As a student, from 7th grade on once we started getting into Algebra, I felt bad at math since almost all my friends were better. So I was surprised when I scored a 590 on the math part of the SAT, which is a bit higher than average. Having arithmetic down solid is sadly, apparently quite an advantage over many Americans.
Also, first Englishmen to come in here and say "maths" will be verbally beaten with a tire iron. I'm looking you Tyr. <_<
http://redtape.msnbc.com/2009/12/when-i-published-gotcha-capitalism-two-years-ago-i-was-in-for-a-big-surprise-as-i-talked-about-systemic-hidden-fee-fraud-al.html#posts
QuoteWhy American consumers can't add
Posted: Tuesday, December 29 2009 at 06:00 am CT by Bob Sullivan
When I published Gotcha Capitalism two years ago, I was in for a big surprise. As I talked about systemic hidden fee fraud all around the country, many, many friends (and even co-workers) found me and asked in hushed tones, "What's a mutual fund?" "What's comprehensive and collision?" "What's a mortgage point?"
It was obvious from these conversations that millions of Americans are severely lacking in financial basics, and this shortcoming played a major role in the housing bubble and the resulting economic collapse. I wanted to know why.
I'm the hidden fee guy, the "Gotcha" guy. People like me usually rant about dreadful banks are and how unfair big companies are, about how corporate greed caused our economic collapse and about how rampant unfairness built the house of cards that just collapsed all around us and sent the world into a global recession.
But it's impossible to ignore the fact that individual consumers made a lot of really bad choices in the past decade. They bought homes with $2,000 mortgages when they only earned $3,000 a month. They borrowed money at 30 percent interest to buy granite countertops. Aren't they to blame for their own demise? To be an honest journalist, I had to ask: Why are American consumers so gullible, so seemingly out of control? Is there something wrong with us?
Yes, several things. But most important is this: Americans are terrible at math.
I know you know that. But my research shows we are far worse at math than you think.
Exhibit A: Think about the last time you had lunch with four or more friends. What happened when the bill came? Everyone pulled out calculators, there was a lot of murmuring and head scratching and still some of your friends just ended up throwing down a $20 bill and hoping for the best. Now, imagine that crowd in a car dealership or with a mortgage broker. They wouldn't stand a chance.
Logo_miniTurns out, there's an entire field of study -- albeit a small one -- devoted to this subject. It's called "innumeracy" -- or mathematical illiteracy. It's a hidden epidemic in our society. And the consequences are dire.
Just as there is a hidden epidemic of people who are functionally illiterate in our country, there is big problem (bigger, by my reckoning) with people who can't do basic math. There's no way to function in our society without understanding money, percentages, interest calculation and so on. Yet in a recent government study, less than one in seven American adults ranked "proficient" at math.
Here are a few examples of innumeracy in action:
According to the Department of Education's National Assessment of Adult Literacy, U.S. adults are terrible at solving real-world math problems, like calculating tips or comparing prices in grocery stores. Some dismal results:
*Only 42 percent were able to pick out two items on a menu, add them, and calculate a tip.
*Only 1 in 5 could reliably calculate mortgage interest.
*1 in 5 could not calculate weekly salary when told an hourly pay rate.
*Only 13 percent were deemed "proficient." Worse yet, only 1 in 10 women, 1 in 25 Hispanics and 1 in 50 African Americans made the grade.
*Americans are terrified of numbers when it counts most: 20 million Americans pay someone to file their 1040EZ, a one-page tax form with around 10 blanks to fill out.
Also, these numbers show up in U.S. student math scores, which are abysmal:
*The U.S. ranks 25th among 30 industrialized nations in math scores, down near Serbia and Uruguay. U.S. students thought they had the highest grades of any nation in the study, however.
*Half of 17 year olds couldn't do enough math to work in an auto plant, according to President's National Mathematics Advisory Panel.
*Study after study shows U.S. achievement falls off the cliff during middle school, when subjects like fractions and percentages are introduced -- exactly the skills you need as a consumer or, for that matter, to move on to algebra, calculus and advanced sciences.
But here's another essential point. How can Johnny learn to add if Johnny's teachers can't?
*In 18 U.S. states, not even one elementary math class is required for certification.
*Some teaching colleges allow admittance as long as students have math skills equal to their future students -- that is, as long as they could pass a 5th grade math test.
*It's possible in some states to pass the teacher certification exam (Praxis) without answering a single math question correctly.
*In Massachusetts, there's a special program to reacquaint teachers with math. The man who runs the program says half of teachers can't answer basic questions involving fractions and has concluded that many elementary teachers are "phobic" about math.
*Teachers seem to be math-averse from the start. College bound seniors headed for elementary education have math SAT scores significantly lower than the national average (483 vs. 515).
HerbboxThere are many, many other reasons why U.S. consumers tripped and fell down a mine shaft during the past two years. In my new book, "Stop Getting Ripped Off," I lay out a series of other explanations: Greed, laziness, lack of government regulation and magical thinking. And I offer up my own handy guide to solving today's consumer puzzles, from buying a home to saving for retirement. But innumeracy is the biggest culprit.
Two years ago, I would have had to lay out a doomsday scenario to draw attention to this ticking time bomb. Well, the bomb's gone off. People who were bad at math could hardly have been expected to see through the consequences of an adjustable-rate mortgage, or to make a sound bet on their future earnings potential. These consumers didn't stand a chance against mortgage brokers, real estate agent and an overheated market. They can't fight with financial planners over fees that are swallowing one-third of their retirement savings. Heck, they can't even stop taking out 250 percent APR payday loans, 1,000 percent overdraft protection loans or paying tax preparation firms $100 for three minutes work to fill out simple tax forms. Now, millions of individuals are losing their homes and are on pace to become destitute in old age.
If I only shine a light on only one topic with this book, I hope it will be the hidden epidemic of innumeracy in America. Because if we can't add, if we continue suffer from an extreme lack of mathematical self-confidence, any recovery we begin is surely doomed.
Become a Red Tape Chronicles Facebook fan or follow me at http://twitter.com/RedTapeChron
I blame calculators.
I used to be awesome at maths when I was a kid. I was a year ahead and still top of the class.
But then maths stopped being maths and started being about formulae, algebra, trigonometry, etc....
And I started to suck.
Anyway. Odd that teachers can get through without maths. Teachers needing to have a maths GCSE is the thing that stops my mam becoming a full teacher.
Quote
Exhibit A: Think about the last time you had lunch with four or more friends. What happened when the bill came? Everyone pulled out calculators
:lol:
I'm pretty sure this has never happened
Quote from: Tyr on December 30, 2009, 08:59:14 AM
But then maths stopped being maths and started being about formulae, algebra, trigonometry, etc....
And I started to suck.
That's when it started becoming math and not arithmetic
I'm of two minds on this. On the one hand, being one of the few numerate ones is certainly lucrative. On the other hand, how long can our standard of living keep up when the general population is thoroughly dumbed down?
I didn't think I was good at maths. But I've had to do a few tests for job interview and apparently I've done well in all of the tests so I must be better than I first imagined :w00t:
Quote from: Tyr on December 30, 2009, 08:59:14 AM
I used to be awesome at maths
I hope some chavs break your fucking legs!
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.benstoneonline.com%2Fblog%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2009%2F02%2Fffffuuu-large.png&hash=8563b04f643c44910dbbe5d1418184f1a9ae0257)
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 30, 2009, 09:12:51 AM
I hope some chavs break your fucking legs!
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmemegenerator.net%2FInstances%2FRage-fFUUUUUUU.jpg&hash=eb145f68ca1f4d6f6647104ddba0609418f87c53)
:bleeding:
But anyway.
Math is one of the stupider American spellings. Others are just different spellings, killing a U here and there and that sort of thing.
With math though...you reduce mathematics from its all-encompassing plural nature to some pathetic singular thing. There is more than one question. More than one formula. More than one number. It is maths. Not math.
:huh:
Why are you annoyed by people calling it 'Maths'.
It seems more appropriate than 'Math'.
Maths is fucking annoying and makes me want to start breaking bones
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on December 30, 2009, 09:21:08 AM
Maths is fucking annoying and makes me want to start breaking bones
:hug:
Quote from: Cerr on December 30, 2009, 09:16:48 AM
Why are you annoyed by people calling it 'Maths'.
It seems more appropriate than 'Math'.
"Maths" is the horrible brit-speak version. "Math" is the true and right american-speak version.
Quote from: ulmont on December 30, 2009, 09:25:32 AM
Quote from: Cerr on December 30, 2009, 09:16:48 AM
Why are you annoyed by people calling it 'Maths'.
It seems more appropriate than 'Math'.
"Maths" is the horrible brit-speak version. "Math" is the true and right american-speak version.
Well as I'm a neutral observer (neither British or American), I declare that 'Maths' is the logical shortening of 'Mathematic
s'. :P
Quote from: Cerr on December 30, 2009, 09:36:51 AM
Quote from: ulmont on December 30, 2009, 09:25:32 AM
Quote from: Cerr on December 30, 2009, 09:16:48 AM
Why are you annoyed by people calling it 'Maths'.
It seems more appropriate than 'Math'.
"Maths" is the horrible brit-speak version. "Math" is the true and right american-speak version.
Well as I'm a neutral observer (neither British or American), I declare that 'Maths' is the logical shortening of 'Mathematics'. :P
Aren't you from Ireland? That makes you British.
Sigh another Josq language argument.
Anyhoo, is it really important for people to know how to do this stuff in their head? As long as we have calculators and computers, theres not much benefit to being able to do it on your own. No one laments the death of calligraphy, for example, and yet we still print stuff out in fancy fonts.
We should adjust our education to meet the technological levels of our society. Just because Japanese nerds can calculate a 15% tip in their head doesn't put them at any more of an advantage than me doing it in the same amount of time with a calculator.
I think our math skills overall are slipping, but that is due to the burden on the education system and the very little amount of actual teaching that goes on there.
