Slashdot Mirror
Discouraging Students from Taking Math
Coryoth writes "Following on from a previous story about UK schools encouraging students to drop mathematics, an article in The Age accuses Australian schools of much the same. The claim is that Australian schools are actively discouraging students from taking upper level math courses to boost their academic results on school league tables. How widespread is this phenomenon? Are schools taking similar measures in the US and Canada?"
After a few generations of not taking any math, administrators won't be able to figure out why not taking math increased their average scores in the first place. At that point, they'll re-institute a math program, probably cutting out history, since that's over and done with.
<Complete your profile by adding a signature!>
It was sweet. I went from six classes to four.
Oh... wait... I thought it read "discouraging students from taking meth."
My mistake.
It would make a little more sense if this was college when you have an idea what you want to do with your life and realize it doesn't make sense to take calculus to finish out an art/language major. But really, a student that is not interested in going into the sciences is unlikely to use calculus or higher mathematics much, but that doesn't mean they should drop it just to boost their GPA.
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
The US doesn't do that, we just hide our heads in the sand and ignore the problem: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20205125/site/newsweek /
In my high school (it was a Georgia public school), you had to have skipped 6th grade math to get to super-basic (no AP) calculus in high school. Otherwise, you topped out at trig. On top of that, trig was optional even for what they called "college prep" diplomas. Guess how many people were in that class. That was going on 15 years ago, though.
This is what you get when schools do what it takes to look good. While they are too blame, the blame also lies on governments and parents who are looking for schools which turn out the most graduates.
Ideally a rating system should be based on the "quality" of those grades. What I mean by this is that the maths levels would be broken down into categories from easy to advanced. A school should be given higher marks if they manage to turn out a few good maths students as opposed to many low level maths students. I am not sure how this could be made to work in reality though.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
I, for one, welcome our new woefully innumerate overlords.
I worked in a lumber yard one summer when I was in college. I worked on the end of line that spit out two by fours cut from logs. The pallets were always of different height, but always the same width - 10 units. At the end, you had to paint the total on the side. So if it was 14 units high, you'd have 140 pieces. Me being "just a kid" wasn't trusted to paint the number. The "senior" person busted out a calculator every fucking time. To multiply a number under 20 (the max) by 10.
I taught 8th grade science, and we were always encouraging students to take as much math as possible.
Unfortunately, students make short sighted decisions in 8th grade that determine whether they are on the calculus track or not. You must start on the path that leads to calculus in 8th grade or it is unlikely you can catch up by 12th grade.
We held an annual pep-rally for 7th graders encouraging them to enroll in math and science courses in 8th grade. If they don't, they are closing doors for future opportunity. Without calculus in high school, it is difficult to be accepted directly into technical/science degree programs in universities. At a minimum, some remedial college math is likely to be required. If you think you might want to be an engineer, scientist, doctor, mathematician, actuarial, astronaut, architect, etc. you should take the most advanced math offered by your school.
In fact, with few exceptions, if you want a high paying job that doesn't require graduate school, you are well served to take advanced math in high school.
That's ridiculous--the moment there's even a shadow of that problem, you weight upper-level classes with a 1.1 or so. The idea is not to punish someone for taking a harder class, after all. (High school math was probably trivial for all of us, but it isn't for everyone.) My high school weighted honors classes at 1.05 when they averaged them into your GPA, and AP classes at 1.10; a similar technique would work here.
In the US it's "math". In the UK (and also Australia, at least) it's "maths". Like elevator/lift or color/colour, prolly.
-uso.
What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
Maybe not intentionally. But the way math courses are setup discourages many otherwise capable students from being successful in the subject. My middle school district did a poor job of coordinating math courses with the high school district. As such, I was behind by the time I reached high school and struggled the whole way.
Couple this with the ridiculous "integrated math" fad that plagued countless districts (at least in California). We barely covered trig functions, factoring, and other critical topics. (Anyone else have a thought about integrated math?) High school physical science courses did a poor job of incorporating math.
In college, I changed to a geology major that required calculus courses. Having struggled with math in high school, I had to start from intermediate algebra and work my way up. At least college math curriculums were organized in a logical and relevant fashion. It helped when the professor said, "Yeah, pay attention to this because you might have to derive the formula for centripetal acceleration in a physics course." Connections are important, especially when dealing with abstract math concepts.
My friends had similar experiences and, not wanting to blow a year taking bonehead math like me, decided not to explore their interests in astronomy, physics, chemistry, and other math-intensive subjects. It's a shame, really.
