I’ve found that pure “Harkness math” is just generally a bad idea. We use traditional textbooks at Lawrenceville, but we still do attempt the “Harkness math”-type curriculum; students spend most of a given class up at the boards working on problems. This does usually worm, but I’ve generally found that my more hands-on teachers tend to be the best, as they know just the right amount of guidance to give—too little, as is typical among many “Harkness math” teachers (I’ve had my fair share of them), just leads to frustration and people spending hours getting nowhere.
Totally agree, @confusedaboutFA .
This method can be really effectively with a certain kind of math learner – typically ones with a flexible mind and innate talent – but there are many kids who really need to be shown how first. They can then spend time with the concepts and problems and develop understanding and flexibility from there. I admit that I am clearly in the latter category.
In an ideal school, there are offerings for all the learners.
My kids did well with Exeter Math but I think it’s 100% the hardest class for kids to adjust to. They came from a problem based flipped classroom program and definitely had a led up during the first trimester at BS.
Kiddo did geometry through Art of Problem Solving, and said it was a huge help for him going into the Exeter-style math classes freshman year. He was primed for the learning style right away while the other students had an adjustment period. There was a little hitch in his giddy up sophomore year when he hit topics that he didn’t immediately recognize - other kids had learned to efficiently muscle through rough patches back in the beginning of freshman year when the pace was slower. He had his learning curve a little later.
There are for sure kids who don’t thrive in the problem solving approach, but for the kids who it clicks with, it is actually fun.
Let’s table the Harkness math discussion until the OP asks about it.
2 posts were split to a new thread: Hackley 5 day boarding pr