The root problem is that Americans generally don't care about school or learning, and too many parents don't care about their kids education. Yeah, the average American's math abilities is atrocious, but so is their ability at a number of other subjects.
Quote from: Cerr on December 30, 2009, 09:36:51 AM
Well as I'm a neutral observer (neither British or American), I declare that 'Maths' is the logical shortening of 'Mathematics'. :P
This makes no sense. 'Math' is the logical shortening of '
Mathematics'. :contract:
Quote from: Neil on December 30, 2009, 09:37:28 AM
Quote from: Cerr on December 30, 2009, 09:36:51 AM
Quote from: ulmont on December 30, 2009, 09:25:32 AM
Quote from: Cerr on December 30, 2009, 09:16:48 AM
Why are you annoyed by people calling it 'Maths'.
It seems more appropriate than 'Math'.
"Maths" is the horrible brit-speak version. "Math" is the true and right american-speak version.
Well as I'm a neutral observer (neither British or American), I declare that 'Maths' is the logical shortening of 'Mathematics'. :P
Aren't you from Ireland? That makes you British.
I think you have a bad grasp on geography.
This might come as a shock to you but Ireland and Britain are two separate islands.
Quote from: Jaron on December 30, 2009, 09:42:08 AM
Sigh another Josq language argument.
Josq didn't start it. He avoided it until Tim went mental.
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on December 30, 2009, 09:21:08 AM
Maths is fucking annoying and makes me want to start breaking bones
Agreed. British dialect can be really inexplicable sometimes.
I was brilliant in school. My theory why most people aren't is that they're stupid.
Quote from: Sheilbh on December 30, 2009, 09:50:12 AM
Quote from: Jaron on December 30, 2009, 09:42:08 AM
Sigh another Josq language argument.
Josq didn't start it. He avoided it until Tim went mental.
Josq started it by using "maths". Tim was just being Tim. Would you not blame someone for participating in a flame war if they insisted on responding to a known troll?
Quote from: ulmont on December 30, 2009, 09:47:22 AM
This makes no sense. 'Math' is the logical shortening of 'Mathematics'. :contract:
But mathematics is a plural (in English, French, Latin and, I believe, Greek). I don't think the linguistic difference between the US and the UK matters at all. But your argument is like saying 'hippo' should be used for a herd because
hippopotamuses as opposed to, for example, hippos.
Quote from: Jaron on December 30, 2009, 09:42:08 AM
Sigh another Josq language argument.
Yet again its other people insisting I'm wrong :contract:
And yeah, what Sheilbh says. Shortened words keep their s if they're a plural. Television is TV, televisions is TVs.
Quote from: Jaron on December 30, 2009, 09:51:52 AM
Josq started it by using "maths". Tim was just being Tim. Would you not blame someone for participating in a flame war if they insisted on responding to a known troll?
I would use maths too. I don't think it's okay for me to go mental at an American for writing if I say in the first post of a thread on colour theory that I really hate it when they cut the 'u'. I think it's weird but there you are.
Quote from: Sheilbh on December 30, 2009, 09:53:55 AM
Quote from: ulmont on December 30, 2009, 09:47:22 AM
This makes no sense. 'Math' is the logical shortening of 'Mathematics'. :contract:
But mathematics is a plural (in English, French, Latin and, I believe, Greek). I don't think the linguistic difference between the US and the UK matters at all. But your argument is like saying 'hippo' should be used for a herd because hippopotamuses as opposed to, for example, hippos.
Mathematics is "matematica" in Russian, and is singular. When Americans and Russians agree, it's probably a good sign that they're right and those that disagree with them are wrong.
We can always use Swedish "matte". :)
Quote from: Sheilbh on December 30, 2009, 09:50:12 AM
Quote from: Jaron on December 30, 2009, 09:42:08 AM
Sigh another Josq language argument.
Josq didn't start it. He avoided it until Tim went mental.
Josq is always trolling with his weird incomprehensible britspeak.
Quote from: Sheilbh on December 30, 2009, 09:53:55 AM
But mathematics is a plural (in English, French, Latin and, I believe, Greek).
Listed as taking a singular verb in multiple definitions, and as "usually singular in construction" from Merriam-Webster.
Quote from: ulmont on December 30, 2009, 10:03:03 AM
Listed as taking a singular verb in multiple definitions, and as "usually singular in construction" from Merriam-Webster.
Yeah it's a plural that's normally treated as a singular in most sentences - for example 'math/s/ematics is difficult'.
Can you people stop hijacking this thread? The subject is American innumeracy, not British illiteracy.
Quote from: DGuller on December 30, 2009, 10:08:13 AM
Can you people stop hijacking this thread? The subject is American innumeracy, not British illiteracy.
Just 2 sides of the same coin--most people are morons. The difference is, Americans reveal their stupidity when they try to balance their checkbooks, Brits reveal their stupidity every time they speak or write using one of their foul dialects.
Mathematics is *a* system of manipulating numbers, so whether you abbreviate it with an s or not, it remains a singular.
Referring to the original article: I agree with the author that you need to know a certain amount of math to function well in our society. Especially when it comes to credit payments or progressively rising tariffs for insurances and the like most people don't comprehend what's going on and pay too much.
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on December 30, 2009, 09:21:08 AM
Maths is fucking annoying and makes me want to start breaking bones
if you look down you'll find two -hopefully- with which to begin, giving you a headstart. :p
Quote from: Tyr on December 30, 2009, 09:16:02 AM
With math though...you reduce mathematics from its all-encompassing plural nature to some pathetic singular thing. There is more than one question. More than one formula. More than one number. It is maths. Not math.
Seeing it as more than one thing is part of the problem.
A more serious problem in the US, I think, is the culturally accepted preconceived notion that math is hard and it's ok to not get it.
After all, there are calculators to do that stuff right? But who's going to build the calculators?
I think that was my point.
Quote from: Maximus on December 30, 2009, 11:44:46 AM
Quote from: Tyr on December 30, 2009, 09:16:02 AM
With math though...you reduce mathematics from its all-encompassing plural nature to some pathetic singular thing. There is more than one question. More than one formula. More than one number. It is maths. Not math.
Seeing it as more than one thing is part of the problem.
A more serious problem in the US, I think, is the culturally accepted preconceived notion that math is hard and it's ok to not get it.
My daughter in high school does that. She just "doesn't get" algebra, and can't understand why I won't accept that as an answer. She is a smart kid, gets mostly A's with some B's mixed in but seems to think that not getting it is the end. Any attempts by me to explain or help her find the answers to her questions is a waste of time.
Quote from: sbr on December 30, 2009, 12:30:52 PM
Quote from: Maximus on December 30, 2009, 11:44:46 AM
Quote from: Tyr on December 30, 2009, 09:16:02 AM
With math though...you reduce mathematics from its all-encompassing plural nature to some pathetic singular thing. There is more than one question. More than one formula. More than one number. It is maths. Not math.
Seeing it as more than one thing is part of the problem.
A more serious problem in the US, I think, is the culturally accepted preconceived notion that math is hard and it's ok to not get it.
My daughter in high school does that. She just "doesn't get" algebra, and can't understand why I won't accept that as an answer. She is a smart kid, gets mostly A's with some B's mixed in but seems to think that not getting it is the end. Any attempts by me to explain or help her find the answers to her questions is a waste of time.
Sounds like a case of "nothing that's hard to do is worth doing". That can be a big problem when kids get out into the real world and find things aren't easy.
Quote from: Cerr on December 30, 2009, 09:50:04 AM
I think you have a bad grasp on geography.
This might come as a shock to you but Ireland and Britain are two separate islands.
Both are part of the British Isles, no matter how unpleasant that is for you terrorist assholes.
Contrary to popular belief, there are absolutely no real-world applications for mathematics.
Maths.
Colour.
Fucking Rebels
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages2.wikia.nocookie.net%2Funcyclopedia%2Fimages%2Fc%2Fc9%2FAsian_calculator_Family_Guy.gif&hash=d0203c3c4a0da436414a61f81f1581c082990e35)
You guys crack me up with your "there's only one way to speak English" nonsense. So it's maths in Britain, and math in the US (and Canada for that matter) ... is it not understandable that it's the same thing? :bleeding:
I personally love that there are so many different ways to say the same thing in English, it's the joy of having an imprecise language that absorbs all language systems it comes in contact with. Resistance is futile.
Quote from: Maximus on December 30, 2009, 11:44:46 AM
A more serious problem in the US, I think, is the culturally accepted preconceived notion that math is hard and it's ok to not get it.
I agree. It's an issue in the UK too. I think that it's a subject, like languages, that many people have a sort-of natural ceiling on their ability. But all too often I don't think kids are pushed to try hard because it's 'difficult' and the stuff they teach (algebra etc) isn't relevant in the 'real world'. It's sad really.
Quote from: Sheilbh on December 30, 2009, 01:34:29 PM
Quote from: Maximus on December 30, 2009, 11:44:46 AM
A more serious problem in the US, I think, is the culturally accepted preconceived notion that math is hard and it's ok to not get it.
I agree. It's an issue in the UK too. I think that it's a subject, like languages, that many people have a sort-of natural ceiling on their ability. But all too often I don't think kids are pushed to try hard because it's 'difficult' and the stuff they teach (algebra etc) isn't relevant in the 'real world'. It's sad really.
Maybe things have changed since I was in school during the paleolithic (70's 80's) but that is the problem, these "difficult" stuff is presented to students in highly artificial ways. Not in a real world context. Taking algebra and higher "maths" should be done in view of the context these things are used. ie: complex formulas regarding financials in Economics class, measurement formulae in related classes like geography or geology or something. not as an abstract class all on it's own.
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on December 30, 2009, 01:33:09 PM
You guys crack me up with your "there's only one way to speak English" nonsense. So it's maths in Britain, and math in the US (and Canada for that matter) ... is it not understandable that it's the same thing? :bleeding:
I personally love that there are so many different ways to say the same thing in English, it's the joy of having an imprecise language that absorbs all language systems it comes in contact with. Resistance is futile.
