|
I did programming without math and it's near impossible without some form of knowledge of algebra. I ended up doing a Computer Science Degree just so that I could get an understanding.
|
On July 30 2012 12:15 Ryuu314 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 12:01 WhiteDog wrote:On July 30 2012 11:50 Ryuu314 wrote:
I can't believe people actually think education is overrated and is a bad thing. Honestly, is it simply a coincidence that the most highly educated countries in the world are also the most developed, powerful, and stable?
I'm really curious as to how many people arguing against teaching basic math in high school are in high school themselves -.- I'd add a poll, but the results would be so skewed with people lying about their age lol You are mystaking a lot of things. By education I mean having a degree in highschool college or whatever institution the country has. I'm sorry but most of our civilisation built itself out of people who didn't had the chance to go to such institution and to get any degree in anything, yet it doesn't mean they were less productiv, less critics toward their environment or whatever. You should see history ; the rise of degree and highschool is not that old, and our economies were actually in better shape before the current time where a degree is needed to do anything. Our civilization built itself out of people who were less educated than we are now, sure. But if we want to continue to advance and grow we need to advance in all areas of life, which includes education. We didn't get iPhones and the internet by sitting on our butts with algebra-less education. Our economies were NOT in better shape before the modern education system was developed. I'm not sure where exactly you got that from.To that end, to everyone who thinks college is worthless. Education is worthless. Degrees are a piece of shit waste of money. Please take a look at very simple statistics from March of 2012. http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_chart_001.htm/ Like xrapture said in his horrible post a few page back, America is strong because people can buy shit. Well, educated people can buy more shit than uneducated people. Simple as that.
Yes our economy were in better shape during the 30 glorious, when a degree wasn't necessarily required to work. I'm not talking about when the modern education system was developped, more when going through the education system became the norm (1980 more or less). During 1950-1980 we didn't had a lot of high end degree (so what you call college ?), not even the third of what we have now.
|
On July 30 2012 12:15 sluggaslamoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 11:53 corpuscle wrote:On July 30 2012 11:38 Zahir wrote:
Like I am I the only one who sees the flawed reasoning here? I pointed out that history, algebra, etc are much less likely to be used in a career than say, comp sci or Spanish, and even pointed to studies...
I ask why algebra should be a requirement for education and ppl say "because it's part of a well rounded education".. You can't just say a term and then not Define or justify it. You do realize that comp sci has math way beyond basic algebra as a graduation requirement at literally every college, right...? Nevermind the fact that even an intro CS class is all about manipulating variables and having a solid grasp of how you want them to interact, which sounds a lot like algebra to me. Also, the fact that comp sci isn't part of a high school diploma is because it's not established. That's a problem, but it's not really what we're talking about. Whether CS should or shouldn't be taught (I think it should) is entirely irrelevant to this debate, which is whether algebra should be. Anyway, I think you're vastly underestimating how useful algebra is in a professional setting. You cited a study that says that 5% of people end up working in a STEM field, but the mere fact that the author of the original article was citing that fact shows his (and your) misunderstanding of how many people need math. Anyone who works in finance, accounting, actuarial services, inventory management, medicine, and hundreds of other professions I can't be bothered to list needs to know math. "STEM" means engineers, scientists, mathematicians, and computer scientists, but it absolutely does not mean "person who uses math." edit: I'm really curious as to how many people arguing against teaching basic math in high school are in high school themselves -.- I'd add a poll, but the results would be so skewed with people lying about their age lol I have to agree, even though it's a little offensive. I can't help getting the sense that the people who think algebra isn't important are people who either struggled with it themselves or are pissed that they have to take it. It's pretty normal to diminish the importance of things you're bad at or dislike; I, for example, have a notorious reputation among my peers for thinking the liberal arts are a waste of time, and it's probably not coincidence that I'm not very good at that kind of stuff. The algebra needed for comp sci can be learned in just a week, and you won't see it as "algebra" you will see as something far more interesting as that. With comp sci you are also not really learning maths, you are learning about logic and patterns. The rest like lambda calculus and big O notation is stuff that you will never learn in school anyway. That's the problem. Once you see the relevance the basic stuff that took you years to learn in school will take just a few days to learn. That's why there is no point.
