I like to think I have a very open mind, but I am also critical and skeptical. That means I will listen attentively as someone says something totally absurd-sounding, and not interrupt or dismiss it completely out of hand. But then I will ask questions.
So, about the Doman math method…I want to believe that Doman & IAHP, and the parents following this method, are really benefitting their kids and not wasting their time. Now, I haven’t read the Doman math book, and I don’t know about it, so I don’t pretend to be criticizing without any knowledge. Rather, I’m asking questions.
I have recently learned the word “subitize,” which means to quantify correctly at a glance, right? Well, mainly I want proof that subitization and automatic calculation are possible for ordinary little kids taught diligently by the Doman method. So, to that end, here are my questions.
In the videos on YouTube in which kids are shown doing subitization of large cards, or automatic calculation of sums, how many of such cards have the parents been showing the children?
Have they been showing the same cards over and over again?
Is it possible that the kids might have memorized the “shape” of the particular card (the overall appearance of it) rather than specifically subitizing? Is a well-trained kid able to subitize brand new cards with the same numbers on them as earlier-shown cards? For example, if you’ve trained a kid to see 50 dots on one card, then you make a brand new card with 50 dots in a different configuration, will the kid be able to tell you that the new card has 50 dots on it?
Further along the same lines, are the well-trained kids able to subitize large numbers (10-100) when using software that automatically randomizes both the arrangement of dots and the specific number of dots on the card?
Same questions regarding arithmetic. Do you teach children only a specific number of calculations, and show them the card with answer, and then, only after long repetition of this specific calculation and answer-card, can they get the answer? Can you give them brand new sums, with brand new answer cards?
Is there any evidence, even anecdotal evidence, that someone taught math in this way has a huge advantage over other kids in math in later years? Obviously, hard scientific data would be preferred. If the phenomenon is real, I’d be curious to know why studies haven’t been done to demonstrate it to child development experts and psychologists. They would, of course, be highly interested in it. It could easily be a Ph.D. psychology dissertation topic.
These are kind of obvious questions to ask, so there must be often-repeated answers, but I haven’t yet come across a discussion of such questions. Is there an info file on brillkids.com that explains these matters? To be honest, I’ll be very impressed if anyone can claim that their kid can subitize with brand new cards and do brand new sums.
I’m with you on #3&4. I don’t have LM, but I wondered if it changed the configuration of the dots each time? I know you are supposed to show groups of cards randomly to avois the memorization factor.
I’ve not started LM or Doman math. I wonder about the time and effort, since my kids are older(4yrs, 15mo), past the best time for subitization and right-brain learning. The 15mo old won’t sit to see more thean 2-3 flash cards at a time. And given the higher “failure rate” at doman math, is it worth my time? Doing other methods and learning games with counting and math may work better.
DadDude, are you using any particular method to work on math? Just curious. I love to hear what others are doing for teaching/learning. I love all the ideas I get from this site.
It so happens I answered that question recently elsewhere…so I’ll just cut and paste.
We’re doing something more “traditional.” We read MathStart books (I think that’s what they’re called), which introduce math in the context of fiction.
We play A LOT with dice and cards (it was War every day for many days in a row with 12-sided dice; $5 for 12-sided dice, in a set of 12, from Holcomb’s KnowPlace), we count beans and other objects, etc. Playing with, sorting, and counting beans, buttons, and other objects has been one of my boy’s favorite things to do for the last six months or so (he’s almost 3).
I’ve also made some math presentations, partly inspired by the Doman approach. I doubt that has helped my boy to recognize (subitize) quantity but I do think it’s helped him to memorize the order of numerals/number words, which is useful to know.
Also, of course, we sometimes watch videos, like Math Circus (was a big hit with the kid), and sometimes some YouTube/Sesame Street videos. (See http://www.watchknow.org/ for some usefully organized.)
All of this has enabled him to count out (one by one, with fingers) objects up to 12 or so, and to recognize quantity at a glance up to 5 (well, 4 and 5 only sometimes).
Hey, we get ideas from here, too. We did those Thai math games…don’t know if we’ll stick with them, but we’ll give them a try.
Have you read the old posts by Chris1? I think he is somewhat skeptical too. I don’t know if his posts will answer any of your questions, but some might.
So…no replies? Not even any useful pointers? That’s disappointing…does this mean that nobody using Little Math can put my doubts regarding questions 3 or 4 to rest?
Dear DadDudde I am no Math expert as I started these programs late (baby was 4 years old). Math in terms of mental math or instant math has not been my focus. I will try to get a mom from the IAHP international school to read and answer your post (I’l also try with their math teacher as well) but can not guarantee an answer - I will get back to you in a week or two about this.
Have tried asking Pamela from Right Brain? I know she is here at the Forum.
you will need to PM as they are in Asia now.
I also know (via another forum) someone from the IAHP. I’ve just emailed to ask if she can answer DadDude’s questions or help find someone from the Institutes who can…