What he said. As Richard Feynman noted, the purpose of language is
communication. Those who try to make it a political statement are doomed to frustration.
I reserve the right to bash Josq or other English types. Not that I cared in this thread.
ME PRAM HAS GONE ALL WOBBLY!
Quote from: grumbler on December 30, 2009, 01:45:00 PM
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on December 30, 2009, 01:33:09 PM
You guys crack me up with your "there's only one way to speak English" nonsense. So it's maths in Britain, and math in the US (and Canada for that matter) ... is it not understandable that it's the same thing? :bleeding:
I personally love that there are so many different ways to say the same thing in English, it's the joy of having an imprecise language that absorbs all language systems it comes in contact with. Resistance is futile.
What he said. As Richard Feynman noted, the purpose of language is communication. Those who try to make it a political statement are doomed to frustration.
Typical physicist crap. People talk all the time and communicate nothing. Clearly the purpose of a language is not to communicate. Language is just random barking that from which we occasionally interpret as something meaningful. If the purpose of language was to communicate people wouldn't make up so many silly languages and dialects, they'd just speak English with a flat Midwestern accent.
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on December 30, 2009, 01:38:40 PM
Maybe things have changed since I was in school during the paleolithic (70's 80's) but that is the problem, these "difficult" stuff is presented to students in highly artificial ways. Not in a real world context. Taking algebra and higher "maths" should be done in view of the context these things are used. ie: complex formulas regarding financials in Economics class, measurement formulae in related classes like geography or geology or something. not as an abstract class all on it's own.
Sorry, but this is just severely misguided. Math is abstract by nature, the biggest application of math is abstract thinking. Math is not just a collection of formulas, it's a way of thinking.
Besides, you need a solid grounding in math to use applied math properly and confidently. The saying that "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing" is highly applicable to math.
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 30, 2009, 01:46:52 PM
I reserve the right to bash Josq or other English types. Not that I cared in this thread.
ME PRAM HAS GONE ALL WOBBLY!
No shit. The English doeseurve to be mocked four their English.
Quote from: Razgovory on December 30, 2009, 01:52:20 PM
If the purpose of language was to communicate people wouldn't make up so many silly languages and dialects, they'd just speak English with a flat Midwestern accent.
QFMFT
USA! :showoff:
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 30, 2009, 08:54:23 AM
*Only 1 in 5 could reliably calculate mortgage interest.
I'm surprised even 1 in 5 could do that. That's not an easy calculation.
I am ever so thankful that both my boys enjoy doing math. I am also ever so thankful that they are good at it so I dont have to help them with their homework.
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 30, 2009, 02:58:18 PM
I am ever so thankful that both my boys enjoy doing math. I am also ever so thankful that they are good at it so I dont have to help them with their homework.
If you want to have grandchildren you should try get them different interests.
Quote from: Razgovory on December 30, 2009, 03:50:31 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 30, 2009, 02:58:18 PM
I am ever so thankful that both my boys enjoy doing math. I am also ever so thankful that they are good at it so I dont have to help them with their homework.
If you want to have grandchildren you should try get them different interests.
Why? Nothing beats smart, handsome and athletic (not to mention tall and can cook).
Quote from: Razgovory on December 30, 2009, 03:50:31 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 30, 2009, 02:58:18 PM
I am ever so thankful that both my boys enjoy doing math. I am also ever so thankful that they are good at it so I dont have to help them with their homework.
If you want to have grandchildren you should try get them different interests.
Fuck you.
Basic maths is so straightforward, the application of a few simple rules.............it is baffling why people seem to find it so difficult.
Quote from: DGuller on December 30, 2009, 04:04:30 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 30, 2009, 03:50:31 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 30, 2009, 02:58:18 PM
I am ever so thankful that both my boys enjoy doing math. I am also ever so thankful that they are good at it so I dont have to help them with their homework.
If you want to have grandchildren you should try get them different interests.
Fuck you.
Raz's photon torpedo blew down insurance boy's shields and hit his soft spot.
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 30, 2009, 04:16:19 PM
Quote from: DGuller on December 30, 2009, 04:04:30 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 30, 2009, 03:50:31 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 30, 2009, 02:58:18 PM
I am ever so thankful that both my boys enjoy doing math. I am also ever so thankful that they are good at it so I dont have to help them with their homework.
If you want to have grandchildren you should try get them different interests.
Fuck you.
Raz's photon torpedo blew down insurance boy's shields and hit his soft spot.
:lmfao: "Shields down, hull breach imminent".
Quote from: Razgovory on December 30, 2009, 03:50:31 PMIf you want to have grandchildren you should try get them different interests.
Pretty rich, given you're still working on the "getting children" part :lol:
As an aside, I happen to know at least one girl whose primary requirement for "the father of her children" is that he's smart, and she defines smart as "good at math". Admittedly, she's a bit quirky.
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on December 30, 2009, 04:05:25 PM
Basic maths is so straightforward, the application of a few simple rules.............it is baffling why people seem to find it so difficult.
I for one am insane so my mind doesn't work logically.
Quote from: Jacob on December 30, 2009, 06:53:37 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 30, 2009, 03:50:31 PMIf you want to have grandchildren you should try get them different interests.
Pretty rich, given you're still working on the "getting children" part :lol:
As an aside, I happen to know at least one girl whose primary requirement for "the father of her children" is that he's smart, and she defines smart as "good at math". Admittedly, she's a bit quirky.
I think it would be better if I didn't have children. At least that's what people tell me.
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 30, 2009, 04:16:19 PM
Quote from: DGuller on December 30, 2009, 04:04:30 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 30, 2009, 03:50:31 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 30, 2009, 02:58:18 PM
I am ever so thankful that both my boys enjoy doing math. I am also ever so thankful that they are good at it so I dont have to help them with their homework.
If you want to have grandchildren you should try get them different interests.
Fuck you.
Raz's photon torpedo blew down insurance boy's shields and hit his soft spot.
I wasn't even aiming for the Russian.
Quote from: Razgovory on December 30, 2009, 06:55:37 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 30, 2009, 04:16:19 PM
Quote from: DGuller on December 30, 2009, 04:04:30 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 30, 2009, 03:50:31 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 30, 2009, 02:58:18 PM
I am ever so thankful that both my boys enjoy doing math. I am also ever so thankful that they are good at it so I dont have to help them with their homework.
If you want to have grandchildren you should try get them different interests.
Fuck you.
Raz's photon torpedo blew down insurance boy's shields and hit his soft spot.
I wasn't even aiming for the Russian.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstartrek.co.nz%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2009%2F08%2Fstar_trek_the_wrath_of_khan_1-239x300.jpg&hash=eeab65e9448da30d85ecd74fa63d2c82a99358fa)
We are one big happy fleet!
Quote from: grumbler on December 30, 2009, 01:45:00 PM
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on December 30, 2009, 01:33:09 PM
You guys crack me up with your "there's only one way to speak English" nonsense. So it's maths in Britain, and math in the US (and Canada for that matter) ... is it not understandable that it's the same thing? :bleeding:
I personally love that there are so many different ways to say the same thing in English, it's the joy of having an imprecise language that absorbs all language systems it comes in contact with. Resistance is futile.
What he said. As Richard Feynman noted, the purpose of language is communication. Those who try to make it a political statement are doomed to frustration.
It's not political, it just grates on the ears, nay, grates on the soul to hear such a horrific concoction.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 30, 2009, 08:47:34 PM
It's not political, it just grates on the ears, nay, grates on the soul to hear such a horrific concoction.
Yes. Much like the pain of reading someone who types lazily, without checking for spelling or grammar mistakes.
Quote from: ulmont on December 30, 2009, 08:50:57 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 30, 2009, 08:47:34 PM
It's not political, it just grates on the ears, nay, grates on the soul to hear such a horrific concoction.
Yes. Much like the pain of reading someone who types lazily, without checking for spelling or grammar mistakes.
APPALLLING!
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 30, 2009, 08:55:09 PM
Quote from: ulmont on December 30, 2009, 08:50:57 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 30, 2009, 08:47:34 PM
It's not political, it just grates on the ears, nay, grates on the soul to hear such a horrific concoction.
Yes. Much like the pain of reading someone who types lazily, without checking for spelling or grammar mistakes.
APPALLLING!
No fair getting in the way while I'm trolling Tim. :P
:)
Any more of this debate and I may wind up in hospital!!! :hmm:
That smiley works real well with your avatar.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 30, 2009, 09:31:22 PM
That smiley works real well with your avatar.
Danke. :sleep:
Speaking of avatars, is yours the Rock Em Sock Em Robots? I know it's been years but I've never been sure.
It is indeed the Rock Em Sock Em Robots.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 30, 2009, 09:40:53 PM
It is indeed the Rock Em Sock Em Robots.
To symbolically represent the ethos of bellicose pugilism that Languish prides itself upon? :D
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on December 30, 2009, 09:49:59 PM
To symbolically represent the ethos of bellicose pugilism that Languish prides itself upon? :D
Correct again.
you give Mutton too much credit Mihali.
Yeah, he just picked his favorite toy.
I had a set of those when I was a kid. Curiously we called "Fightin' Yis"
Quote from: Razgovory on December 30, 2009, 11:20:53 PM
I had a set of those when I was a kid. Curiously we called "Fightin' Yis"
:lol:
Raz. You're funny. Keep up the good work.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 30, 2009, 08:47:34 PM
It's not political, it just grates on the ears, nay, grates on the soul to hear such a horrific concoction.
Then I am switching to "maths" immediately. :cool:
gaol.
Quote from: sbr on December 30, 2009, 12:30:52 PM
Quote from: Maximus on December 30, 2009, 11:44:46 AM
Seeing it as more than one thing is part of the problem.
A more serious problem in the US, I think, is the culturally accepted preconceived notion that math is hard and it's ok to not get it.
My daughter in high school does that. She just "doesn't get" algebra, and can't understand why I won't accept that as an answer. She is a smart kid, gets mostly A's with some B's mixed in but seems to think that not getting it is the end. Any attempts by me to explain or help her find the answers to her questions is a waste of time.
