Political Science Prof Asks: Is Algebra Necessary? 1010
Capt.Albatross writes "Andrew Hacker, a professor of Political Science at the City University of New York and author of Higher Education? How Colleges Are Wasting Our Money and Failing Our Kids — and What We Can Do About It, attempts to answer this question in the negative in today's New York Times Sunday Review. His primary claim is that mathematics requirements are prematurely and unreasonably limiting the level of education available to otherwise capable students ."
yes (Score:5, Insightful)
substitute in his thesis,
Algebra is an onerous stumbling block for all kinds of students: disadvantaged and affluent, black and white.
and substitute to:
History is an onerous stumbling block for all kinds of students: disadvantaged and affluent, black and white.
and you have a perfect argument for me and the school system not requiring History.
Even better,
$yourWorstSubject is an onerous stumbling block for all kinds of students: disadvantaged and affluent, black and white.
and we've eliminated the need for any required subjects.
"I am not good at", or "I don't want to" are not good arguments for not requiring learnin'.
(-e**(i*pi) st post)
Mathematics is a tool (Score:5, Insightful)
NO.
It's the unintuitive ways in which it's taught (which in turn causes the societal alienation of the subject) that is the problem, not the fact that it's a requirement.
Mathematics is nothing less than the upmost tool of rationality. Lose it, and all progress decays.
That's A Convenient Theory (Score:5, Insightful)
This guy is an idiot (Score:5, Insightful)
If you want to understand the world... (Score:5, Insightful)
If you want to understand the world, you need math. If your education doesn't include that, what sort of education is it?
The real question is: (Score:5, Insightful)
... is High School necessary?
Re:That's A Convenient Theory (Score:5, Insightful)
Political Science is an oxymoron, and insult to the term science. It should be Political Skullduggery, or something to match the true ilk of it, being an observation of the human nature at its finest and worst at the same time.
Flamebait Headline (Score:4, Insightful)
The professor in the article is asking something completely different and reasonable: since everyone is different, and everyone has a set of proficiencies and aptitudes, why do we try to teach everything a set of knowledge someone somewhere has somehow determined to be paramount? What if everyone's talent was fostered at a young age instead of forcing them to neglect their proficiencies and learn skills which perhaps they will never use? Would we end up with a society where everyone was an expert at something, rather than a society where everyone has a little knowledge everywhere but no real spectacular skill?
I don't know the answer to any of these questions, but really, I think they're worth considering. I for one was fostered at a young age because my parents identified that I was good at science and math, and I benefited tremendously. I could only imagine if that kind of fostering was afforded to every child, we might be better off.
Yup. (Score:5, Insightful)
Most students do not really understand mathematics anyway, they simply memorize equations and techniques. Why should students who can't manage that be barred from the higher levels in other courses?
Re:Flamebait Headline (Score:2, Insightful)
You, and the author, are pretending like Algebra is advanced math. It's not -- at least not the portion that typical students are required to know.
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
So by counterexample it's apparent not all mathematics is necessary for everyone... so I think these blanket answers I'm seeing floated around here by people who probably rely on mathematics daily for their jobs is a little short sighted.
remember Heinlein's assessment? (Score:5, Insightful)
Everyone wants Excel skills. (Score:5, Insightful)
If you've been in any large business you realize that it operates primarily on Excel spreadsheets being repeatedly e-mailed back and forth. While many of the folks creating these spreadsheets don't even realize it, each of the cells are little algebraic equations. People often ask "what from math class do you use every day", well algebra is an easy one, people write business formulas in Excel.
Re:If you want to understand the world... (Score:4, Insightful)
I certainly prefer my banker to know algebra, and so should the lawyer and notary. Social studies (history plus geography) was ALSO required when I was in school. And if you haven't noticed, studying and actually solving a lot of those "social realities" that have such a big impact in everyday life depends on statistics, which is... math.
