Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xfwgj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T02:01:01.268Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Notation and language in school mathematics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2016

John Hersee*
Affiliation:
76 Pembroke Road, Bristol BS8 3EG

Extract

It has now been possible to study the many comments received since the publication of the “interim statement” in Gazette No. 407 (March 1975). The recommendations given below are based on the original suggestions, taking these comments into account. Sidelining indicates a change or modification of the original suggestion.

It is proposed also to publish these recommendations as a pamphlet, so that they may be widely available to authors and others.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Mathematical Association 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Page no 243 note † Except with small samples the difference is trivial. Professional statisticians have urged the importance of n − 1, especially for later theory. We emphasise that our recommendation is for school use and would argue as follows:

  1. (i)

    (i) In teaching, the use of n is intuitively reasonable, to average the squared deviations.

  2. (ii)

    (ii) Ideas of estimation are too sophisticated to introduce at the same time as the (quite difficult) idea of variance.

  3. (iii)

    (iii) The simplified formula loses its simplicity if n − 1 is used, since the two terms have to be adjusted differently.

Page no 245 note † For example, we should say “horizontal resolute” rather than “horizontal component”, except in a context where the direction(s) of the other component(s) is (are) clear.