No. To understand algorithms well enough for comp sci you need substantially more than a week of algebra. Big-O notation is useless without high school maths - you need to be able to manipulate and differentiate many different functions include polynomial and logarithmic functions in order to show anything useful. If you have not previously spent time learning it, you will not get it in a week.
Logic is maths, patterns can be defined in maths - and you will need to do so in CS.
|
as a prospective mathematician, i think basic algebra and calculus is required for human to perform daily chores and make wiser decisions overall. people failing doesnt mean the education system need to compromise, teach harder -____-
also theres a saying, maths is the mother of all discipline lol but from another pov, policy makers need to determine how much of algebra people need to learn, im sure those who are into art and history won't need to know how to prove sophisticated formulas but still need to know what is differentiation what is integration how to solve a basic simultaneous equation as they can be handy in daily life.
as a chinese/asian, i dont understand the point of this article. 
|
A great way to manipulate statistics.
Too many students drop out of school because some subjects are too hard? Np, just remove them and let them all pass. Make America a country, where everybody gets a high school diploma, a modern athens!
Suddenly, statistics tell America has the highest educational standart.
|
On July 30 2012 12:32 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 12:15 Ryuu314 wrote:On July 30 2012 12:01 WhiteDog wrote:On July 30 2012 11:50 Ryuu314 wrote:
I can't believe people actually think education is overrated and is a bad thing. Honestly, is it simply a coincidence that the most highly educated countries in the world are also the most developed, powerful, and stable?
I'm really curious as to how many people arguing against teaching basic math in high school are in high school themselves -.- I'd add a poll, but the results would be so skewed with people lying about their age lol You are mystaking a lot of things. By education I mean having a degree in highschool college or whatever institution the country has. I'm sorry but most of our civilisation built itself out of people who didn't had the chance to go to such institution and to get any degree in anything, yet it doesn't mean they were less productiv, less critics toward their environment or whatever. You should see history ; the rise of degree and highschool is not that old, and our economies were actually in better shape before the current time where a degree is needed to do anything. Our civilization built itself out of people who were less educated than we are now, sure. But if we want to continue to advance and grow we need to advance in all areas of life, which includes education. We didn't get iPhones and the internet by sitting on our butts with algebra-less education. Our economies were NOT in better shape before the modern education system was developed. I'm not sure where exactly you got that from.To that end, to everyone who thinks college is worthless. Education is worthless. Degrees are a piece of shit waste of money. Please take a look at very simple statistics from March of 2012. http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_chart_001.htm/ Like xrapture said in his horrible post a few page back, America is strong because people can buy shit. Well, educated people can buy more shit than uneducated people. Simple as that. Yes our economy were in better shape during the 30 glorious, when a degree wasn't necessarily required to work. I'm not talking about when the modern education system was developped, more when going through the education system became the norm (1980 more or less). During 1950-1980 we didn't had a lot of high end degree (so what you call college ?), not even the third of what we have now.
Well, I can't speak for France, but the US economy in the 1950-1980 was strong because of the Cold War driving the economy. During that time, education funding shot through the roof. Your time frame kinda contradicts what you're saying. There were less degrees during that time, yes, but that's because higher education (colleges) weren't as accessible or popular to people as they are now. But during that time period, education was MUCH more highly valued and funded by the US. Education standards were raised during that period of time, as well.