Short answer: yes. (Score:5, Insightful)
Longer answer:
The fact that anyone felt the need to ask this question says to me that we're doing education wrong in the USA. Very wrong. Fundamentally wrong. Yes, algebra is necessary, possibly more necessary than any other branch of math, because there are so many other fundamentally useful concepts wrapped up in it -- formal logic, proof, and a whole bunch of other basic building blocks of epistemology, not just mathematics -- that IMHO it's crucial to teaching students to think and reason answers and not just churn them out by rote memorization the way they do with arithmetic .. the way we're currently teaching it.
But why are we approaching the subject as though it's something "hard" that we have to "work" to learn and then question whether the effort is necessary? The only reason we have that view of it is that by the time our kids hit algebra, they've had all the curiosity and fascination for new knowledge hammered out of them, by normalizing their curriculum to death assembly-line style. Arithmetic by addition and multiplication tables and memorization is boring, mind-numbingly so, and any kid who gets through that gauntlet and is still interested in algebra didn't learn his/her math in the classroom, they learned it by exploring and playing around with it and getting a feel for number theory and how arithmetic operators work .. you know, real math, the kind that gets the imagination flowing.
And if you haven't had curiosity crushed out of you by memorization drills, algebra is fascinating. If you're teaching it right and letting the math itself do the teaching, you'd be hard pressed to stop kids from learning it. Case in point: In my 6th grade math class, a "substitute" (who I'm fairly sure was actually an education researcher experimenting with math teaching methods, but "substitute" was what they called him) came into the class, which was starting on basic algebra, and taught us what turned out to be differentiation by the power rule. I ended up using that one method in every math class I had from then on -- much to the consternation of my teachers who weren't quite sure how to deal with me doing differential calculus on high school algebra tests -- but I also ended up exploring how polynomials went through simpler and simpler derivatives until they ended up as a constant, and then zero, and gained a whole new appreciation for how they worked, and later on, integration and the fundamental theorem of calculus just sort of fell into place. The power rule is still one of my old friends when it comes to math. But I have that "substitute" to thank for most of the algebra I learned on my own because I couldn't get enough of it -- that one little seed sparked a whole adventure that continued to teach me mathematics for decades afterward.
Granted, I'm a hardcore nerd in a lot of ways, but I'm not entirely sure that's an aspect of who I am and not just an artifact of a society raised on the "math is hard" meme. It's hard, yes, but it's irresistible to a curious mind, and we're all born curious .. it's how we bootstrap every bit of knowledge we gain firsthand about the world. If we stop killing it in the schools, give it a few generations and our PolySci professors wouldn't even think to ask this question..
Re:If you want to understand the world... (Score:4, Insightful)
And how exactly do you define the world? The world is vast, and we can probably define and describe less than 1% of all we know with mathematical formulas. What about poets, artists, authors... do they not understand the world? I can't tell you the last time I read an equation that elicited more emotion than Whitman or Frost. So maybe it's apt to say those who do not understand love or nature or poetry or biology do not understand the world.
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Mathematics is the language used to describe how the world around you works. At the very least you should understand the concepts of exponential growth and decay (which I think is algebra 2). Most people are going to have credit cards, 401ks, mortgages, car loans, etc. Knowing how these things work is the first step to financial success. I went through differential equations in college and honestly I can't recite off-hand the formulas for those things but I do understand how it works and could look up and calculate loan totals payoffs, monthly payments, etc.
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
False comparison (Score:0, Insightful)
The piece specifcially suggests higher math requirements are a problem. It does not suggest math is a problem. Therefore you should have RTFA before you made your dumbass remark.
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
How many people use a substantial fraction of their high school education in their working life?
The purpose of a high school education is to enable a person to be able to be able to think and be able to have an intelligent conversation. It is not specialization nor is it designed to train someone how to perform a specific job. Math, arts, science, history, music, language, writing, civics, etc., all play a part. A person with a well rounded education is a person who can make useful judgements as a citizen.
High school doesn't prepare people to be salesmen, barbers, engineers, doctors, receptionists, or mechanics. Each of those fields will have specific training. High school only makes it possible that once you do enter one of those fields that you can do so as an intelligent citizen.
Is this worth it? Some developed societies separate their education systems half-way through high school into a vocational and college prep line because they want to use high school to prepare their citizens for a job. They choose specialization over breadth. It has been argued that this stifles creativity. Math and science scores are nice on paper to show off your education system, but perhaps the true measure is how creative your students are. Everyone is going to specialize after leaving high school, but the well rounded students who might be a step behind on specialization will be two steps ahead with creativity.
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Mathematics is a tool, [...]
Math isn't factual or learnable per se - studying math to your brain is what jogging is to your body.
Very very small share of people does the theoretical math. Most people do applied math and most of the time using specialized software.
I have used math last time god knows how many years ago and personally no huge fan of it. Yet, I'm still very grateful and that I had the math. For it taught me the analytical thinking, it taught me how to find the way to dismantle large problems into smaller ones, it taught how to deal with ambiguities and so on.
Math stands apart from the rest of the subjects because it is sole pure abstract one. It is the only subject which was created 100% by humans. Yet, since it relates in no way to the outside world, it is also the most unnatural for our brain to learn.
Instead of all the flames, probably a healthy discussion on how to better teach the math would be more productive?
Re:This guy is an idiot (Score:5, Insightful)
No exaggeration at all, this is completely true! The author himself states that he's not in favor of ruling out quantitative reasoning, which he considers important. The fact that the thinks algebra isn't an important component of this skill only shows how ignorant he is of mathematics (why he's given his soapbox in light of this is only more concerning, but I digress).
Algebra builds an understanding of abstract and unknown concepts. You can train students to do quantitative reasoning problems like machines, but algebra is much more abstract, but then you can throw them a curveball and they'll be totally hopeless. You end up with situations where students can solve problems like 'how much should 3 apples cost if one costs 1$' and then they won't be able to solve things like 'if you have 5$, how many apples can you buy?' We have freaking tip calculators on our phones because we're too lazy to learn that all you have to do is slide the decimal over, round to a convenient number and double it. Is that really so hard?
No, the problem isn't the subject - it's the students. Get over the fact that you have to learn things that you don't like. I feel like all the time I spent on my humanities subjects in secondary school and college were thoroughly wasted as well, but I put up with it because I had to. I fell off the honor roll when I was 12 because I got straight A's and a B in Art. Art for Christ's sake! Pardon me if I suck at using a pair of scissors! I guess that's what should hold me back from being recognized in my math and science achievements, right?
I'm not gonna stand here and suggest that I never complained about it, but at the same time, I went into that class every day fighting for my life because I knew that was the one thing standing in the way of my being recognized as a good scholar. So ultimately I didn't reach my goal, but at least I can say that I tried as hard as i could. I don't make excuses. The problem is that nowadays we have a problem telling kids to suck it up and deal with it. Math is a requirement - deal with it. I'm not gonna get a damn thing out of reading Dante's Inferno, or buillshitting about character development and relationships in Dickens, but do it because I must. Kids (and their parents) seem to not accept that as a reason nowadays.
Maybe alongside with learning algebra (or whatever subject trips you up), we should learn to accept that not eveything's gonna be easy in life and that we shouldn't make excuses and just blame ourselves instead.
And before I forget, obligatory xkcd: http://xkcd.com/1050/ [xkcd.com]
And also before I forget, not only should algebra be mandatory, but statistics should as well.
Re:Flamebait Headline (Score:3, Insightful)
But he's talking about algebra, not about category theory or partial differential equations. Algebra, taught well, is no more than firstly, the ability to solve problems in general using abstract thinking, instead of muddling through the specifics every time; and secondly, to map numerical concepts onto the world and use them to solve problems. These reasoning skills are incredibly basic and incredibly important in today's society to function as a competent and responsible individual. If some people manage to learn the same skills through another circuitous route, that's okay, but if a HS diploma is supposed to mean that an individual has reached some minimal level of education, and they cannot manage to read and decipher texts of the level of complexity necessary to understand the world, cannot manage to think abstractly about problems quantitative and otherwise so as to act wisely on the basis of experience, and so on, then what is it that the diploma signifies aside from reaching a certain age? What is it that a B.A. from Harvard is supposed to signify--that the person is intellectually accomplished, or merely that they do one thing that they like well?
