In reading “A Social
Semiotics Framework for Conceptualizing Content Area Literacies” by Amy
Alexandra Wilson, I am moved to think of the notion/myth of left brain and
right brain dominance. We are told that those that are left brain dominant are
more logical and even better at subjects such as math and science. Meanwhile
those that are right brain dominant are more creative and perform better in
courses such as the arts and language arts. As a child, I remember taking
multiple of these so-called right-left dominance mythical tests. Each test gave
me the same answer telling that I was left brain dominant. Coincidentally,
although I hold no truth to those tests, I am now working towards a Teaching of
Math degree. I specifically chose to use the hemisphere myth because to me it
is a simpler way of illustrating the fact that those in different disciplines approach
situations and problems differently from one another.
On a day-to-day basis I expect
to receive instructions in my math courses through symbols. Yet those that
major in English do not expect to receive information the way I do. Wilson
explains that social semiotics is “a field of study that addresses how messages
are used and exchanged within social groups” (Halliday, 1978; Hodge &
Kress, 1988). Disciplines vary by the
type of texts we use and the way in which we approach these texts (Wilson,
2011). Specifically, in Mathematics I have a textbook. Within the textbook
there are words, symbols, and numbers that help me put meaning to different
theorems and corollaries. If I am given a problem I will always use symbols and
numbers because those are intrinsic to the study of math (O’Halloran, 2005). Words
are not as important because they are simply used to help further explain an
answer. In math we almost seem to avoid the use of words by creating symbols
instead of words. For example, we may use the symbol in lieu of the words “for all/for any”. We
also can use the symbol in lieu of the words “is an element of”. In
the higher level math courses we are expected to use these symbols and stray
from the usage of words. Yet as Wilson brings up, words are almost crucial to thoroughly
explain proofs in texts (Shanahan and Shanahan, 2008).
Wilson
brings up the fact that students obey the commands of a nonexistent author in
solving math problems. Unlike in English where “individual authorship” is
praised, in math there is one answer and individual authorship is frowned upon
(Wilson, 2011). In reading a book in English class, students are expected to
create their own understanding of the story and analyze the characters. In math,
students are given problems and are expected to solve them. In obtaining an
answer students are not free to create their own analysis because it is instead
a more mechanical process where a specific answer is expected.
Another
difference that math holds is order. By order I mean the order in which one
solves a problem is different from most other disciplines. For example, we
align numbers in base-10 place values and use the acronym PEMDAS as a reminder
of the order of operations (Wilson, 2011). We live in a world where we read left to right. Yet
when it comes to math we must restructure our thinking to better accommodate the
problems we are given. If students do not follow these rules, then they will
arrive to the wrong answer.
Although my initial use of
the right and left brain hemispheres may have been confusing I hope that it
helped portray the message that I initially had hoped to show. Math is very
different from other disciplines when it comes to social semantics. The
discipline itself relays messages through different forms of texts and also has
different rules that are essential for solving problems correctly. Without a
good understanding of these texts a student can become very confused. Wilson
really emphasizes the need for teachers to show their students how to understand
these texts because “if not us then who”.
Hi Marisol,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your post. I found it interesting that you mention that in Math individual authorship if often frowned upon. I am a Science Ed major and do not consider myself a math expert by any means however I have used a lot of math in my undergraduate science work but I am wondering why individual authors cannot be praised in Mathematics. Aren't there multiple ways of getting the same answer in Math especially in advanced mathematics and wouldn't this be considered "individual authorship?" Even though math uses more symbols than written words I think that encouraging individual authorship and thinking outside the box is important. I know math is much more "mechanical" than other disciplines but I still think we as teachers should encourage students to think about all possible routes of coming up with an answer. At least if there is only one way to get an answer, it would show students why the other routes are incorrect. Maybe I am taking this point completely wrong and if I am please let me know. I really did enjoy reading your post and it definitely got me thinking.
John
Marisol,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your post and the picture shows a great description of how students are sometimes lost in the classroom. It's true that in our Math classes we are constantly shown these types of notation and we are expected to know them as we move onto higher Math courses. The second article Moving Writing to the Front Burner, they explained the teacher modeling which I really liked. Student benefit from seeing the steps teachers take in order to write and I think this can be also applied to Math.
I agree that for Math there is always one correct answer, but there may be different approaches to achieve that answer. The teacher modeling can then be applied to a Math classroom but instead of writing students can see how the teacher approaches a problem. What do you think?
Marisol,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your post. I never trusted those left/right brain quizzes because they told me I'm a left brain, and I've always felt like a right. I think your comments on individual authorship are interesting because I often make this argument to my science/math friends. I find a lot of people are under the impression that I have it easier because I'm a history major. I always counter this with your argument that there are specific ways to get to answers in courses like math. As long as you follow the steps, you'll get the correct answers. Mean while, when I turn in a paper to a history class, my grade is completely up in the air. It is impossible to calculate exactly what you need to produce in classes like history and English. I also liked your comments about how mathematicians convert everything into a symbol. Very interesting!