Talk:Interactive Mathematics Program

Well done, you've managed to make maths sound dull :0)--Dr Finkbottle 07:33, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article isn't very neutral in its tone--it seems to me pretty anti-IMP. Could we clean this up?

Meganomics 05:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am rewriting this page with an effort to maintain a Neutral Point of View Dmbryant 03:49, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uh...

"Criticism often includes anecdotal evidence..."

"On the other hand, some IMP students describe the program in positive terms."

The battle of the anecdotes! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Owijad (talk • contribs) 12:43, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article naming

This article really should be named "Interactive Mathematics Program", not "Interactive Mathematics Program (IMP)", to go along with article naming convention, but I don't feel like fixing all the links to this page after doing a page move :-/ Are there bots or anything that makes it easier, or anyone who does feel like spending that time? —Isaac Dupree^(talk) 11:59, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IMP" After all this homework, I’ve learned how to use a T-Stick and have gotten super-speedy at creating even lines to write on poster boards. After we’ve solved the unit problem, it only took us a collaboration of ten hours to put together our boards with interactions, diagrams and having them look creative and presentable. I totally get a lot out of IMP. In classes like world studies, or Spanish, the homework only helps teach me the material. With IMP, I get to discover it all by myself! I love it! It’s GREAT! As you can tell I am quite enthusiastic about it. IMP is life in a nutshell. I mean we don’t get enough life experience outside of class anyways. My motto is - “Life is like IMP. You work really hard at it, and in the end your just as confused as when you started and you fail anyways. Also, everyone wishes it was as simple as regular math.” Because before, you know, I was getting A’s in math and I scored a 998 (only because I missed half a day) on the entrance exams. But I don’t think I was getting the college experience I should have. I know that because I am very confused with IMP, I might not score well on the SAT’s. But that’s okay, because I will have the experience colleges want me to have for their courses. I will have beasted the difficult skills of working in a group and figuring things out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.141.82.131 (talk) 21:08, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality problems

This article shows clear signs of bias pro-IMP (I understand from an above comment that the opposite was once true). I have added the POV tag, and suggest a clean-up by someone knowledgeable (my own knowledge is limited to what I have read in the article).

Examples include:

This larger problem serves as motivation for students to develop the underlying
skills and concepts needed to solve it, through solving a variety of smaller
related problems.

This presupposes that the motivation is succesful, which is not a given. All we could claim is that this is the intent.

Together, they tackle problems that are usually too complex to be solved by any

one individual.

This is factually doubtful: In my experience adding more people to a group makes it harder to solve complex problems, not easier. Your mileage may vary, but this claim would need more foundation to be left standing.

Students become comfortable with the calculator to such an extent that a Year

4 project tasks students with using their knowledge of trigonometry, matrix algebra, geometric projections and transformations, and computer programming to design and present an animated cartoon on the screen of the graphing calculator.

Here it is clear (from the introduction of the task) that the intent is that the students should be comfortable enough. It may or may not be verifiable that they also reach this state (I have not checked the reference); however, under no circumstance is the "reversed causality" in the above formulation allowable.

The way "Mathematically Correct" is introduced leaves me with a subjective impression that the author is hostile towards them. In particular, the quoting from the website strikes me as somewhat odd. (Strictly my personal impression, however.)

Criticism often includes anecdotal evidence [...]

is followed by a paragraph with equally anecdotal evidence that supports IMF, without any corresponding qualification.

94.220.246.35 (talk) 00:29, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]