Democratic societies ultimately depend upon the intellectual sophistication of their members. Measures that increase the pressure to be intellectually sophisticated are therefore advisable.
Now, if we're doing a lousy job teaching algebra--and I think we are--then we should be alarmed and try to find ways to improve dramatically. Then most everyone will be able to learn that basic skill, and devote the rest of their time (after covering the other basics) to whatever it is that they're particularly good at and/or passionate about. (I think that the thought-patterns required for applying calculus to physical problems are also so fundamental that they should be required in high school, but let's try to get algebra under control first.)
I'm an English professor (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
No, the point of educating people is not so that, one day, they will go "aha!" and use their knowledge of geometric series or the battle of Gettysburg to found a company and make a million dollars, but to ensure that the constituents of the very influential body politic (in a democratic society) are capable of interacting effectively with their world. While you will never be asked to solve for X in your daily life, you will likely be asked to apply similar concepts, and you will definitely be asked to use your knowledge of, for example, plotting of functions, to understand things like graphs which are presented to the public by the media in ways which are either unintuitive or outright deceptive.
The same arguments in the TFA could easily have been applied, in an earlier time, to literacy: there are historically plenty of people who lived long, happy lives who never knew how to read. However, it is essential in today's society, because our commitment to a literate society has gone hand in hand with out commitment to an advanced society capable of effective and efficient engagement and contribution to the experience and knowledge of our collective self. Mathematical literacy, of an increasingly advanced degree, is a similar requisite in the modern society, where the sheer amount of information available grows larger and more formidable every day. In such a time, it is the duty of us as a community to ensure all persons are capable of effectively interacting with and utilizing this information. To do less, simply because the individuals prove recalcitrant, or might find ways to ignore our information rich society, is to condemn ourselves to mean regions of social existence, consciousness, and ultimately human experience.
Re:Oblig xkcd (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Don't really get the American system (Score:4, Insightful)
I agree to a point. General education is useful to provide a well rounded education. Sometime in the teen years you can start allowing children to specialize, which is something adults do anyways. Heck, even our brains do it, unless I am wrong about my limited understanding of neuroscience.
The value in math is not what you can do with it. Highest math courses I passed were Calculus and I never went on to anything else in college. To this day I don't use very high level math, the standard deviation equation being a notable exception. I just don't need an absolute ton of math to be programming and administrating the systems that I do. I know there is a *huge* amount of math involved in the platforms that I am using, but I'm working at a much higher level of abstraction and can just use a math class or plugin where required.
The true value of math is learning critical thinking skills and logic. While only a very small percentage of students will ever use it daily, 100% could be benefiting from the critical thinking skills and logic.
Regardless of specialization, those skills need to be taught. Could there be a better way than pure math? Perhaps.
Re:yes (Score:3, Insightful)
Correction: Your uncle any cousins run a business which currently is very successful. You don't know if it will still be very successful in ten years. And it may be that the reason of a future failure is not recognizing a problem which he would have recognized if he had a solid basic understanding of mathematics (for example, underestimating the importance of an exponentially growing trend). Of course it may also well be that he'll still be successful, or that he will fail for a completely different reason. But the point is that his chances to continued success would be higher with a solid basic understanding of mathematics.
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
I was a Data room tech, field engineer, service tech, systems administrator, and second level support tech (not in that order) for over thirty years, and while I had taken (and done well at) algebra, calculus and geometry/trigonometry etc I don't remember ever actually using it on the job
I work as a programmer. I took and did well in Spanish, geography, history, chemistry, physics, biology, sexual education, art, wood shop and gym classes in high school, but I don't remember ever using them on the job.
The idea that education should be reduced to voc-tech work is bizarre.
