against the use of calculators and for traditional instruction in the algorithms of pencil-and-paper arithmetic. The value of mental arithmetic in achieving all the aims-and more-of the traditional curriculum is argued. Also considered is the outline of an elementary school mathematics curriculum without pencil-and-paper arithmetic. As well, the impact of such a curriculum on secondary school and college mathematics is discussed. Finally, the barriers to achieving what the article advocates are assessed.

Citation

Ralston, A. (1999). Let’s Abolish Pencil-and-Paper Arithmetic. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 18(2), 173-194. Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved December 11, 2019 from .

© 1999 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. American Mathematical Society (1995-97). Various articles and letters to the editor in the Notices of the American Mathematical Society. Arcavi, A. (1994). Symbol Sense: Informal Sensemaking inFormal Mathematics, For the Learning of Mathematics, 14 , 24-35.
  2. Askey , R . (1996) . In Views on High School Mathematics , Notices American Mathematical Society, 43, 866-873.
  3. California AcademicS tandards Commission (1997). Mathematics ContentS tandards (1 October) (http://www.ca.gov /go lds tandards).
  4. California Board of Education (1998). Mathematics Framework for California Public Schools K-12 (10 December) (http://www.cde.ca.gov /c i l- branch /e l td iv /ma th fw.h tm).
  5. Dubinsky , E . (1998) . Personal communication .
  6. Effros , E . (1989 , April 12) . Commentary in Education Week . Ernest , P . (1998) . Personal communication .
  7. Gardiner, T. (1998 , May 8). Back to the Blackboard, The Times.
  8. Jackson, A (1997 , June /Ju ly and August). The Math Wars, Parts I and II, Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 44, 619-702; 817-827.
  9. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1989). Curriculum and EvaluationS tandards for School Mathematics, Reston , VA: NCTM.
  10. Ross, K. (1998 , May/June). Reality Check: At Baltimore Standards Forum, All Qu ie t A long “Ma th Wars” Front, Focus, Newsletter of the Mathematics Association of America, 18, 1, 4.
  11. Saxon , J . (1990) Transcript of 60 M inu tes, CBS News , 4 March .
  12. Selter , C . (1995) . From Teaching to Learning Ma thematics , Keynote Lecture at Panama Conference , Noordwijkerout , The Ne therlands .
  13. Wu, H. (1996). The Mathematician and Mathematics Education Reform, Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 43, 1531-1537.
  14. Wu, H (1998). Some Observations on the 1997 Battle of the Two Standards in the California Math War, Department of Mathematics, University of California at Berkeley.
  15. Zhang, D. (1997). Some Characteristics of Mathematics Education in East As ia—An Overview from China. In N.D. Tri et al. , (Eds.) , Proceedings of the Seventh Southeast Asian Conference on Mathematics Education. Hanoi 1996 , Hanoi: Vietnamese Mathematical Society.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read

Related Collections