Investigating what arithmetic to teach is more fundamental than investigating how to teach it, because method studies may be eliminated by subject-matter findings¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · theoreticalr2·q1
Currency · newest study 1913 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q1 i? The article argues that studies of conflicting teaching methods are less fundamental than studies of what subject-matter to include, since a method question can become moot if the topic it concerns is dropped from the curriculum. → Stone 1913
Evidence¶
Stone 1913¶
Stone, C. W. (1913). Problems in the Scientific Study of the Teaching of Arithmetic. The Journal of Educational Psychology, IV(1). https://psycnet.apa.org/journal/edu
q1 · i? · theoretical · r2
Theoretical argument in the introductory statement of a 1913 agenda-setting paper; no data are offered. The author reasons that further subject-matter study may safely omit still more obsolete content, and illustrates with fractions whose common denominator cannot be determined by inspection, quoting that "there will be no need of a scientific study to determine the degree to which it pays to explain the processes of reducing to a common denominator."
"It is important that these studies be pushed forward, but it is even more important that the question of uhat to teach be scientifically investigated."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The editorial argues that fundamental questions about teaching music should be settled by controlled experiment rather than by trial and error. — related
- Knowledge of individual differences in children's memories should shape recitation questioning, and psychology's analysis of school subjects underlies teaching methods — related
- Dewey argues that science has not justified its early promises as part of the educational curriculum — related
- The Learning How to Learn MOOC's popularity appears attributable to its presentation and instructional methods rather than its subject matter alone — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
what-to-teach-more-fundamental-than-how |
title |
Investigating what arithmetic to teach is more fundamental than investigating how to teach it, because method studies may be eliminated by subject-matter findings |
description |
Investigating what arithmetic to teach is more fundamental than investigating how to teach it, because method studies may be eliminated by subject-matter findings |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
1913 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-25 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — stone-1913 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.