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
If problem solving is the goal, then your better served by a Logic/Critical Thinking class then Algebra.
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone not understanding what an exponential
Anyone not understanding what an exponential is should NOT be making policy decisions at all. Period.
A very sad fact.
Re:yes (Score:4, Insightful)
No you don't. A basic understanding of our shared history is important for the proper functioning of a democratic society. An understanding of math beyond what is needed to balance a checkbook (or national budget) is not. 90% of us never use algebra, even once, after leaving school. It is basically pointless for non-techies.
It's a very good analogy, actually. You're right that a basic understanding of our shared history is important, but the vast majority of people rarely if ever use more than what they'd learned of history by the end of middle school.
I'd argue that that doesn't make it worthless to teach more in high school--although only maybe 5% will benefit directly from taking more advanced history classes, you don't know which 5% it is and you're handicapping your culture slightly by not providing that knowledge. It's exactly the same argument that I'd make about algebra, except more people are likely to use algebra at some point.
And in both cases I'd argue that even if you don't directly pull some history facts out now and again or have to figure out how much each of those 10 cars cost pre-tex, you still benefit indirectly by taking those classes--for one thing, it's a lot easier to forget the final levels of coursework than it is the stuff that you used again in later years of school. So if you want people to know, say, algebra I and 7th grade history for the rest of their life, then a very good way to help do that is to make sure they take algebra II and 8th grade history--not only did they just learn the former out of the book, but they practiced it as part of something else for another year.
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
This guy, Hacker, is a troll. (Score:5, Insightful)
He has gotten a few minutes of glory by killing a sacred cow. In this case The-Math-Is-Vital to-Higher-Education cow. The cow is sacred because it is a good and right cow. An all-the-way-down cow. It is so easy to make a name for yourself by taking contrary positions -- especially if they are outrageous. This specious argument was born to be reported on Cable News. Or *"cough* on Slashdot. Of course these pay-as-you-go degree mills would like to have more customers. So let's just change these ridiculous standards. This guy has an agenda.
Here is my next book? "The Reading Railroad. Speak Don't Write." The summary: With the advent of text to speech and audio recording reading and writing is an unneeded barrier to many otherwise smart people getting PH.Ds. As long as they can get a student loan they can get a doctorate.
"Here. Let me help you with that wordy loan application."
The brain is a mathematical engine. When you catch a fly ball you are solving a differential equation. Intuitively. When you gauge the speed of an oncoming car to cross the street that is Algebra. Hell, even dogs can do it. Sometimes. Mathematics when taught elegantly is interesting. It is a critical structure for the first of the two main components of Education: 1) The Discipline of the Mind (The ability to think) The other being 2) The Furniture of The Mind (Knowledge). Learning a second language, doing mathematics, reading music, writing computer code are all mental disciplines that require a disciplined mind. Knowledge without mental discipline is furniture without a room.
Re:yes (Score:3, Insightful)
"No one really "needs" to learn how to read anything more advanced than a children's book, especially if they're a carpenter or plumber."
I stopped reading your long comment there. You should try furthering your own carpentry or plumbing skills by just a recreational bit, then rethink that thought.
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps should someone clue in this "political science" professor.
In the rest of the industrialized world Algebra is considered an elementary schools subject. The idea that it is too cumbersome to bother average students with simply boggles the mind.
Formalized education should challenge the students in some way. Otherwise, there is no point in bothering at all.
It needs to be diverse enough to push everyone outside of their comfort zone if only by a small amount.
Re:One of my Physics professors once said (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Screw that, it doesn't matter what algebra is good for.
My 5th grade math teacher said this, math helps change the way you think. It doesn't seem like much, but you'll need that way of thinking in the future. And she was right.
Advanced math, physics, chemistry, programming, anything that required even a bit of abstract thinking was easier because of those "useless" algebra classes.
Are they perhaps trying to kill institutionalized education? If so, they're definitely on the right path.
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
It's been a long time since I took a logic/critical thinking class. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this one of the first things that they teach? Perhaps I misunderstand what you're saying.
I omitted the "not". One need not remember the full probability course... And what I was saying was that most people can't understand what is a correlation. And without understand the nature of the thing, it's nearly impossible to distinguish it from that which is similar to it. This is why most people fall for the correlational arguments. They don't know what a correlation is.
What's wrong with questioning every argument?
This! This is exactly the problem with critical thinking students. They don't know when the argument has been proven. They've been taught to always question, but they have not been taught to understand when a conclusion has been legitimately reached. That would require subject-matter expertise. And that's the part they don't get. And it is why they keep arguing in circles.
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
" Most people are going to have credit cards, 401ks, mortgages, car loans, etc. Knowing how these things work is the first step to financial success."
Not to burst your bubble but this guy teaches future politicians and as you know they have no idea that they have to pay back any loans nor such things as 'interest' and other things.
If you have to promise the moon to people to keep your job, knowing that you can't possibly pay for it is just a hindrance.
Re:yes (Score:2, Insightful)
Don't get me started. I've met programmer after programmer, some actually proud of having forgotten most of the algebra they were taught. "I've never had to use it" is the oft-heard line
Then comes code-review time. Rounding errors. (Hint: (int)(x + 0.5) doesn't work for negative x). Subtle miscalculations (Hint: 0.33 isn't 1/3). And overly complicated expressions because they lacked even the idea to try seeing whether it simplifies, let alone the knowledge to do so.
They are shocked how, after a couple minor edits, their subroutine now runs 3x faster. Knowing where to look, how to look, and being able to navigate the space of possibilities without getting bogged down in dead ends, ultimately, has its roots in MATH. And, IMHO, a programmer who does not know higher math is like a car engine that's missing half its pistons.
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Are they perhaps trying to kill institutionalized education? If so, they're definitely on the right path.
I don't think they want to kill the institutionalized part...
Re:yes (Score:2, Insightful)
No one really "needs" to learn how to read anything more advanced than a children's book, especially if they're a carpenter or plumber.
If that's the case, and you're so clever, then why do you still need to hire a plumber and why does your plumber have a better car than you?
Re:yes (Score:2, Insightful)
This, this, a thousand times this! They don't teach you mathematics because you'll need to calculate the area of triangles at work, they teach it because it forces you to use logical thinking to solve problems. Critical thinking and logic are essential to solving problems in the real world, no matter where you are.
Have you ever been walking down a street and instead of coming to the next intersection and turning towards your destination, you cut diagonally across a field to get there faster? You just made use of the Pythagorean theorem to shorten your trek! GO MATH!
Re:yes (Score:4, Insightful)
Calculus measures the rate of change. IMO, if you don't know how to use calculus, you are unable and unqualified to argue the merits of arguments on Economics, global warming, unemployment, air pollution, groundwater pollution, and thousands of other concerns. Those people who are unable to argue sensibly and knowlageably still have opinions, but those opinions are without merit. Those same people are at the mercy of opinion-makers of questionable integrity.
Perhaps the proper place for Calculus is in high school, and your school is a possible exemplar. However, it most likely that Calculus is taught only to a select few, and the rest of the high school population is graduated ignorant. IMO, Propositional Logic and Rhetoric should also be taught.
Algebra is a prerequisite for Calculus, but not everyone understands Mathematics in the way that Algebra expresses it. Almost all mathematical principles can be described in either Arithimetic, Geometric, or Algebraic terms. Assume that some people count, some people visualize, and others like "recipes". At the very least, graduates should be able to describe mathematical concepts in their preferred method, and to be able to recognize those concepts when described in other thinking styles.
The original article is prima facie evidence that even PhD's are not immune to lousy thinking practices. I would be more impressed with the argument if I thought that Hacker actually understood Mathematics. The reason is that I usually divide people who are into "Political Science" into three major categories:
At one extreme is the "Political Philosopher" who theorizes about the "best" forms of political action.
At the other extreme is the "Political Technician" who concentrates the means of obtaining thier "preferred" political situation.