Also, I think you're arguing about higher education. This discussion is mostly about secondary education, which is basically under 18.
|
The problem, from my highschool in a small town in Illinois, wasn't the course material that was the reason for people failing, but the teaching. The teachers, for the most part, would just write notes on the board straight out of the book and then assign homework and that would be every class of the week. This wasn't just for algebra, but even the high school calculus classes I took. I barely passed all the math classes that I took, not because I didn't know the material, but because I didn't do any of the hours of homework they would assign every night. I feel that the school system and the teachers are the problem for the students being uninspired to try hard in school and the reason that they don't pass the classes.
|
Last time I checked the buddies I have who study Medicine, Psychology, Literature (yarly), Sociology, Geology and also (yarly) Archeology ALL need some form of math knowledge in their courses.
Not sure why people are trying to argue that basic math or rather being familar with mathematical concepts and mathematical thinking in general isn't required in fields like IT or programming which is WAY closer than most of the above.
|
On July 30 2012 12:53 Melvin0000 wrote:
The problem, from my highschool in a small town in Illinois, wasn't the course material that was the reason for people failing, but the teaching. The teachers, for the most part, would just write notes on the board straight out of the book and then assign homework and that would be every class of the week. This wasn't just for algebra, but even the high school calculus classes I took. I barely passed all the math classes that I took, not because I didn't know the material, but because I didn't do any of the hours of homework they would assign every night. I feel that the school system and the teachers are the problem for the students being uninspired to try hard in school and the reason that they don't pass the classes.
As I said earlier.. unless someone wants to argue that students in the USA are lazier/dumber than students in e.g. Finland or even Germany... one usually ends up with some kind of "Hey... maybe... just maybe our educational system is weaker in general!"
|
If the political science professor can explain how knowledge of the the 30 years war is more necessary knowledge for all students than being to calculate how much I owe if my grocery bill was $18 but I had them put back 4 apples at 30 cents a piece I'm all ears.
Nothing other than incredibly rudimentary grammar and vocabulary is of much universal use, but we still teach things in school. What a moronic article.
|
I find this article rather ridiculous. I can absolutely agree that many people are not going to use algebra every day in their lives. However, there are probably fewer people who use their knowledge about the US civil war, the Holocaust, the World Wars, the Cold War, etc in their daily lives, yet those are required and for good reason.
You do not learn algebra because it's useful. You learn algebra because once you learn algebra you'll think about the world differently and will be a better person, just like learning about the wars that have happened throughout history. This is exactly the reason why people have a hard time learning algebra. You go through much of your early schooling with a single perspective on the world, and especially in math many people are taught that there is only one correct answer and that your goal is to correctly apply procedures to arrive at that answer.
Really, that's not math.
If you really learn algebra, you realize that it's not about arriving at an answer, but expressing relationships between quantities and deducing new relationships from ones that you already know. Sometimes that allows you to reduce the space to a small set of possibilities, which is commonly known as ``solving''. I would expect that most people who go through high school never really pick up on this perspective, and I would not be surprised if the people teaching also don't fully understand why algebra is so important.
|
On July 30 2012 12:36 -_-Quails wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 12:15 sluggaslamoo wrote:On July 30 2012 11:53 corpuscle wrote:On July 30 2012 11:38 Zahir wrote:
Like I am I the only one who sees the flawed reasoning here? I pointed out that history, algebra, etc are much less likely to be used in a career than say, comp sci or Spanish, and even pointed to studies...
I ask why algebra should be a requirement for education and ppl say "because it's part of a well rounded education".. You can't just say a term and then not Define or justify it. You do realize that comp sci has math way beyond basic algebra as a graduation requirement at literally every college, right...? Nevermind the fact that even an intro CS class is all about manipulating variables and having a solid grasp of how you want them to interact, which sounds a lot like algebra to me. Also, the fact that comp sci isn't part of a high school diploma is because it's not established. That's a problem, but it's not really what we're talking about. Whether CS should or shouldn't be taught (I think it should) is entirely irrelevant to this debate, which is whether algebra should be. Anyway, I think you're vastly underestimating how useful algebra is in a professional setting. You cited a study that says that 5% of people end up working in a STEM field, but the mere fact that the author of the original article was citing that fact shows his (and your) misunderstanding of how many people need math. Anyone who works in finance, accounting, actuarial services, inventory management, medicine, and hundreds of other professions I can't be bothered to list needs to know math. "STEM" means engineers, scientists, mathematicians, and computer scientists, but it absolutely does not mean "person who uses math." edit: I'm really curious as to how many people arguing against teaching basic math in high school are in high school themselves -.- I'd add a poll, but the results would be so skewed with people lying about their age lol I have to agree, even though it's a little offensive. I can't help getting the sense that the people who think algebra isn't important are people who either struggled with it themselves or are pissed that they have to take it. It's pretty normal to diminish the importance of things you're bad at or dislike; I, for example, have a notorious reputation among my peers for thinking the liberal arts are a waste of time, and it's probably not coincidence that I'm not very good at that kind of stuff. The algebra needed for comp sci can be learned in just a week, and you won't see it as "algebra" you will see as something far more interesting as that. With comp sci you are also not really learning maths, you are learning about logic and patterns. The rest like lambda calculus and big O notation is stuff that you will never learn in school anyway. That's the problem. Once you see the relevance the basic stuff that took you years to learn in school will take just a few days to learn. That's why there is no point. No. To understand algorithms well enough for comp sci you need substantially more than a week of algebra. Big-O notation is useless without high school maths - you need to be able to manipulate and differentiate many different functions include polynomial and logarithmic functions in order to show anything useful. If you have not previously spent time learning it, you will not get it in a week. Logic is maths, patterns can be defined in maths - and you will need to do so in CS.
Logic is not maths. I'm terrible at maths and I understand programming a lot better than most people. While lambda calculus falls under maths, it is nothing like "maths", its pure logic. You do not need to be good at maths to be able to understand lambda calculus, and what becomes of it currying with functional programming. Same goes for algorithmic programming, and learning data structures, sorting algorithms, etc.
I've seen heaps of programmers who were pretty bad at highschool mathematics who became geniuses when they started learning sorting algorithms and lambda calculus.
My point is that stuff is so easy you could learn it within a couple of weeks. It only takes a long time because you are either dragged down by the rest of the class who don't give a shit, or you are not interested yourself.
|
United States10328 Posts
On July 30 2012 13:41 sluggaslamoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 12:36 -_-Quails wrote:On July 30 2012 12:15 sluggaslamoo wrote:
The algebra needed for comp sci can be learned in just a week, and you won't see it as "algebra" you will see as something far more interesting as that. With comp sci you are also not really learning maths, you are learning about logic and patterns. The rest like lambda calculus and big O notation is stuff that you will never learn in school anyway. That's the problem.
Once you see the relevance the basic stuff that took you years to learn in school will take just a few days to learn. That's why there is no point. No. To understand algorithms well enough for comp sci you need substantially more than a week of algebra. Big-O notation is useless without high school maths - you need to be able to manipulate and differentiate many different functions include polynomial and logarithmic functions in order to show anything useful. If you have not previously spent time learning it, you will not get it in a week. Logic is maths, patterns can be defined in maths - and you will need to do so in CS. Logic is not maths. I'm terrible at maths and I understand programming a lot better than most people. While lambda calculus falls under maths, it is nothing like "maths", its pure logic. You do not need to be good at maths to be able to understand lambda calculus, and what becomes of it currying with functional programming. Same goes for algorithmic programming, and learning data structures, sorting algorithms, etc. I've seen heaps of programmers who were pretty bad at highschool mathematics who became geniuses when they started learning sorting algorithms and lambda calculus.
Hmm, seems like you have an extremely narrow definition of math? Discrete math is still math. Yes, it isn't really taught in high schools, but that doesn't change the fact that all algorithms require both verification of correctness and time/space complexity analysis... which are both math.
