|
Somehow this reminds me of Lockhart's Lament.
Also, the author's exaggerating a little. If anyone is teaching an introductory algebra course by teaching (x^2+y^2)^2=(x^2-y^2)^2+(2xy)^2 and Fermat's dilemma, they should be stripped of their certification for such nonsense.
If these people aren't passing algebra, it's not eminently clear that they'll do well in any sort of curriculum that still includes math and science. I can see how requiring a 700 in the Math SAT is a little absurd, considering the curve, but I don't see this being a huge issue. I'd like to see how the other countries he refers to-- South Korea, Canada, etc.-- set up their own math curricula, rather than having a one-line dismissal of comparative results.
|
On July 29 2012 22:28 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 22:23 Smoot wrote:
Letting a teenager 13-16 decide whether or not to learn Algebra is basically letting them decide to limit their choice of career in life 5 years down the road.
They will not understand the consequences of not-learning Algebra early on until it is too late. At 18-19 they may say, you know, I wasn't BAD at Algebra, maybe I'll look into a science or engineering career.
But if they decided at 13 not to take Algebra because "it sucked", then they just cut short their future career prospects without realizing it. Not to mention the career prospects that they are forgoing are some of the highest paying career prospects out there.
I'm sure this will get glossed over in 5 minutes with posts about how math stinks and how it is completely worthless to learn for them. I think you overestimate the amount of jobs that use algebra. The articles cites a source that says that it will be 5% over the next several years. So it will be useless for 95% of students in their future careers. And then there's this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/us-pushes-for-more-scientists-but-the-jobs-arent-there/2012/07/07/gJQAZJpQUW_story.htmland this: http://mikethemadbiologist.com/2012/07/09/the-stem-phd-glut-makes-the-mainstream-media/#more-10493
Yeah, I really don't think I underestimate it.
Accountants, Engineers, Finance, Economics, Physics, Nuclear Industry, HVAC, Electricians, Building Construction, Any cost / benefit analysis, any Science.....
I think they count for more than 5% of the job market.
The articles you link show that it is difficult for a new graduate to find a job in a bad economy. There are more factors regarding whether or not you get a job than your degree and the economy. The two major ones are work experience and internships. Location is also a limiting factor.
Generally speaking if you have three things open for you, you can find a decent job. Location, Ability, and Willingness to Work. If you have all three of these knocked out, then you won't struggle to find a job. Location is a HUGE limiter, as well as ability and willingness to work. But that's just me talking. If someone REALLY wanted to find a job, and they cast their net nationwide, they will have some options available to them.
|
Maths (and algebra in general) is actually very benefical for our human development. Without it, we would lose the skill of logical thinking and problem solving. And, as most teachers will tell you when you ask about the purpose of maths and algebra, "Algebra conditions you for your work next time where you need to think on-the-spot and conditions are usually constrained. Maths work like that in a sense where certain questions require certain steps to complete and certain concepts to understand to gain marks."
|
I think we must learn algebra and calculus not because we might use them ( i never will) but what they do is help us look at things differently, they rewire the way your brain works (in a certain way). If people are failing, removing the course is the worst "solution" ever. Look for better teachers or better ways of teaching algebra, dont look to reward failure.
|
reminds me of The Onion Movie ... Let's remove math to make it easier to pass, what a bunch of bullshit. People wonder why America (and for the greater part North America) is lagging behind the rest of the world in schooling... Let's remove algebra to raise the passing levels! : D
|
Another point of view is the idea of comparative advantage from economics, which basically says that it's better for society if everyone specialized in doing what they're good at and traded for everything else.
So we should make mathematicians better at mathematics, and mechanics better at fixing cars, and when a mathematician's cars brakes down, it is more efficient for him to call the service of a mechanic than for him to understand how to fix a car and do it himself.