Spoken like two people who "get" math. <_<
I have struggled my whole life with math(s) because it is not an easy concept for me. I can do Algebra, Geography, and various types of Business math(s), but I seriously struggled with it. In fact, the math(s) class I took last year had me in tears numerous times because no matter how hard I tried to understand why something was what it was, I just couldn't get it.
Part of it, for me at least, is that I have to understand why something is what it is. Just saying, "Well, use this formula and it will work," doesn't cut it for me. I need to know why that formula works so that I can remember it and apply it for other things.
This isn't a logic vs. literature thing, either. My logic scores tend to be my highest on any standardized tests, while my math scores are my lowest.
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 10:56:24 AM
Quote from: sbr on December 30, 2009, 12:30:52 PM
Quote from: Maximus on December 30, 2009, 11:44:46 AM
Seeing it as more than one thing is part of the problem.
A more serious problem in the US, I think, is the culturally accepted preconceived notion that math is hard and it's ok to not get it.
My daughter in high school does that. She just "doesn't get" algebra, and can't understand why I won't accept that as an answer. She is a smart kid, gets mostly A's with some B's mixed in but seems to think that not getting it is the end. Any attempts by me to explain or help her find the answers to her questions is a waste of time.
Spoken like two people who "get" math. <_<
I have struggled my whole life with math(s) because it is not an easy concept for me. I can do Algebra, Geography, and various types of Business math(s), but I seriously struggled with it. In fact, the math(s) class I took last year had me in tears numerous times because no matter how hard I tried to understand why something was what it was, I just couldn't get it.
Part of it, for me at least, is that I have to understand why something is what it is. Just saying, "Well, use this formula and it will work," doesn't cut it for me. I need to know why that formula works so that I can remember it and apply it for other things.
This isn't a logic vs. literature thing, either. My logic scores tend to be my highest on any standardized tests, while my math scores are my lowest.
Well, yeah, the key to algebra and geometry (the gateways to higher math) is understanding the concepts and why a formula works. Plugging the numbers in and solving a formula is just basic arithmatic.
Quote from: dps on December 31, 2009, 11:06:01 AM
Well, yeah, the key to algebra and geometry (the gateways to higher math) is understanding the concepts and why a formula works. Plugging the numbers in and solving a formula is just basic arithmatic.
And Trigonometry is all theory, which has no basis in real-world applications, so it's much more difficult to grasp if you need that. Once you get past Geometry, math is an entirely different beast. I was tutoring Geometry as a freshmen to juniors and seniors. I dropped out of Trigonometry. Part of that was the teacher's attitude - "I don't understand why you can't get this. It's not that hard. If you can't, then maybe this just isn't the right tract for you." - and part of that was not understanding how to apply Trigonometry to real-world situations.
Max is right in that the culture accepts failure at math as "okay", which is a problem. However, to me, the greater problem is the lack of adaptability by teachers to work with those who don't just "get" it.
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 10:56:24 AM
Quote from: sbr on December 30, 2009, 12:30:52 PM
Quote from: Maximus on December 30, 2009, 11:44:46 AM
Seeing it as more than one thing is part of the problem.
A more serious problem in the US, I think, is the culturally accepted preconceived notion that math is hard and it's ok to not get it.
My daughter in high school does that. She just "doesn't get" algebra, and can't understand why I won't accept that as an answer. She is a smart kid, gets mostly A's with some B's mixed in but seems to think that not getting it is the end. Any attempts by me to explain or help her find the answers to her questions is a waste of time.
Spoken like two people who "get" math. <_<
I have struggled my whole life with math(s) because it is not an easy concept for me. I can do Algebra, Geography, and various types of Business math(s), but I seriously struggled with it. In fact, the math(s) class I took last year had me in tears numerous times because no matter how hard I tried to understand why something was what it was, I just couldn't get it.
Part of it, for me at least, is that I have to understand why something is what it is. Just saying, "Well, use this formula and it will work," doesn't cut it for me. I need to know why that formula works so that I can remember it and apply it for other things.
This isn't a logic vs. literature thing, either. My logic scores tend to be my highest on any standardized tests, while my math scores are my lowest.
I get math, but that wasn't quite my point. She seems to think that "not getting" it allows her to not put any more effort into than she wants. I would rather see her in tears because she is trying so hard, as opposed to just giving up.
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 11:17:07 AM
And Trigonometry is all theory, which has no basis in real-world applications
:bleeding:
QuoteFields which make use of trigonometry or trigonometric functions include astronomy (especially, for locating the apparent positions of celestial objects, in which spherical trigonometry is essential) and hence navigation (on the oceans, in aircraft, and in space), music theory, acoustics, optics, analysis of financial markets, electronics, probability theory, statistics, biology, medical imaging (CAT scans and ultrasound), pharmacy, chemistry, number theory (and hence cryptology), seismology, meteorology, oceanography, many physical sciences, land surveying and geodesy, architecture, phonetics, economics, electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, civil engineering, computer graphics, cartography, crystallography and game development.
See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_trigonometry
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 11:17:07 AM
And Trigonometry is all theory, which has no basis in real-world applications
:lmfao:
Quote from: ulmont on December 31, 2009, 11:22:10 AM
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 11:17:07 AM
And Trigonometry is all theory, which has no basis in real-world applications
:bleeding:
QuoteFields which make use of trigonometry or trigonometric functions include astronomy (especially, for locating the apparent positions of celestial objects, in which spherical trigonometry is essential) and hence navigation (on the oceans, in aircraft, and in space), music theory, acoustics, optics, analysis of financial markets, electronics, probability theory, statistics, biology, medical imaging (CAT scans and ultrasound), pharmacy, chemistry, number theory (and hence cryptology), seismology, meteorology, oceanography, many physical sciences, land surveying and geodesy, architecture, phonetics, economics, electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, civil engineering, computer graphics, cartography, crystallography and game development.
See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_trigonometry
My understanding of Trig is that it's the building block to Calculus, which is actually what's used in those fields. In other words, you learn the theory in Trig and the application in Calc. If I'm mistaken, I again blame my 10th-grade math teacher.
Quote from: sbr on December 31, 2009, 11:21:48 AM
I get math, but that wasn't quite my point. She seems to think that "not getting" it allows her to not put any more effort into than she wants. I would rather see her in tears because she is trying so hard, as opposed to just giving up.
Finding a way that makes sense to her will help her try. I've found that those who "get" math don't understand what I don't "get" about it. To them, do this, this, and this, and voila! You've got the answer! For me, it's "Why am I doing that? What will it do? How does that work?" If you can't answer those questions clearly, none of it will make sense to me.
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 11:28:39 AM
Quote from: ulmont on December 31, 2009, 11:22:10 AM
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 11:17:07 AM
And Trigonometry is all theory, which has no basis in real-world applications
:bleeding:
QuoteFields which make use of trigonometry or trigonometric functions include astronomy (especially, for locating the apparent positions of celestial objects, in which spherical trigonometry is essential) and hence navigation (on the oceans, in aircraft, and in space), music theory, acoustics, optics, analysis of financial markets, electronics, probability theory, statistics, biology, medical imaging (CAT scans and ultrasound), pharmacy, chemistry, number theory (and hence cryptology), seismology, meteorology, oceanography, many physical sciences, land surveying and geodesy, architecture, phonetics, economics, electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, civil engineering, computer graphics, cartography, crystallography and game development.
See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_trigonometry
My understanding of Trig is that it's the building block to Calculus, which is actually what's used in those fields. In other words, you learn the theory in Trig and the application in Calc. If I'm mistaken, I again blame my 10th-grade math teacher.
What is interesting is that your response to the thread, IMO, points to the *real* problem - people all too willing to blame anyone but themselves for their failure to learn.
Johnny cannot understand math, so I guess it is the teachers fault, they should be more "flexible" and change the curriculum (read: dumb it down) so Johnny can get an A too!
Quote from: DGuller on December 31, 2009, 11:27:00 AM
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 11:17:07 AM
And Trigonometry is all theory, which has no basis in real-world applications
:lmfao:
<_<
This really helps me want to learn this. And you "math geeks" wonder why we give up.
I suspect that every time in the past when X% of the students fail their math assessment test, and we change the test, or change the teaching to address those X%, we end up fucking the 100-X% who did NOT fail the damn test or assessment.
And that just feeds on itself - this idea that if only we had the right system, why, *everyone* can succeed! And if *everyone* is NOT succeeding, we had better change the system to cater more and more and more to the lowest performers.
And now we wonder why more and more people think it is a-ok to fail at math in any practical sense.
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 11:28:39 AM
My understanding of Trig is that it's the building block to Calculus, which is actually what's used in those fields. In other words, you learn the theory in Trig and the application in Calc. If I'm mistaken, I again blame my 10th-grade math teacher.
If your apportionment of blame is accurate, then your 10th grade math teacher should be executed.
The building block of calculus is the concept of a limit. There is some trigonometry in calculus, of course, but I don't see how it's a building block. Trigonometry has a number of very direct, and not that complicated, applications. In short, it's about relationship between angles and distances, two things that we encounter all the time.
EDIT: Now that I think about it, trigonometry is a building block of complex analysis. It's supremely useful in many applications, but that's not the kind of calculus we normally think of.
Quote from: Berkut on December 31, 2009, 11:31:48 AM
What is interesting is that your response to the thread, IMO, points to the *real* problem - people all too willing to blame anyone but themselves for their failure to learn.
Johnny cannot understand math, so I guess it is the teachers fault, they should be more "flexible" and change the curriculum (read: dumb it down) so Johnny can get an A too!
That's what you got from my post? :huh:
Then I wasn't very clear. As I've said, I have struggled - as in, I've put in vast amounts of work trying to learn this stuff - with math my entire life. I hate not "getting" it. When everything else comes so easy, it's a huge blow to not be able to just "get" something. So I've worked very hard on it. And yet, I still don't do math well. I have never been able to understand Trigonometry, despite working at it. I hate the subject because none of it makes any sense to me at all.