Also,
Wikipedia wrote:
Lambda calculus (also written as λ-calculus or called "the lambda calculus") is a formal system in mathematical logic for expressing computation by way of variable binding and substitution.
There's a good reason schools like MIT cross-list algorithms and logic in the math department.
|
On July 30 2012 13:01 r.Evo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 12:53 Melvin0000 wrote:
The problem, from my highschool in a small town in Illinois, wasn't the course material that was the reason for people failing, but the teaching. The teachers, for the most part, would just write notes on the board straight out of the book and then assign homework and that would be every class of the week. This wasn't just for algebra, but even the high school calculus classes I took. I barely passed all the math classes that I took, not because I didn't know the material, but because I didn't do any of the hours of homework they would assign every night. I feel that the school system and the teachers are the problem for the students being uninspired to try hard in school and the reason that they don't pass the classes. As I said earlier.. unless someone wants to argue that students in the USA are lazier/dumber than students in e.g. Finland or even Germany... one usually ends up with some kind of "Hey... maybe... just maybe our educational system is weaker in general!"
Culture is the problem. The US doesn't wanna pay higher taxes for education like they do in Europe. The bottom line is higher education tax = better education.
You can have all these policies like grading teachers, but all that does is increase the discrepancy in grading students, which means students that would have gotten a C may end up getting an A instead. That's the problem we have in private schools, if you want a student to go to a good university send him to a private school. The private schools just artificially inflate the scores so they look good when people see all their students going to good universities (although they do have better teaching regardless). Sure the more you pay, a lot of the extra money may still go to bad teachers, but the extra money inventivenesses industry experts and professors to start teaching instead. That's why the best teachers here are all at private schools because they get paid so much more.
The nature of this is that the process for replacement of good teachers may take 10 years for the investment to have an effect, by that time government has changed and the new government ends up looking good instead, but that's the bottom line, there really is no way around it.
|
On July 30 2012 13:51 ]343[ wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 13:41 sluggaslamoo wrote:On July 30 2012 12:36 -_-Quails wrote:On July 30 2012 12:15 sluggaslamoo wrote:
The algebra needed for comp sci can be learned in just a week, and you won't see it as "algebra" you will see as something far more interesting as that. With comp sci you are also not really learning maths, you are learning about logic and patterns. The rest like lambda calculus and big O notation is stuff that you will never learn in school anyway. That's the problem.
Once you see the relevance the basic stuff that took you years to learn in school will take just a few days to learn. That's why there is no point. No. To understand algorithms well enough for comp sci you need substantially more than a week of algebra. Big-O notation is useless without high school maths - you need to be able to manipulate and differentiate many different functions include polynomial and logarithmic functions in order to show anything useful. If you have not previously spent time learning it, you will not get it in a week. Logic is maths, patterns can be defined in maths - and you will need to do so in CS. Logic is not maths. I'm terrible at maths and I understand programming a lot better than most people. While lambda calculus falls under maths, it is nothing like "maths", its pure logic. You do not need to be good at maths to be able to understand lambda calculus, and what becomes of it currying with functional programming. Same goes for algorithmic programming, and learning data structures, sorting algorithms, etc. I've seen heaps of programmers who were pretty bad at highschool mathematics who became geniuses when they started learning sorting algorithms and lambda calculus. Hmm, seems like you have an extremely narrow definition of math? Discrete math is still math. Yes, it isn't really taught in high schools, but that doesn't change the fact that all algorithms require both verification of correctness and time/space complexity analysis... which are both math. Also, Show nested quote +Wikipedia wrote:
Lambda calculus (also written as λ-calculus or called "the lambda calculus") is a formal system in mathematical logic for expressing computation by way of variable binding and substitution. There's a good reason schools like MIT cross-list algorithms and logic in the math department.
Discrete math is best math. 