Of course, there are some basic knowledge common for most fields, for example mathematicians need to learn to write English, because that's part of being a better mathematician. Advertising executives need to learn basic math and statistics since it's part of the job, etc. But apart from the basic and necessary skills that are required to be proficient in a profession, it's socially optimal for people to specialize. Thus, to the extent that people do not need to know algebra for their jobs, comparative advantage says it's better for them to learn about things that make them better at their jobs instead of algebra.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage
|
But... Algebra is pretty simple. I mean I even have a learning disability and went in the sped classes in high school and I handled it just fine, just took a bit longer than normal.
|
United States24805 Posts
I have seen the same thing come up multiple times in this thread:
"if kids are failing a course, removing the course isn't the answer; help kids not to fail the course"
...which I honestly don't get. Whether or not kids should be learning something is almost completely independent of whether or not they are all doing well in it at a whole. Just because kids are learning something doesn't mean they should be, and vice versa.
Something else: "I would understand the author's point if algebra wasn't so easy!"
...and how do you determine what is objectively easy or difficult? For you, it apparently wasn't that hard. For many other students it's quite difficult. Part of this is because it's taught imperfectly, and part of it is because we all have brains that work differently.
As for whether or not algebra should be taught to all public school students here: I think at least some should be taught. It's true that not everyone will need to solve an algebraic problem directly in their post-school life, but it's also true that everyone stands to benefit from the experience of learning it and understanding the concepts behind it. I'm more mathematically oriented than over 90% of typical students, so using myself as an example isn't very convincing, but when I talk with my dad (who is also mathematically oriented) we are constantly referring to concepts learned from algebra and above, even without ever solving or creating any algebra problems. Even something as simple as understanding the difference between a linear growth, a parabolic growth, and an exponential growth, is something that you should be picking up in an algebra-related class, and will probably be missed for the majority of students by what the author of the article is proposing.
Not to mention, as a man of physics, knowing algebra is paramount for the study of almost any physics field, and I think the more people that learn some physics the better! (different discussion)
|
On July 29 2012 22:42 paralleluniverse wrote:Another point of view is the idea of comparative advantage from economics, which basically says that it's better for society if everyone specialized in doing what they're good at and traded for everything else. So we should make mathematicians better at mathematics, and mechanics better at fixing cars, and when a mathematician's cars brakes down, it is more efficient for him to call the service of a mechanic than for him to understand how to fix a car and do it himself. Of course, there are some basic knowledge common for most fields, for example mathematicians need to learn to write English, because that's part of being a better mathematician. Advertising executives need to learn basic math and statistics since it's part of the job, etc. But apart from the basic and necessary skills that are required to be proficient in a profession, it's socially optimal for people to specialize. Thus, to the extent that people do need to know algebra for their jobs, comparative advantage says it's better for them to learn about things that make them better at their jobs instead of algebra. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage
This is true to a point. But do people aged 13-16 know what they want to do the rest of their lives? Not learning basic Algebra in high school limits their options later in life. I am of the mind that a teenager can CHOOSE to be good at anything they set their mind to. There are limiters, but I'll not go into that. Letting someone choose whether or not they want to do something hard, without realizing they are limiting their future career choices in life is a mistake in my opinion.
|
Algebra is dirt as hell easy.
Advanced Calculus is where it gets tricky in high school, but obviously that's not required to pass or get into most university courses.
Sorry, but if you can't pass basic Algebra with a good amount of invested effort you are dumb as shit and shouldn't be getting out of high school, or at least be getting out through some sort of SPED program.
The reason people drop out of high school isn't because it's difficult, it's because they are lazy or don't think you'll actually learn anything useful.
You can burn through and learn everything you learn in high school match outside advanced calculus in just 2 weeks.
Removing math from high school is ridiculous considering the amount of fields that require it.
College and University are where people get to start picking and chosing, you SHOULD be required to learn the absolute basics in high school.
|
When I was finishing up the equivalent of high school here, I was an absolute slacker. In most classes it worked out just fine because I was smart enough to see the essence of what I was learning fast, and that allowed me to get good grades with little to no work. Math though was an entirely different beast. It requires you to continually work with it and actually put in the effort. I'd been sclaking off there for the last 5 years. It made even the simple things we learned insanely hard to do, because my grasp and understanding of the basics such as algebra was lacking. Shit I didnt even know how to properly divide without a calculator. Through hard work in my final year I barely managed to pass (got similar to E-).