Yes, I blame the way it is taught. At least, the way it was taught to me, and the way I've seen it taught to my two eldest sons. If we don't just "get" it, the teachers wash their hands of it. Either we get it, or we don't, and if we don't, the teachers don't bother working at it with us.
I'm not sure how that's putting all of the blame on the teachers, nor how that's asking for them to "dumb it down" so that I can get an A. What I'm saying is that the way a subject is taught, as in all things from a foreign language to history to English Literature, will affect how a student reacts to it. If the overriding attitude of the teacher is, "Well, you don't get it, too bad," well, then that will be the same attitude of the student.
Quote from: Berkut on December 31, 2009, 11:34:59 AM
I suspect that every time in the past when X% of the students fail their math assessment test, and we change the test, or change the teaching to address those X%, we end up fucking the 100-X% who did NOT fail the damn test or assessment.
And that just feeds on itself - this idea that if only we had the right system, why, *everyone* can succeed! And if *everyone* is NOT succeeding, we had better change the system to cater more and more and more to the lowest performers.
And now we wonder why more and more people think it is a-ok to fail at math in any practical sense.
I would argue that there is more than one way to teach a lesson, and using all of those ways in the same class will reach more students. I would never advocate changing something that works and not using it, but I would certainly advocate using other methods
as well.
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 11:32:20 AM
Quote from: DGuller on December 31, 2009, 11:27:00 AM
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 11:17:07 AM
And Trigonometry is all theory, which has no basis in real-world applications
:lmfao:
<_<
This really helps me want to learn this. And you "math geeks" wonder why we give up.
And what would you want him to say to get you to want to learn it?
And while there are certainly poor teachers and poor schools out there, the fact is that the resources exist to learn almost anything one might want to learn, if one is willing to devote the time and effort, and has a modicum of intelligence.
Sure, I suppose it could be the case that in the three examples from you personal life where people failed to "get it", the fault was with three different teachers, rather than any of the actual students involved, or their parents.
I would guess that if those three teachers all saw your post, every single one would disagree that their attitude was "Well, you don't get it, too bad".
Quote from: DGuller on December 31, 2009, 11:35:05 AM
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 11:28:39 AM
My understanding of Trig is that it's the building block to Calculus, which is actually what's used in those fields. In other words, you learn the theory in Trig and the application in Calc. If I'm mistaken, I again blame my 10th-grade math teacher.
If your apportionment of blame is accurate, then your 10th grade math teacher should be executed.
The building block of calculus is the concept of a limit. There is some trigonometry in calculus, of course, but I don't see how it's a building block. Trigonometry has a number of very direct, and not that complicated, applications. In short, it's about relationship between angles and distances, two things that we encounter all the time.
EDIT: Now that I think about it, trigonometry is a building block of complex analysis. It's supremely useful in many applications, but that's not the kind of calculus we normally think of.
Until Max told me, I had no idea that it was trigonometry that was used to calculate how a bridge should be placed across a river. When I asked in class about what sine, cosine, etc., meant, I was told that it was theory and I would just need to memorize how to use it. What it was wasn't important.
http://rlrr.drum-corps.net/weirdness/1116 (http://rlrr.drum-corps.net/weirdness/1116)
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 11:32:20 AM
Quote from: DGuller on December 31, 2009, 11:27:00 AM
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 11:17:07 AM
And Trigonometry is all theory, which has no basis in real-world applications
:lmfao:
<_<
This really helps me want to learn this. And you "math geeks" wonder why we give up.
Sorry, this is out of character for me. I usually go out of my way to not mock people for faulty understanding of math, having worked for a number of years as a math tutor in college.
It's just that your statement was way out there, and I dropped my guard. It's like saying that automobile is an impractical curiosity. Trigonometry is one of those branches that is actually extremely applicable to the real world, from the very basics to the very advanced stuff.
Quote from: dps on December 31, 2009, 11:41:57 AM
And what would you want him to say to get you to want to learn it?
And while there are certainly poor teachers and poor schools out there, the fact is that the resources exist to learn almost anything one might want to learn, if one is willing to devote the time and effort, and has a modicum of intelligence.
And yet, I have a relatively high IQ, have devoted time and effort to it, and still do not understand it. Given the number of "relatively intelligent" people in the U.S., I suggest that I am not alone in this.
Quote from: Berkut on December 31, 2009, 11:43:18 AM
Sure, I suppose it could be the case that in the three examples from you personal life where people failed to "get it", the fault was with three different teachers, rather than any of the actual students involved, or their parents.
I would guess that if those three teachers all saw your post, every single one would disagree that their attitude was "Well, you don't get it, too bad".
Just out of curiosity, do you "get" math? Is it a relatively easy subject for you?
Think about this Meri. Do you want your children to grow up and be like Berkut and Dguller?
I do ok - I would say I "get it", but I am not a prodigy or anything.
I don't disbelieve that you struggle with math, I just think the attitude of "Oh, math is hard for me, so they should change the curriculum so I can succeed too!", which appears to be your position, is in fact why we see declining math scores in many cases - the desire to see everyone succeed, at a cost to those who were already having success.
And, to be completely blunt, I suspect that in the majority of cases, people who don't "get it" but are otherwise pretty bright are most likely to just not "get" the work involved. Studies have shown that IQ is pretty general - people who do well in one subject tend to do well in all subjects. I think most people who don't "get it" mostly just don't like it, which isn't the same thing at all.
But mostly I was just responding to your tone of "I don't "get" math, and neither do my kids, and it is those damn teachers fault!". Fuck that. Plenty of teachers suck, but if you go around blaming your failures on mediocre teachers, you aren't ever going to succeed - there will always be some damn teacher who will be a handy excuse for your failure, if that is what you are looking for.
For the record, I got a D in Algebra II in high school, because I was a lazy git who didn't want to do any work. That was in 10th grade, the only D I got in high school. I quit taking math classes at that point in HS because I was a lazy git, and paid the price for that once I started my CS degree, and had to make up for a lot of lost ground, since I should have already taken both trig and calculus.
But I sure as hell am not going to blame that on my teachers - that was all me, and to a lesser extent my parents for not paying attention to what I was doing, and not asking in my junior and senior years of HS "Hey, why in the hell aren't you taking any math classes?". But wtf, I was the only kid who actually made it through HS in my family, until my younger sister, so its not like they were paying attention to me.
I do think that "getting math" is a phenomenon worth discussing. Personally, even when I was a C student in Soviet Union, math was something that just made perfect sense to me, and something I could get an A in without any effort. Starting from 1st grade, and all the way to the end of college, I never really had to struggle for understanding (although by the time of my senior year in college I felt like I was starting to reach the limit of my potential).
If I didn't start out that way, I have no idea what I would need to do to get up to speed. Maybe ability to get math is just a result of some chance development of the brain at a really young age.
Quote from: Berkut on December 31, 2009, 11:58:36 AM
I don't disbelieve that you struggle with math, I just think the attitude of "Oh, math is hard for me, so they should change the curriculum so I can succeed too!", which appears to be your position, is in fact why we see declining math scores in many cases - the desire to see everyone succeed, at a cost to those who were already having success.
Not the curriculum, how it's taught. There's a difference.
Surely you've heard of the theory of varying ways of learning? Kinesthetics, Visual, and Auditory? It's been applied in most subjects... except math beyond the elementary level. At least, that's the discussion in this area. It's been a source of aggravation for several of our math teachers at the middle school level, as they have limited resources to go beyond what's laid out for them by the district.
EDIT: and check your PMs :contract:
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 11:47:35 AM
Just out of curiosity, do you "get" math? Is it a relatively easy subject for you?
This is a terrible excuse Meri. People dont just "get" something. Math is something that is learned. You dont just get it. Which is really the problem isnt it.
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 12:09:40 PM
Not the curriculum, how it's taught. There's a difference.
Surely you've heard of the theory of varying ways of learning? Kinesthetics, Visual, and Auditory? It's been applied in most subjects... except math beyond the elementary level. At least, that's the discussion in this area. It's been a source of aggravation for several of our math teachers at the middle school level, as they have limited resources to go beyond what's laid out for them by the district.
Sounds like excuses. I need pretty colors and music to understand math!
Quote from: DGuller on December 31, 2009, 12:03:02 PM
Maybe ability to get math is just a result of some chance development of the brain at a really young age.
More likely it is the chance development of a person actually learning the basics and then building from there.
I was a C student in math until my high school basketball coach informed me that I needed to pull up my grades to keep playing. I studied for the next test and got close to 100%. Everyone is different obviosly but I really hate the excuse that a person cant learn math because their brain isnt wired that way.
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 31, 2009, 12:11:43 PM
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 11:47:35 AM
Just out of curiosity, do you "get" math? Is it a relatively easy subject for you?
This is a terrible excuse Meri. People dont just "get" something. Math is something that is learned. You dont just get it. Which is really the problem isnt it.
I know some math teachers who have the attitude she describes, that math is something that student's either have an innate aptitude or they don't.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 31, 2009, 12:16:12 PM
I know some math teachers who have the attitude she has, that math is something that student's either have an innate aptitude or they don't.
Great. So now we have teachers feeding into the failure of students who dont "get" it.
Quote from: DGuller on December 31, 2009, 12:03:02 PM
I do think that "getting math" is a phenomenon worth discussing. Personally, even when I was a C student in Soviet Union, math was something that just made perfect sense to me, and something I could get an A in without any effort. Starting from 1st grade, and all the way to the end of college, I never really had to struggle for understanding (although by the time of my senior year in college I felt like I was starting to reach the limit of my potential).
If I didn't start out that way, I have no idea what I would need to do to get up to speed. Maybe ability to get math is just a result of some chance development of the brain at a really young age.
I "get" languages. I've studied Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Welsh, German, and Latin. I'm not fluent in any of them, but I never had a problem understanding how the language works grammatically, etc. With a little time learning vocabulary, I've little doubt that I could pick up several in a conversational way in a fairly short time.