I do wonder how many people only assume they are terrible aat math because no-one has explained to them what math is. If my entire definition of math was differential calculus, I would like it much less.
|
On July 30 2012 13:51 ]343[ wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 13:41 sluggaslamoo wrote:On July 30 2012 12:36 -_-Quails wrote:On July 30 2012 12:15 sluggaslamoo wrote:
The algebra needed for comp sci can be learned in just a week, and you won't see it as "algebra" you will see as something far more interesting as that. With comp sci you are also not really learning maths, you are learning about logic and patterns. The rest like lambda calculus and big O notation is stuff that you will never learn in school anyway. That's the problem.
Once you see the relevance the basic stuff that took you years to learn in school will take just a few days to learn. That's why there is no point. No. To understand algorithms well enough for comp sci you need substantially more than a week of algebra. Big-O notation is useless without high school maths - you need to be able to manipulate and differentiate many different functions include polynomial and logarithmic functions in order to show anything useful. If you have not previously spent time learning it, you will not get it in a week. Logic is maths, patterns can be defined in maths - and you will need to do so in CS. Logic is not maths. I'm terrible at maths and I understand programming a lot better than most people. While lambda calculus falls under maths, it is nothing like "maths", its pure logic. You do not need to be good at maths to be able to understand lambda calculus, and what becomes of it currying with functional programming. Same goes for algorithmic programming, and learning data structures, sorting algorithms, etc. I've seen heaps of programmers who were pretty bad at highschool mathematics who became geniuses when they started learning sorting algorithms and lambda calculus. Hmm, seems like you have an extremely narrow definition of math? Discrete math is still math. Yes, it isn't really taught in high schools, but that doesn't change the fact that all algorithms require both verification of correctness and time/space complexity analysis... which are both math. Also, Show nested quote +Wikipedia wrote:
Lambda calculus (also written as λ-calculus or called "the lambda calculus") is a formal system in mathematical logic for expressing computation by way of variable binding and substitution. There's a good reason schools like MIT cross-list algorithms and logic in the math department.
I agree, know they fall under the same umbrella, but you are missing the point of my argument.
|
On July 30 2012 13:56 sluggaslamoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 13:01 r.Evo wrote:On July 30 2012 12:53 Melvin0000 wrote:
The problem, from my highschool in a small town in Illinois, wasn't the course material that was the reason for people failing, but the teaching. The teachers, for the most part, would just write notes on the board straight out of the book and then assign homework and that would be every class of the week. This wasn't just for algebra, but even the high school calculus classes I took. I barely passed all the math classes that I took, not because I didn't know the material, but because I didn't do any of the hours of homework they would assign every night. I feel that the school system and the teachers are the problem for the students being uninspired to try hard in school and the reason that they don't pass the classes. As I said earlier.. unless someone wants to argue that students in the USA are lazier/dumber than students in e.g. Finland or even Germany... one usually ends up with some kind of "Hey... maybe... just maybe our educational system is weaker in general!" Culture is the problem. The US doesn't wanna pay higher taxes for education like they do in Europe. The bottom line is higher education tax = better education. You can have all these policies like grading teachers, but all that does is increase the discrepancy in grading students, which means students that would have gotten a C may end up getting an A instead. That's the problem we have in private schools, if you want a student to go to a good university send him to a private school. The private schools just artificially inflate the scores so they look good when people see all their students going to good universities (although they do have better teaching regardless). Sure the more you pay, a lot of the extra money may still go to bad teachers, but the extra money inventivenesses industry experts and professors to start teaching instead. That's why the best teachers here are all at private schools because they get paid so much more. The nature of this is that the process for replacement of good teachers may take 10 years for the investment to have an effect, by that time government has changed and the new government ends up looking good instead, but that's the bottom line, there really is no way around it.
I think the word you were looking for is incentivize. Also, I agree that the USA has a poor educational system. Germany students, for example, go into one of five different types of secondary school much earlier on (10-12ish, i think). Where as, in USA, we all go to the same secondary school (middle & high school) until we are apprx 18.