There needs to better curriculum coordination at the middle- and high-school levels so kids understand the importance of math and have a foundation that preps them for college. I understand how easy it is for a student's math foundation to get ruined. Such foundations, at least in my case, take years to build. Oh yeah, and (excessive) testing doesn't help -- but that's a whole other rant! If you want to encourage kids to take math, do a good job of setting up the courses in the first place...and tell them how important it is!
As a former mathematics teacher in Canada (Winnipeg, Manitoba if it matters) I can say that there is a worse scenario, it is not uncommon for school principals to put pressure on math teachers to give all students good grades. The logic being that since math courses are mandatory for graduation, failing a student will socially stigmatize them.
As a specific example, I personally had 3 students who did not attempt a single assignment and all of them had attendance rates below 50%. I was told by the principle that if I wanted to be hired on next year I would need to give these students an extra assignment for 'Bonus' marks so that they would pass. I refused and hence am a former math teacher.
Technology is most abused by the very people it was created to help
Math still has its place. If you want to go to graduate school in humanities, then you may still need some advanced math. In particular, many students from medicine, political science, humanities, and the arts, do advanced multi-variate statistical studies as part of their post-graduate studies. Understanding the tools used in these advanced statistical studies typically requires first or second year statistics skills. If you want your Master's degree, you need your undergraduate math.
As such, a significant number of undergraduate degrees require "Math for Humanities" or "Statistics for Non-stats Major" courses. It is a good idea to keep math throughout high school. It gives you many more options when you reach university.
If you never learned calculus or any higher maths, how do you know that you would have never used them? Math is used for all kinds of research in history: population extrapolations, statistical correlations, dynamic modeling, hypothesis testing, etc.
You're like a blind person who has found ways to cope with what you're missing, but that doesn't mean that you wouldn't benefit from sight.
Stick it to da' man: factor a polynomial!
I drank what? -- Socrates
Great. While we're at it, let's also drop the "core" classes in English, diversity, and art history that engineers have to take.
If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
Math and maths both being short for mathematics. I guess it depends on whether you consider mathematics to be a science (ergo singular) or a group of sciences (ergo plural).
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
When you are being bred to be a bunch of mindless controllable sheep?
A country of dishwashers and burger flippers dont really need an advanced education.
Eventually it will backfire of course, when the country slips into place as a 3rd world nation that cant even support itself. But until then, it keeps the ones in power, in power.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
As long as they do not try to discourage them from taking Bath...
Screw math, we need a class on general problem solving and trouble shooting. In IT we have to understand *everything* in order to help someone. My CIS teacher told me "The client doesn't know what he wants or needs, you need to find this for him" and the client being the owner/CEO/whatever. "my speakers stopped working" = the *green* plug is plugged into the *blue* port next to the *green* port.. WTF?! This is your average person. How can the speakers stop working if they couldn't have worked in the first place. We need people capable of figuring out stuff on their own and researching. Once we can start getting this down, math will come naturally. The only thing I've learned as IT is "Never underestimate the stupidity of average intelligence." I love working with and helping people... but wow.. it's never ending
In high school, they took the me and other 49 or so kids that were taking more than 2 AP classes aside for an entire day of testing in the school library. We had snacks and were able to take breaks. They did this so that we would have a calm, cool, environment to do the best we could and thus bring the school scores up. Far from ethical, but better than denying others the same test.
Working now in education and having worked with a very large school district, I've seen a similar system practiced.
I just don't think that's the case. I took the four years of math (two of algebra, one of statistics, one of geometry). plus another in college (having deliberately chosen a major that would let me avoid as much math as possible). That's five years of math, plus the algebra class in eigth grade, which could count as a sixth year of math even though it was, obviously, not very advanced.
To this day I have absolutely no idea what a quadratic equation is beyond a vague "something to do with parabolas". I still remember the formula thanks to a silly mneumonic, and if forced I could probably still crunch through one. But that was ten years ago, and that is all I can do today.
Even then, being exposed to it every single day, I didn't understand it. I had no idea what it was used for, and I had no idea whatsoever how it worked. At all. And I still don't.
To say I -- or anyone like me who is not inclined towards math -- is "learning" it is somewhat disingenuous. I learned nothing about math in high school. I did what most non-math types did, which was memorize the formulas long enough to plug the numbers in and pass the test. I had no idea what I was doing -- just steps in a dance I was forced to go through like a trained monkey.
And today I still suck at it.
See, the reason I don't like your analogy is because, unlike math, English (or whatever your native language may be) is something you are constantly exposed to, and you will use it every single day of your life, regardless of your profession, interests, social status, etc. And because of that, it is useful to everyone, from every walk of life, in every professional or personal communication they have with anybody. Ensuring that people are better at this is a good thing for everyone, and moreover, it doesn't take much, because everyone is exposed to it all the time.