At the same time, I understand that this is not the case for everyone. I know plenty of people who seriously struggle to get the concepts of English grammar as a native speaker, while I barely think of them anymore. Hell, half the time I can't even explain why something is what it is anymore, but I know it to be true. My vocabulary is considered extensive, and often times I have to backtrack and "dumb down" what I'm saying so that others "get" it.
This is how math is for some people. They understand it at such a level that trying to explain it isn't possible. I know that Max is like that. When I ask why something is what it is, he gets a blank look on his face for a few minutes. He no longer has to think about the whys, whereas I'm still at that point. While he's working out Calc IV problems, I'm trying to work out the radius of a circle knowing the circumference.
The biggest problem, from my perspective, is that those who "get" math have a hard time understanding those who don'ts limitations. And those who "get" math are the ones who usually teach it.
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 12:09:40 PM
Quote from: Berkut on December 31, 2009, 11:58:36 AM
I don't disbelieve that you struggle with math, I just think the attitude of "Oh, math is hard for me, so they should change the curriculum so I can succeed too!", which appears to be your position, is in fact why we see declining math scores in many cases - the desire to see everyone succeed, at a cost to those who were already having success.
Not the curriculum, how it's taught. There's a difference.
Surely you've heard of the theory of varying ways of learning? Kinesthetics, Visual, and Auditory? It's been applied in most subjects... except math beyond the elementary level. At least, that's the discussion in this area. It's been a source of aggravation for several of our math teachers at the middle school level, as they have limited resources to go beyond what's laid out for them by the district.
Meri, when I posted about there being resources available and putting time and effort into learning, you said that you had devoted time and effort to learning math. But I don't think you realized that I was referring to doing independent reading and studying, because you're still talking about teaching methods, which really don't apply to you putting the time and effort into something to become self-taught.
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 31, 2009, 12:17:15 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 31, 2009, 12:16:12 PM
I know some math teachers who have the attitude she has, that math is something that student's either have an innate aptitude or they don't.
Great. So now we have teachers feeding into the failure of students who dont "get" it.
And when teachers feed it, students eat it up, creating a vicious cycle.
I don't believe that most people can't learn it. I do believe, however, that the way it's taught makes a huge difference in a person's ability to grasp the concepts. And I do believe that there are those with an innate ability that others may lack. Not just in math, but in other subjects as well.
Quote from: garbon on December 31, 2009, 12:13:39 PM
Sounds like excuses. I need pretty colors and music to understand math!
It's a sound education theory. Because you've never heard it, doesn't mean it wasn't applied to you, and that you didn't benefit from it.
Only 13% of British children can carry out basic mathematics. The other 92% are effectively innumerate.
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 31, 2009, 12:15:08 PM
More likely it is the chance development of a person actually learning the basics and then building from there.
I was a C student in math until my high school basketball coach informed me that I needed to pull up my grades to keep playing. I studied for the next test and got close to 100%. Everyone is different obviosly but I really hate the excuse that a person cant learn math because their brain isnt wired that way.
I'm not sure I can explain this any more clear than I already have. While I'm fully capable of memorizing the basics and applying them, I do not understand how the theories work. I don't get
why math works, and if I don't understand that, I can't remember it enough to use it at the next level.
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 12:22:29 PM
It's a sound education theory. Because you've never heard it, doesn't mean it wasn't applied to you, and that you didn't benefit from it.
No I'm pretty sure I've heard of that shit and suffered the horrors of it. I think the lack of multimedia presentations is less of a problem than the fact that many children are lazy fucks who don't really want to be in school.
Quote from: dps on December 31, 2009, 12:20:01 PM
Meri, when I posted about there being resources available and putting time and effort into learning, you said that you had devoted time and effort to learning math. But I don't think you realized that I was referring to doing independent reading and studying, because you're still talking about teaching methods, which really don't apply to you putting the time and effort into something to become self-taught.
That statement was meant for Berkut and the theory of teaching it differently. As for my own studies, you're mistaken. I've worked at it on my own, with a tutor (my ex-husband, who also never understood why I couldn't "get" it), and in a class. I've struggled with this deficit for a very long time and have worked hard to overcome it. The theory behind why math works eludes me.
Quote from: garbon on December 31, 2009, 12:25:44 PM
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 12:22:29 PM
It's a sound education theory. Because you've never heard it, doesn't mean it wasn't applied to you, and that you didn't benefit from it.
No I'm pretty sure I've heard of that shit and suffered the horrors of it. I think the lack of multimedia presentations is less of a problem than the fact that many children are lazy fucks who don't really want to be in school.
Different subject. And because you disliked it, doesn't mean that it didn't work for others. The point of classroom teaching is to reach all of the kids, not just one or two.
Though multimedia maths might help some kids who have difficulties with the basics understand it as it triggers different parts of the brain, it doesn't explain the fact that standards were higher when we used log tables and calculators were banned from exams.
Quote from: Brazen on December 31, 2009, 12:29:36 PM
Though multimedia maths might help some kids who have difficulties with the basics understand it as it triggers different parts of the brain, it doesn't explain the fact that standards were higher when we used log tables and calculators were banned from exams.
Agreed. Elementary and Middle School math education is abysmal. We took on the task of teaching Riley her multiplication tables as she didn't really have to know them in class. :blink:
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 12:28:04 PM
Different subject. And because you disliked it, doesn't mean that it didn't work for others. The point of classroom teaching is to reach all of the kids, not just one or two.
Glad to see you are a proponent that this theory is the correct way of teaching.
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 12:21:39 PM
I don't believe that most people can't learn it. I do believe, however, that the way it's taught makes a huge difference in a person's ability to grasp the concepts. And I do believe that there are those with an innate ability that others may lack. Not just in math, but in other subjects as well.
You are contradicting yourself. I thought you were talking about some students understanding traditional teaching methods better then others and that teaching methods need to be adapted to meet the needs of those that dont. I can understand that logic.
Where you lose me entirely is your argument that there is some innate ability that makes people not be able to understand math. Math is just logic. You are really making the argument that a lot of people are just innately stupid.
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 31, 2009, 12:15:08 PM
Quote from: DGuller on December 31, 2009, 12:03:02 PM
Maybe ability to get math is just a result of some chance development of the brain at a really young age.
More likely it is the chance development of a person actually learning the basics and then building from there.
I was a C student in math until my high school basketball coach informed me that I needed to pull up my grades to keep playing. I studied for the next test and got close to 100%. Everyone is different obviosly but I really hate the excuse that a person cant learn math because their brain isnt wired that way.
I don't think getting good grades in math courses is all there is to it. You can certainly improve your math test scores with more work. Russians and Asians in general are much better at math mainly because math is drilled so much harder there.
What I'm not sure about is the abstract thinking part (which I think is the essence of "getting math"). You can get your good grades in math without ever learning to think abstractly, at least up to a certain point. However, it's certainly a lot easier to do well in math if you're predisposed to think abstractly.
Is abstract thinking just a talent given to some and not others, or is it a skill that math develops? I don't know.
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 31, 2009, 12:32:36 PM
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 12:21:39 PM
I don't believe that most people can't learn it. I do believe, however, that the way it's taught makes a huge difference in a person's ability to grasp the concepts. And I do believe that there are those with an innate ability that others may lack. Not just in math, but in other subjects as well.
You are contradicting yourself. I thought you were talking about some students understanding traditional teaching methods better then others and that teaching methods need to be adapted to meet the needs of those that dont. I can understand that logic.
I am.
Quote
Where you lose me entirely is your argument that there is some innate ability that makes people not be able to understand math. Math is just logic. You are really making the argument that a lot of people are just innately stupid.
An innate ability makes it easier for someone to understand a subject. That doesn't mean that those without it can't learn it; only that it is harder and may take a different way of teaching it for them to fully understand. And math is not just logic. As I said, my logic scores on standardized tests are usually my highest, but my math scores are the lowest. Logic is logic; math is math.
Though there's little application for trigonometry for most careers, applied maths would be a big help. Whether it's cheaper to buy 8 beers for £7 from the supermarket, or 6 beers for £5 from the corner store, to give an example I used only this morning :P
Quote from: DGuller on December 31, 2009, 12:34:49 PM
I don't think getting good grades in math courses is all there is to it. You can certainly improve your math test scores with more work. Russians and Asians in general are much better at math mainly because math is drilled so much harder there.
What I'm not sure about is the abstract thinking part (which I think is the essence of "getting math"). You can get your good grades in math without ever learning to think abstractly, at least up to a certain point. However, it's certainly a lot easier to do well in math if you're predisposed to think abstractly.
Is abstract thinking just a talent given to some and not others, or is it a skill that math develops? I don't know.
I got an A in my math class last year, but walked away feeling as though I'd learned nothing. Rote memorization is not learning. And if I don't understand the why (i.e. the abstract thinking part), I don't feel as though I've learned it. The difficult part is getting someone to understand that THAT is what I'm hoping to learn, not the "how to apply a formula to a problem".
Jake is in 4th grade now, and he certainly seems to "get" math. The curriculum, from what I have seen, is very good. A mix of "new" math concepts with a heavy emphasis on problem solving and teaching skills on how to think about problems mathematically, combined with a solid chunk of needed foundational memorization, like learning multiplication tables (up to 14x14 no less). Jake is very much like me - he picks it up quickly, but does not like it because he is lazy. However, you can tell he is good at it, because he can attack problems from different directions very well.
Similar, in fact, to how they are teaching reading - a lot of emphasis on skills (how to sound out a word, how to derive meaning from context, etc., etc) combined with a considerable amount of solid repetition. Melanie (in 1st grade) brings home a couple dozen "sight words" at a time on flash cards - basically you are expected to be able to know all these words "on sight", rather than having to actually read them, so every night we go over her sight words, leave out the ones she does not know pretty much instantly, and go over those again. Once she can get through a set of them without pausing, we send them back to school and the teacher sends another batch.
So far I have been extremely pleased with both kids educations - they have had either excellent (most), very good (one), or only competent (one) teachers so far. Melanie does not pick things up nearly as quickly as her brother though, although she seems more willing to work at it than he is.
Quote from: Berkut on December 31, 2009, 12:41:16 PM
Jake is in 4th grade now, and he certainly seems to "get" math. The curriculum, from what I have seen, is very good. A mix of "new" math concepts with a heavy emphasis on problem solving and teaching skills on how to think about problems mathematically, combined with a solid chunk of needed foundational memorization, like learning multiplication tables (up to 14x14 no less). Jake is very much like me - he picks it up quickly, but does not like it because he is lazy. However, you can tell he is good at it, because he can attack problems from different directions very well.
Similar, in fact, to how they are teaching reading - a lot of emphasis on skills (how to sound out a word, how to derive meaning from context, etc., etc) combined with a considerable amount of solid repetition. Melanie (in 1st grade) brings home a couple dozen "sight words" at a time on flash cards - basically you are expected to be able to know all these words "on sight", rather than having to actually read them, so every night we go over her sight words, leave out the ones she does not know pretty much instantly, and go over those again. Once she can get through a set of them without pausing, we send them back to school and the teacher sends another batch.
So far I have been extremely pleased with both kids educations - they have had either excellent (most), very good (one), or only competent (one) teachers so far. Melanie does not pick things up nearly as quickly as her brother though, although she seems more willing to work at it than he is.
It sounds like a solid foundation for both of them.
Riley struggles a bit more than the boys did, too, but she's in a much harder curriculum than they were in. She, of all of my kids, is the only one that's been challenged every year, with the teachers pushing her to her potential, rather than allowing her to lag behind with the less capable students.
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 11:28:39 AM
My understanding of Trig is that it's the building block to Calculus, which is actually what's used in those fields. In other words, you learn the theory in Trig and the application in Calc. If I'm mistaken, I again blame my 10th-grade math teacher.
While this is a bit late, now, blame your 10th-grade math teacher. I was taught trigonometry both in physics and in math. The physics version was very concrete, and directed towards triangle-based problem solving; the math version was more abstract, and directed towards interesting circle properties. Really, though, calculus is a different idea based solely on limits (as noted by dguller).
Quote from: Berkut on December 31, 2009, 11:34:59 AM
I suspect that every time in the past when X% of the students fail their math assessment test, and we change the test, or change the teaching to address those X%, we end up fucking the 100-X% who did NOT fail the damn test or assessment.
And that just feeds on itself - this idea that if only we had the right system, why, *everyone* can succeed! And if *everyone* is NOT succeeding, we had better change the system to cater more and more and more to the lowest performers.
And now we wonder why more and more people think it is a-ok to fail at math in any practical sense.
I suspect that you have made all of this up. None of it bears any resemblance to teaching and learning success as I know it. I suspect, though, that you knew this when you made it up.
Quote from: ulmont on December 31, 2009, 01:31:56 PM
While this is a bit late, now, blame your 10th-grade math teacher. I was taught trigonometry both in physics and in math. The physics version was very concrete, and directed towards triangle-based problem solving; the math version was more abstract, and directed towards interesting circle properties. Really, though, calculus is a different idea based solely on limits (as noted by dguller).
This would have been very handy. However, because I dropped out of Trigonometry, I wasn't allowed into Physics. Trig was taught the year before Physics. So, all I learned was theory, not application.
Quote from: garbon on December 31, 2009, 12:25:44 PM
No I'm pretty sure I've heard of that shit and suffered the horrors of it. I think the lack of multimedia presentations is less of a problem than the fact that many children are lazy fucks who don't really want to be in school.
Nice non-requiter!
You may or may not have been a lazy fuck who didn't want to be in school, but I can assure you that many lazy fucks who didn't want to be in school had no particular problems with maths. And some very hard-working students who loved school did.
Whether you were lazy, ugly, or whatever doesn't change the fact that differentiated instruction works, so if you "suffered the horrors of it" I suspect that that is because you were a lazy fuck who don't really want to be in school.
Most trigonometry we did in 10th grade was based on real life problems. The classic was, "A ship sights the top of a lighthouse at an upward angle of x degrees. The lighthouse is known to be y meters high. How far is the ship from the lighthouse? Solve with both calculations and drawing."
Similarly, "Lightouses x and y are sighted with angle z between them. They are known to be x meters apart. How far is the ship from each lighhouse?"
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 31, 2009, 12:32:36 PMYou are really making the argument that a lot of people are just innately stupid.
A lot of people are just innately stupid. Some of them are good at math, some of them are not.
Quote from: DGuller on December 31, 2009, 12:34:49 PM
I don't think getting good grades in math courses is all there is to it. You can certainly improve your math test scores with more work. Russians and Asians in general are much better at math mainly because math is drilled so much harder there.
What I'm not sure about is the abstract thinking part (which I think is the essence of "getting math"). You can get your good grades in math without ever learning to think abstractly, at least up to a certain point. However, it's certainly a lot easier to do well in math if you're predisposed to think abstractly.
Is abstract thinking just a talent given to some and not others, or is it a skill that math develops? I don't know.
Maths is a language. Some people think better in non-native languages than other people do. Maths is not generally taught in high school as a language, though; it is taught as though , say, French were an entirely abstract concept, with no people actually speaking it and no utility in communications, just a bunch of connected ideas.
Part of the problem is that maths teachers, IMO, aren't very good teachers nor mathematicians. They know they pretty much cannot be fired because they are so hard to replace (teaching is just about the least lucrative thing one could do with a maths degree) and so they tend to be pretty inflexible - and since the more advanced maths teachers are teaching optional courses, it is easier for them to chase away the students who need more help than it is to help them.
Quote from: Syt on December 31, 2009, 02:00:09 PM
Most trigonometry we did in 10th grade was based on real life problems. The classic was, "A ship sights the top of a lighthouse at an upward angle of x degrees. The lighthouse is known to be y meters high. How far is the ship from the lighthouse? Solve with both calculations and drawing."
Similarly, "Lightouses x and y are sighted with angle z between them. They are known to be x meters apart. How far is the ship from each lighhouse?"
I agree trig can be a lot of fun, if taught that way - especially if presented as a problem that the students cannot answer yet, but which they
can answer if they just learn the new rule. It isn't always done that way, unfortunately.
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 11:47:35 AM
Just out of curiosity, do you "get" math? Is it a relatively easy subject for you?
Interestingly, I "got" math up through the second semester (well, quarter at the time) of college math, Calculus II. Calculus III was ok, and after that I struggled through about a million more quarters of calculus and proofs.
So I've done it both ways.
I was lazy. 2 trains traveling to some location? Who cares? Nobody rides trains in America.
Quote from: grumbler on December 31, 2009, 02:06:34 PM
Maths is a language. Some people think better in non-native languages than other people do. Maths is not generally taught in high school as a language, though; it is taught as though , say, French were an entirely abstract concept, with no people actually speaking it and no utility in communications, just a bunch of connected ideas.
Part of the problem is that maths teachers, IMO, aren't very good teachers nor mathematicians. They know they pretty much cannot be fired because they are so hard to replace (teaching is just about the least lucrative thing one could do with a maths degree) and so they tend to be pretty inflexible - and since the more advanced maths teachers are teaching optional courses, it is easier for them to chase away the students who need more help than it is to help them.
Thank you, grumbler. This makes perfect sense to me. :hug:
Quote from: grumbler on December 31, 2009, 02:08:35 PM
I agree trig can be a lot of fun, if taught that way - especially if presented as a problem that the students cannot answer yet, but which they can answer if they just learn the new rule. It isn't always done that way, unfortunately.
I agree. Many math tasks in German schools during my time (between 1982 and 1995) were presented in that way. Of course that also required a different skill from the students: reading comprehension.
Math became theoretical in grades 12 and 13 for us (calculus), and that was when I slipped from being an A student in math to being a B student. They still tried to inject some real life stuff into it occasionally, though, such as calculating the volume of a yoghurt cup that's shaped like a hyperbola.
I admit, though, that I've forgotten much of the more advanced math stuff because I simply don't use it. I still can do force vectors, and - the single most useful everyday life stuff they teach you in math - the rule of three.
Quote from: grumbler on December 31, 2009, 01:59:02 PM
so if you "suffered the horrors of it" I suspect that that is because you were a lazy fuck who don't really want to be in school.
True. :cool:
Yeah, I think there's a "getting" and "not getting" part of math understanding. Math was easy for me for most of my education, until I hit a certain point and I just couldn't get it right. I mean, I could get it right after lots of hard work but it was qualitatively different from all the prior math where I just sort of glanced at it and figured it out and got it right 95% of the time.
This was independent of any laziness factors, because I was equally lazy before and after hitting that point.
Quote from: merithyn on December 31, 2009, 02:09:24 PM
Quote from: grumbler on December 31, 2009, 02:06:34 PM
Maths is a language. Some people think better in non-native languages than other people do. Maths is not generally taught in high school as a language, though; it is taught as though , say, French were an entirely abstract concept, with no people actually speaking it and no utility in communications, just a bunch of connected ideas.
Part of the problem is that maths teachers, IMO, aren't very good teachers nor mathematicians. They know they pretty much cannot be fired because they are so hard to replace (teaching is just about the least lucrative thing one could do with a maths degree) and so they tend to be pretty inflexible - and since the more advanced maths teachers are teaching optional courses, it is easier for them to chase away the students who need more help than it is to help them.
Thank you, grumbler. This makes perfect sense to me. :hug:
Well it is nice to for someone who actually knows something about the subject to chime in. Personally I believe that some people are in fact good at certain things and not so good at others. Some people have to work much harder to be able to accomplish the same task as other people. There are for instance many people who will do very well in math classes but still not be very good at mathematics and never feel comfortable with it. Others might find it comes easy for them and still do poorly in their studies cause they don't like it. Remarkably not all people's brains work the same. I invite anyone one who disagrees with me to spend some time in a mad house. You'll meet plenty of people who's brains don't work like yours.