Sandwiched in the middle is a narrow band of real "Political Scientists" who try to understand the principles behind politics and derive principles that predict the outcomes of various actions. Although these people are hamperred by lack of a "laboratory" in which to conduct experiments and control variables, they have tools such as Logic and Mathematics, particularly Calculus and Statistics, that they can use to evaluate different political actions.
Hacker comes across as a "Technician" and gets a discount on credibility from me.
Calculus and Shakespeare (Score:5, Insightful)
Mathematics is the language used to describe how the world around you works.
I'd go further. It used to be that in the UK everyone going to university had to have a maths O'level which required _simple_ calculus. After all if I had to study Shakespeare before I could do a physics degree shouldn't those studying english study the basic maths developed by Newton to describe the same world that Shakespeare described with his plays?
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:yes (Score:4, Insightful)
Specialization is for insects
Specialization is what makes modern civilization possible. Without division of labor, we'd all be subsistence farmers. Either Heinlein didn't know what he was talking about, or (more likely) the words he put in the mouth of Lazarus Long weren't meant to be taken as gospel truth.
Dumbing down (Score:5, Insightful)
The way I see it the ultimate aim of the author of TFA is to dumb down the future generations
The dumber future generations get the easier they can be manipulated to do the dirty things that the elites themselves do not want to do
Re:Calculus and Shakespeare (Score:3, Insightful)
You shouldn't have to study Shakespeare to get a physics degree.
That is exactly the problem with our university system in the U.S. and evidently other countries as well. I went through two B.S. degree programs in four years. The combined program that did that only required 18 hours of miscellaneous garbage - the equivalent of six courses. One of the courses had to be economics and one had to be business law. That left four non-core courses in the entire combined program. There were still many courses in math and science, but we were spared the bulk of the absolute garbage that most schools require.
If you want to study a foreign language or two, that is what you should be able to concentrate in along with history of that part of the world. If you want to study math, you should be able to study math. If you want to go into science or medicine you should be able to concentrate in those fields without having to everything else just to keep the professors employed. If you want to study engineering, that is where you should be able to concentrate. If you don't know what you want to study you should wait to go to college until you know and not waste everyone's time dabbling here and there in some broad based curriculum
I know that it would be hard to do 100% engineering or 100% science courses, but the breadth required in many schools is absurd. You've got the rest of your life to read classics, study history, and attend the gym to work out. There's no reason to pay college tuition rates to do that. . You won't regret the college loans if you haven't had to subsidize a bunch of teachers who instruct in courses which have no bearing on your life or career.
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Political Science Professor (Score:2, Insightful)
They don't teach you mathematics because you'll need to calculate the area of triangles at work, they teach it because it forces you to use logical thinking to solve problems. Critical thinking and logic are essential to solving problems in the real world, no matter where you are.
I am not a bit surprised to see a Political Science professor suggesting the dropping of Algebra from high school curriculum
After all, the objective of political science is "Controlling", and students who never get to learn Algebra (and other logic-based subjects) may grow dumber, and dumb people are easier to control
Do you know that they _ARE_ doing similar things in England?
In England, in some schools, students do not received grades, and they do not know how they fair inside their own class - because, according to those so-called "experts", they do not want to "hurt the feeling of those children who aren't doing well"
In other words, they _are_ doing everything they can to dumb down the future generations to the lowest common denominator
Re:Political Science Professor (Score:5, Insightful)
No, political science isn't about controlling people any more than zoology is about controlling animal populations.
It's a study. It's no more unified than politics is, because that's what political science is: the study of politics, government, and state.
Also, I'm sure some fringe school somewhere does what you say, but the UK has a standardized uniform grading system that is widely used:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_grading_in_the_United_Kingdom [wikipedia.org]
I think this guy's idea is dumb too. But your assertions don't seem grounded in reality.