Then I got to the university, on an computer engineering course. I finally met people I could work with. I spent every day staying late working on my math most of the first semester. I managed to get a C on my calculus class. The next semester I got an A on the advanced calculus course. It is possible. It is possible for everyone, but you have to do the work. Managing to do just that is on the best things I have ever done for myself. A whole new world opened for me, and now I love the shit out of math. Allowing teens to choose whether or not to apply themselves to the often grueling trial that any part of math may be, is a horrible mistake, atleast it would have been for me. I could never have imagined myself doing what I do now, and I shudder to think where I would have been, had they given me a choice about math.
|
Let's try to demolish this "..won't need algebra in their careers" argument.
1* Why would it matter? The high school, and to some extent college do not exist to train you directly for THE job you are going to do for the rest of your life. Especially with high school, the needs of the student are necessarily A) getting to a good college and B) generally educational ("so as to not be an ignorant fool for the rest of your life").
2* Mathematics is applied logic. Is logic and it's application important? Is it something we know by nature? Or is it something we do have to learn? The greek word mathematica (exact spelling?) literally means "learning". How could we possibly expect anyone to make anything of themselves if we don't at least have them learn learning.
3* (re-post from earlier) If we choose to not invest as big as we can into mathematics and science (mathematics being pre-requisite for learning science), how can we be sure we invest enough? It is mathematics and science that create the world that we live in. Society is only a monument to scientific achievement.
|
Nice article and although i loved math i do kinda agree with it.
University doesnt realy teach math or politics or history, it teaches you how to process huge amounts of information in a relativly short amount of time, this information can be annything realy.
Math, history, sociology, physics, it does not realy matter what you study, what matters is that you learn to learn, so to say lol.
Most people use only verry little from the knowledge they learned at university in their every day job, the learning never stops and the most important things you learn by doing them, one skill they do use all their live though, and that is the skill to learn.
As such i dont think students should be forced through huge amounts of maths,though i do think it is still usefull
(advanced) maths is easy for some (for thoose who understand it and dont need to learn it) and difficult for manny ,it is probably the biggest challenge to understand and overcoming such a challenge will proove verry valuable throughout your live, even though the knowledge you have gotten from it is not that relevant.
Math is good, though i dont think it should be forced, there are plenty alternatives.
History, wich is pretty much on the other end of the spectrum, can teach people how to learn and process and understand huge amounts of information just as well basicly.
|
On July 29 2012 22:46 Clearout wrote:
When I was finishing up the equivalent of high school here, I was an absolute slacker. In most classes it worked out just fine because I was smart enough to see the essence of what I was learning fast, and that allowed me to get good grades with little to no work. Math though was an entirely different beast. It requires you to continually work with it and actually put in the effort. I'd been sclaking off there for the last 5 years. It made even the simple things we learned insanely hard to do, because my grasp and understanding of the basics such as algebra was lacking. Shit I didnt even know how to properly divide without a calculator. Through hard work in my final year I barely managed to pass (got similar to E-).
Then I got to the university, on an computer engineering course. I finally met people I could work with. I spent every day staying late working on my math most of the first semester. I managed to get a C on my calculus class. The next semester I got an A on the advanced calculus course. It is possible. It is possible for everyone, but you have to do the work. Managing to do just that is on the best things I have ever done for myself. A whole new world opened for me, and now I love the shit out of math.
Allowing teens to choose whether or not to apply themselves to the often grueling trial that any part of math may be, is a horrible mistake, atleast it would have been for me. I could never have imagined myself doing what I do now, and I shudder to think where I would have been, had they given me a choice about math.
That is the point I have been trying to make for 3 posts.
|
Why are so many people saying basic algebra is important, but trigonometry has little real world application??
