Advertisement

Innovative Higher Education

, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp 91–100 | Cite as

The common denominators: A collaborative approach to teaching reasoning skills through literature and mathematics

  • Anne C. Coon
  • Marcia Birken
Articles

Abstract

At a highly technical institution, this interdisciplinary problem-solving course was designed for students who had been placed on probation or suspended. Two professors, with divergent backgrounds in mathematics and literature, collaborated in the research, planning and teaching. The course stresses the cross-disciplinary applications of “tools” such as analogy, using a variety of assignments in mathematics, logic and literature. The importance of both “ill-structured” and “well-structured problems” is discussed, as is the rationale for including oral presentations, group problems, and a formal debate in the curriculum. The article emphasizes the value of cross-disciplinary collaboration for studentsand faculty, as it presents an approach to teaching reasoning skills that could be applied to a variety of academic settings.

Keywords

Social Psychology Cross Cultural Psychology Common Denominator Oral Presentation Technical Institution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Brightman, Harvey J. (1980).Problem solving: A logical and creative approach. Atlanta: Georgia State University.Google Scholar
  2. Buchanan, Scott (1962).Poetry and mathematics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  3. Cooley, Thomas, (Ed.). (1979).The Norton sampler: Short essays for composition. New York: W.W. Norton and Co. With permission of the American Anthropological Association (1956) fromThe American Anthropologist, 58, (3).Google Scholar
  4. Davis, Samuel W. (1984). Tuesday night dead: A ‘whodunit’ logic puzzle.Games, 49. Google Scholar
  5. Dewey, John (1910).How We Think. Boston: D.C. Heath Co.Google Scholar
  6. Frederiksen, Norman (1984). Implications of cognitive theory for instruction in problem solving.Review of Educational Research, 54, (3), 363–407.Google Scholar
  7. Greenes, Carole, Gregory, John, & Seymour, Dale (1977).Successful problem solving techniques. Palo Alto: Creative Publications.Google Scholar
  8. Hayes, John R. (1981).The complete problem solver. Philadelphia: The Franklin Press.Google Scholar
  9. Kennedy, X.J. (Ed.). (1979).Literature (second ed.). Boston: Little Brown, & Co.Google Scholar
  10. Kruger, Arthur N. (1960).Modern debate: Its logic and strategy. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc.Google Scholar
  11. Lakotos, Inre (1976).Proofs and refutations: The logic of mathematical discovery. Worrall, John & Zahar, Elie (Ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. McCarthy, Virginia (1984). A circle of friends.Games, 10.Google Scholar
  13. McCuen, Jo Ray & Winkler, Anthony C. (Eds.). (1977).Readings for writers, (second ed.). New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.Google Scholar
  14. Polya, G. (1945).How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. (second ed.) Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Rubinstein, Moshe F. (1975).Patterns of problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.Google Scholar
  16. Young, Robert E., (Ed.) (1980).Fostering critical thinking. InNew directions for teaching and learning, San Francisco; Jossey-Bass, Inc.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anne C. Coon
    • 1
  • Marcia Birken
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.The State University of New York at BuffaloUSA
  2. 2.Mount Holyoke CollegeUSA
  3. 3.Mathematics from the Courant Institute of Mathematical SciencesNew York UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations