<p>The New York Times has a fascinating articlwe on a recent study done on teaching math <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/25/science/25math.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=math&st=cse&oref=slogin%5B/url%5D">http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/25/science/25math.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=math&st=cse&oref=slogin</a> The research suggests that aabstract math reasoning is more effective thatnuse of concrete manipulatives. Ironicalaly, the example they give is a "classic" SAT type math question, to which xiggi would probably say, the answer is B!</p>
<p>Boy was my previous post full of typos!! Oops!</p>
<p>If you look at their sample question, the children's game is a lot more similar to the abstract example than to the concrete example.</p>