You cannot make the same argument for math. It is rarely used by anyone; only a small subset of people use it for their professions, and another small percentage find it of personal interest. But the majority of people never encounter math beyond arithmetic outside the classroom -- and because of that, they forget what they allegedly learned.
Learning English may have helped you be somewhat better at it, but then, you have plenty of opportunity for practice. Learning math won't help most people, who will never find a chance to use it, and after only a year or two away from the classroom, will have forgotten most of it.
I'm not denying that math is important -- the fact that we're talking about it using computers which require an intimate understanding of silicon semiconductor physics demonstrates that. But Joe Average didn't design the computer. But can you really, with a straight face, tell me that most people have any use for math beyond basic arithmetic?
mirrorshades radio -- darkwave, industrial, futurepop, ebm.
The value of the math content in a curriculum is more than just "useful math", in the same way that composition, literature, art, science, and history courses have value far beyond the explicit content. It's true that the specific mathematical skills that are taught in high school and college math are not necessary for most people. However, the rigorous logical analysis and problem solving skills necessary in mathematics are absolutely essential to an educated person.
I've forgotten most of the specific content of my literature courses, but they were part of how I learned how to read critically. I don't remember much from my college chemistry courses, but they helped me to think scientifically. I've forgotten many of the details from my history, art, and social science courses, but along the way I learned to analyze and appreciate the world around me.
The purpose of an education is to learn to think, and mathematics is a crucial part of that process.
Stick it to da' man: factor a polynomial!
Funny but also kinda true. Math is a gateway to Critical Thinking or Logic. The kind of accuracy and clarity you get with math isn't something that most modern governments really want to encourage in the populace. Not the math itself, but the kinds of thinking you learn by way of math. It's much easier to sway them with a convincing soundbite than to actually have to have a through and logical understanding of an issue. Factoring a polynomial teaches you break things down into clear components in a much different way than you will get if you are only ever exposed to literature,history,and civics. A well educated thinking man is going to be a politicians toughest constituent.
We are all just people.
In general, community colleges in the US only offer two year degrees, whereas universities generally offer four year degrees. However, the courses at many community colleges are transferable, so it is very common for people to spend a year or two at a community college to save money before transferring to a university to get a four year degree. So employers in the United States will obviously care which you graduated from simply because they are different degrees. However, there is generally no distinction made between someone who spent part of the time at a community college versus someone who spent the whole time at a university. However, you also need to keep in mind that colleges and community colleges are not synonymous in the US. In general, universities tend to be larger institutions with many areas of study (often divided into smaller units called colleges), while there are many smaller institutions called colleges that have a much narrower academic focus. These sorts of colleges usually offer four year degrees as well as advanced degrees, so they are generally comparable to universities in terms of prestige and value of the degree.
Yes. In the same way 'ads' is short for 'adsvert' and 'abs' is short for 'absdominal muscle'.
I'll probably be modded down for this...
In *general* (not in *all* cases but in the majority of them) people tend to do whatever they have been given incentive to do. When you judge the success of a school by how many A's they give to their own students, you have given them just as much incentive to exercise statistical manipulation and practice grade inflation as you have to provide an education.
I believe that the people who test students, and the people who educate students, should be different people. The educators should not be able to rate their own success by giving whatever grades they please to their own students. Instead, the public school should only provide the education. Then, at the end of the year, the students are sent off to take some standardized tests which are graded by people who do not work for the school board, and who focus primarily on objective criteria.
Since the educators will no longer be able to determine the grades, and since the grades will still be used as a determination of the success of the educators, they now have to focus their efforts on the providence of a good education (rather than the grade inflation and what have you).
I think it would help. It would create its own set of problems (schools trying to expel special-needs students rather than help them, for example), so it is not a perfect solution. But I do think it would help.
IMHO that's just wishful thinking. How strong are Chinese students in math? I'm one, and I consider myself quite strong mathematically, though most of my Asian peers are even more insane. Of course, I am probably *the* only critical thinker out of the bunch. It's entirely possible to create a bunch of math geniuses without risking exposure to democratic ideas.
Slightly off topic, but what I find most interesting about my Chinese peers is that they haven't been indoctrinated to worship Mao, or any such nonsense. Rather, they've been indoctrinated not to care. Most have a very mild contempt for Mao, and aren't writing rave reviews about their government, but at the same time they fail to see what the fuss is about with democracy, freedom of the press/religion, etc, having been totally trained to believe that politics simply aren't important in a proper person's life. I find it altogether much scarier than a bunch of Mao worshippers, and infinitely more depressing.