Trig is an integral (yay math thread) part of electronics technology. You know... electricity? That stuff pretty much EVERYTHING runs on? Let's not forget physics! Wanna be a sniper? trig. Artillery? Trig.
You wanna know how the world around you works? Algebra can explain a great deal of it. It's also how thousands of inventions first came to life..
Let me tell you this, you big bunch of god damn nerds, of which I am a part of. Mr. Tony Stark wouldn't have created an Arc Reactor without algebra. This whole thread just has me facepalming.
I'm starting my last semester of a Naval electronics program, after which I'll be posted to a ship in the Royal Canadian Navy. Do I REALLY need to know how to design an amplifier circuit to do my job? No, but I'm damn glad I know how these things work.
|
United States24805 Posts
On July 29 2012 22:46 Figgy wrote:
You can burn through and learn everything you learn in high school match outside advanced calculus in just 2 weeks.
This line got my attention (although it's doubtful you are the only TL user to feel this way...)
Do you seriously think that almost any student can learn all the math they need to graduate in just 2 weeks? (I didn't even include the optional pre-calculus and entry-level calculus you did)
Maybe you can, as a naturally gifted learner of math (I doubt even that), but most kids can't through no fault of their own. I'd like to see some evidence behind such a ridiculous statement for it to be used.
Removing math from high school is ridiculous considering the amount of fields that require it. Isn't this oversimplifying the discussion? This isn't so black and white... the question isn't whether or not to remove math, but what form required math should take.
College and University are where people get to start picking and chosing, you SHOULD be required to learn the absolute basics in high school. What is the 'absolute basics'? I agree with you, but the article is simply placing the upper limit on 'absolute basics' at a different place than you.
|
Learning mathematics or algebra or what ever field of mathematic at its basic level is in my opinion really mandatory, even if you do not need it in your study at university or in your job it teaches you a way of thinking and problemsolving that can be applied to everything if thought the right way.
|
Why dont we just let the industry decide on the whole curriculum? That way they can form the perfect employees and nothing unneccessary needs to be learned.
No, I do not really mean this.
|
On July 29 2012 22:45 Smoot wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 22:42 paralleluniverse wrote:Another point of view is the idea of comparative advantage from economics, which basically says that it's better for society if everyone specialized in doing what they're good at and traded for everything else. So we should make mathematicians better at mathematics, and mechanics better at fixing cars, and when a mathematician's cars brakes down, it is more efficient for him to call the service of a mechanic than for him to understand how to fix a car and do it himself. Of course, there are some basic knowledge common for most fields, for example mathematicians need to learn to write English, because that's part of being a better mathematician. Advertising executives need to learn basic math and statistics since it's part of the job, etc. But apart from the basic and necessary skills that are required to be proficient in a profession, it's socially optimal for people to specialize. Thus, to the extent that people do need to know algebra for their jobs, comparative advantage says it's better for them to learn about things that make them better at their jobs instead of algebra. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage This is true to a point. But do people aged 13-16 know what they want to do the rest of their lives? Not learning basic Algebra in high school limits their options later in life. I am of the mind that a teenager can CHOOSE to be good at anything they set their mind to. There are limiters, but I'll not go into that. Letting someone choose whether or not they want to do something hard, without realizing they are limiting their future career choices in life is a mistake in my opinion.
The comparative advantage argument falls apart when you consider the achievements of hard science, for which learning mathematics is a required. The achievements of science haven't simply increased mathematicians capability of doing their stuff right, the achievements of scientists have tremendously increased the capabilities of others in completely unrelated tasks.
|
I dont' think we need english classes. I have never needed to know what the parts of a sentence were. And I definitely never needed to learn about any plays and the books were pointless. I wish I could have dropped it because while I was in advance placement in every other subject I would always pick the mid tier english classes so I didn't have to do any real work.
The SATs however have a lot of that stupid and ultimately subjective material in it visa vi the whole english part. In a culture of standardizing intelligence for a mindless workforce you're going to need to know a little of everything.
I'm a physicist so I pretty much communicate in math. I also realize that everyone is different and too much knowledge is never a bad thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