Re:What's the aim of studying politic and governme (Score:5, Insightful)
what's the use of studying the animal kingdom if there isn't any step further - like improving / changing / experimenting on the animals
There are hundreds of thousands of people who spent many years studying biology and zoology to become veterinarians and, you know, help animals who will disagree with you.
The vast majority of people study history to learn from it, not to make it or rewrite it. The vast majority of people who study psychology don't do so because their plan is to control people and then force them into Cybermen suits. Not everything in life is a conspiracy to rule the world.
Seriously... Slashdot just gets crazier and crazier.
Re:yes (Score:4, Insightful)
IIRC, math knowledge is one of the most important factors in whether people repay loans. People who can't count (or can't divide by 12, or figure out what interest is, etc) can't manage their personal finance. It's sometimes maddening to hear their explanations. Even if you are good at math, it can be hard to figure out a lot contracts (which are designed to mess with your head), people without math skills who sign contracts are like people who represent themselves in court.
Re:Yes, but when does it do so efficiently? (Score:5, Insightful)
>the main problem in early education is that math, with its many abstractions of notation and convention, is brought in far too early
This is a myth from our child development overlords.
My wife, who grew up in Hong Kong, was learning algebra in elementary school. Kids are capable of learning algebra much younger than it's taught here in America. When she immigrated, she literally didn't learn any new math for four years. It's not a mistake we're ranked so poorly in the world math standings.
Re:Yes, but when does it do so efficiently? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Political Science Professor (Score:2, Insightful)
My sisters went to an alternative high school that did not have grades, and combined what you need to learn into something fun, such as a horror fiction class for english where they spent most of their class time watching horror movies. From comparing their experiences to mine, I feel like they were actually pushed a lot harder than I was in a more traditional setting. Instead of just getting the C for instance for not turning in a homework assignment, you would just fail and have to take the class over. Most of the kids coming out of this school are more independent thinkers and less likely to be controlled, having taken a more active role in their own education.
Re:Calculus and Shakespeare (Score:5, Insightful)
If you want to study engineering, that is where you should be able to concentrate.
I did that, 25 years ago. Recently I returned to my alma mater (UWO in Canada, if anyone cares) and 6 of us were invited by the fairly new Dean to discuss what they should be doing to improve the curriculum. While lab methods had changed a lot in 25 years, most of the core curriculum hadn't -- which is probably the right thing. Anyway, when he asked what we didn't get at university, but should have, we came up with two: project management and English.
Project management is an obvious skill for an engineer, and should have always been there. When he was surprised that we mentioned English (specifically a writing course) we all said that a lot of our work since graduation has included writing reports, and learning how to write well early on would have been a great advantage. I have forgotten an awful lot of math in 25 years, and learned a lot of English writing.
By all means learn the math and physics. I think you cannot possibly do anything worthwhile in economics or finance without calculus, and even political scientists must need to know about trends and statistics, both of which are built at least partially on calculus. But to do only, e.g., calculus, leaves one poorly equipped for life.
Re:Political Science Professor (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yes, but when does it do so efficiently? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Yes, but when does it do so efficiently? (Score:4, Insightful)
1869 Harvard entrance exam [nytimes.com]
Take a look at that. Now keep in mind that the best you had at the time would have been a slide rule and paper. You say that we are more educated today than the previous generations, I would argue that the majority of kids these days most likely could not answer any of those questions. Hell, I took Algebra, Calc, Trig, Geometry, 6 years of Latin and speak or are familiar with 11 languages and I can barely answer many of those questions.
You say better educated, and I would disagree. I think more people are educated than previous generations and I think that current generational knowledge extends to more subjects, but definitely not better.
Granted, the rate of improvement has slowed down considerably, during the last few decades. However your great-grandmother's generation was definitely not better educated on average than the current one.
Between the article itself and personal experience with educating kids these days, I can guarantee you her generation would run circles around these kids in math, grammar, vocabulary and probably foreign languages. Hell my 71 year old (at the time) Great -Grandmother was able to help me with my Latin lessons 20 years ago and again, she was raised in the back woods of TN where they really only gave a damn about agricultural knowledge.