PS. This is a terrible opinion article that grossly misinterprets Georgetown's research to better serve the authors agenda (refer to page 33). But that is American media for you, as well. And you guys are getting way off-topic, this is about ALGEBRA.
|
On July 30 2012 14:14 Prplppleatr wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 13:56 sluggaslamoo wrote:On July 30 2012 13:01 r.Evo wrote:On July 30 2012 12:53 Melvin0000 wrote:
The problem, from my highschool in a small town in Illinois, wasn't the course material that was the reason for people failing, but the teaching. The teachers, for the most part, would just write notes on the board straight out of the book and then assign homework and that would be every class of the week. This wasn't just for algebra, but even the high school calculus classes I took. I barely passed all the math classes that I took, not because I didn't know the material, but because I didn't do any of the hours of homework they would assign every night. I feel that the school system and the teachers are the problem for the students being uninspired to try hard in school and the reason that they don't pass the classes. As I said earlier.. unless someone wants to argue that students in the USA are lazier/dumber than students in e.g. Finland or even Germany... one usually ends up with some kind of "Hey... maybe... just maybe our educational system is weaker in general!" Culture is the problem. The US doesn't wanna pay higher taxes for education like they do in Europe. The bottom line is higher education tax = better education. You can have all these policies like grading teachers, but all that does is increase the discrepancy in grading students, which means students that would have gotten a C may end up getting an A instead. That's the problem we have in private schools, if you want a student to go to a good university send him to a private school. The private schools just artificially inflate the scores so they look good when people see all their students going to good universities (although they do have better teaching regardless). Sure the more you pay, a lot of the extra money may still go to bad teachers, but the extra money inventivenesses industry experts and professors to start teaching instead. That's why the best teachers here are all at private schools because they get paid so much more. The nature of this is that the process for replacement of good teachers may take 10 years for the investment to have an effect, by that time government has changed and the new government ends up looking good instead, but that's the bottom line, there really is no way around it. I think the word you were looking for is incentivize. Also, I agree that the USA has a poor educational system. Germany students, for example, go into one of five different types of secondary school much earlier on (10-12ish, i think). Where as, in USA, we all go to the same secondary school (middle & high school) until we are apprx 18. PS. This is a terrible opinion article that grossly misinterprets Georgetown's research to better serve the authors agenda (refer to page 33). But that is American media for you, as well.
Lol I could have sworn I wrote incentivise, damn autocorrect? But what I wrote is still not a word... damn 
|
On July 30 2012 13:56 sluggaslamoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 13:01 r.Evo wrote:On July 30 2012 12:53 Melvin0000 wrote:
The problem, from my highschool in a small town in Illinois, wasn't the course material that was the reason for people failing, but the teaching. The teachers, for the most part, would just write notes on the board straight out of the book and then assign homework and that would be every class of the week. This wasn't just for algebra, but even the high school calculus classes I took. I barely passed all the math classes that I took, not because I didn't know the material, but because I didn't do any of the hours of homework they would assign every night. I feel that the school system and the teachers are the problem for the students being uninspired to try hard in school and the reason that they don't pass the classes. As I said earlier.. unless someone wants to argue that students in the USA are lazier/dumber than students in e.g. Finland or even Germany... one usually ends up with some kind of "Hey... maybe... just maybe our educational system is weaker in general!" Culture is the problem. The US doesn't wanna pay higher taxes for education like they do in Europe. The bottom line is higher education tax = better education.
We actually pay more per capita for education than all, or at least most. We just have a pretty inefficient system.
The only credit I'd give our non-university system is that you're not locked into a certain educational path from childhood based on interests or intelligence.
|
The last time I used algebra was trying to guess how much I would have to pay rent for 9 more days, most stuff I use is reeeaally simple math, like mnus my miles by state borders/adding. Schooling in general could use a revamp... like way more hands on, because honestly kids won't even write 30 years from now, any problem will have a calc on w.e device or an app for that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