Quote from: Jacob on December 31, 2009, 02:55:46 PM
Yeah, I think there's a "getting" and "not getting" part of math understanding. Math was easy for me for most of my education, until I hit a certain point and I just couldn't get it right. I mean, I could get it right after lots of hard work but it was qualitatively different from all the prior math where I just sort of glanced at it and figured it out and got it right 95% of the time.
This was independent of any laziness factors, because I was equally lazy before and after hitting that point.
Yeah. Once I reached university it became a skill that required practice in order to solve many of the problems, rather than just something that came. For some people it still just came easily to them.
Quote from: Jacob on December 31, 2009, 02:55:46 PM
Yeah, I think there's a "getting" and "not getting" part of math understanding. Math was easy for me for most of my education, until I hit a certain point and I just couldn't get it right. I mean, I could get it right after lots of hard work but it was qualitatively different from all the prior math where I just sort of glanced at it and figured it out and got it right 95% of the time.
This was independent of any laziness factors, because I was equally lazy before and after hitting that point.
I was similar, I can't recall who it was but I recall someone coming up with a theory that because maths was so easy for me early on I never learned how to struggle with it and learn how to get it properly. Hence when it came that maths rose above natural talent and into abstract oddness I was left completely clueless at how to tackle it (hard work didn't work. It took...god knows what.)
Quote from: Tyr on December 31, 2009, 03:10:08 PM
Quote from: Jacob on December 31, 2009, 02:55:46 PM
Yeah, I think there's a "getting" and "not getting" part of math understanding. Math was easy for me for most of my education, until I hit a certain point and I just couldn't get it right. I mean, I could get it right after lots of hard work but it was qualitatively different from all the prior math where I just sort of glanced at it and figured it out and got it right 95% of the time.
This was independent of any laziness factors, because I was equally lazy before and after hitting that point.
I was similar, I can't recall who it was but I recall someone coming up with a theory that because maths was so easy for me early on I never learned how to struggle with it and learn how to get it properly. Hence when it came that maths rose above natural talent and into abstract oddness I was left completely clueless at how to tackle it (hard work didn't work. It took...god knows what.)
I was probably the same way. I was moved up a few classes and started with high school maths in basic school, but when I started high school I had already done the basic high school maths and did no math at all for some time before it was time for the more advanced stuff - and then my grades slipped from good to average. And then I took no more maths.
I spent my math classes in school reading books.
I wonder if people have a "ceiling" when it comes to math - in my case, it was very abrupt. I had to work pretty hard taking a trig/pre-calc class in college, but that was just because I had not taken any math courses in, oh, 6 years? 7 years? so there was a lot of re-learning to do. But once I got into Calc-1, I loved it, and easily got an A. Took some CS math courses like Algorithms, Set Theory, stuff like that, no problem.
Was actually thinking about getting either a minor in math (you only needed 2 more classes once you completed your CS pre-reqs) or even toyed with the idea of a double major.
Then I took Calc-II. Holy shit, that was fucking HARD. *Nothing* came easy, and I struggled to escape with a B. Other than an advanced algorithms class, I was done with math. It was like I hit a math wall or something - everything prior was easy!
Well, the talk of math understanding being something that's innate to each individual also argues that it's not something that different teachers and/or different methods of teaching won't have much impact on. It it's innate, there wasn't much else that Meri's teachers could do except go, "Oh, you just don't get it. Too bad.".
Quote from: Berkut on January 01, 2010, 12:02:36 PM
I wonder if people have a "ceiling" when it comes to math - in my case, it was very abrupt. I had to work pretty hard taking a trig/pre-calc class in college, but that was just because I had not taken any math courses in, oh, 6 years? 7 years? so there was a lot of re-learning to do. But once I got into Calc-1, I loved it, and easily got an A. Took some CS math courses like Algorithms, Set Theory, stuff like that, no problem.
Was actually thinking about getting either a minor in math (you only needed 2 more classes once you completed your CS pre-reqs) or even toyed with the idea of a double major.
Then I took Calc-II. Holy shit, that was fucking HARD. *Nothing* came easy, and I struggled to escape with a B. Other than an advanced algorithms class, I was done with math. It was like I hit a math wall or something - everything prior was easy!
My Calc II instructor told us Calc II was a weed-out course. I didn't do too well in Calc II and III but I blamed that on a bout of depression during that time rather than the course being that hard. The courses I've taken since- linear algebra and discrete math- have been pretty easy but maybe they're just easy in general.
To this day, though, I cringe when I encounter calculus. I wonder how much of peoples' trouble with math stems from bad experiences in the past.
Calc 2 is what, integrals? That shit was much more intuitive than linear algebra.
Quote from: dps on January 01, 2010, 12:08:45 PM
Well, the talk of math understanding being something that's innate to each individual also argues that it's not something that different teachers and/or different methods of teaching won't have much impact on. It it's innate, there wasn't much else that Meri's teachers could do except go, "Oh, you just don't get it. Too bad.".
Not true. People learn in different ways. People can learn to understand maths in different ways. As an example, I used to tutor kids in algebra. Factoring trinomials was hard for them. The teacher used to teach the tabular method and all of the special rules that were shortcuts past the tabular method. I told the kids to ignore the special rules, because "Mister Table never fails." I had them do problems the "long way' until they themselves realized that there were special cases that let them take shortcuts. These were, of course, the special rules that the teacher had tried to teach them along with the table method, and which they couldn't get that way. Once they developed them on their own, though, they could use the special rules with great faculty.
It is called "discovery learning" and is very powerful, but isn't popular because it is harder to teach. Not really any more time-consuming, just harder to plan out.
Quote from: Fate on January 01, 2010, 12:43:33 PM
Calc 2 is what, integrals? That shit was much more intuitive than linear algebra.
Yea, the funny thing is I felt understood it all, I just went blank when it came to exams, which is why I think the problem was on my end.
Quote from: grumbler on January 01, 2010, 12:57:13 PM
It is called "discovery learning" and is very powerful, but isn't popular because it is harder to teach. Not really any more time-consuming, just harder to plan out.
Yea and it's hard to forget, because you can just re-derive most of it if needed, at least in my experience.
TBH I have trouble with algebra too. :Embarrass: I've only ever taken one 4-month algebra course and there are many concepts I don't feel comfortable with.
Quote from: Fate on January 01, 2010, 12:43:33 PM
Calc 2 is what, integrals? That shit was much more intuitive than linear algebra.
I don't remember - I think I blocked it all out.
Although we did not have Calc III or IV - all the Calc courses where just I & II, and they were both 5 credit hour courses, and hence met every single fucking day.
Quote from: Maximus on January 01, 2010, 12:38:26 PM
To this day, though, I cringe when I encounter calculus. I wonder how much of peoples' trouble with math stems from bad experiences in the past.
The funny thing was that I actually really *liked* calculus...at least the first course.
I remember hitting a math wall. For me it was 2nd year university statistics. I enjoyed high school math, I enjoyed 1st year stats, but that second year class was wildly difficult - I think it was the only course I VW'd from ever.
Since we are reminiscing, taking an Algebra course after a 18 year gap is awesome.
Me: WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS SHIT?
Got a "B" :blush:
Quote from: Tyr on December 31, 2009, 03:10:08 PM
Quote from: Jacob on December 31, 2009, 02:55:46 PM
Yeah, I think there's a "getting" and "not getting" part of math understanding. Math was easy for me for most of my education, until I hit a certain point and I just couldn't get it right. I mean, I could get it right after lots of hard work but it was qualitatively different from all the prior math where I just sort of glanced at it and figured it out and got it right 95% of the time.
This was independent of any laziness factors, because I was equally lazy before and after hitting that point.
I was similar, I can't recall who it was but I recall someone coming up with a theory that because maths was so easy for me early on I never learned how to struggle with it and learn how to get it properly. Hence when it came that maths rose above natural talent and into abstract oddness I was left completely clueless at how to tackle it (hard work didn't work. It took...god knows what.)
I think this comes from the fact that not enough stress is put on learning the process but on getting the right results, in the way math knowledge is tested in schools. Students usually ignore the process early on since simpler math problems can be pretty much solved in your head, but later when it is no longer possible, they do not have a set of skills to tackle it.
I don't think there's any polite way to say this so I won't: people who don't get math are stupid. It's OK, most people are stupid.
I've always found math boring and I've always been great at it. Just like other theoretical subjects.
Quote from: grumbler on January 01, 2010, 12:57:13 PM
Quote from: dps on January 01, 2010, 12:08:45 PM
Well, the talk of math understanding being something that's innate to each individual also argues that it's not something that different teachers and/or different methods of teaching won't have much impact on. It it's innate, there wasn't much else that Meri's teachers could do except go, "Oh, you just don't get it. Too bad.".
Not true. People learn in different ways. People can learn to understand maths in different ways. As an example, I used to tutor kids in algebra. Factoring trinomials was hard for them. The teacher used to teach the tabular method and all of the special rules that were shortcuts past the tabular method. I told the kids to ignore the special rules, because "Mister Table never fails." I had them do problems the "long way' until they themselves realized that there were special cases that let them take shortcuts. These were, of course, the special rules that the teacher had tried to teach them along with the table method, and which they couldn't get that way. Once they developed them on their own, though, they could use the special rules with great faculty.
It is called "discovery learning" and is very powerful, but isn't popular because it is harder to teach. Not really any more time-consuming, just harder to plan out.
That reminds me of something: I once managed to make a kid realize he already understood differentiation and integration using EVE examples, like damage curves over time for a blaster Mega during a 1v1 engagement. :nerd:
It was kind of funny seeing him going from 'Fuck this math thing is hard' to 'Holy shit who knew it was so easy!'.
Quote from: Fate on January 01, 2010, 12:43:33 PM
Calc 2 is what, integrals? That shit was much more intuitive than linear algebra.
They're very different beasts. I can see someone hating one and not the other. I wasn't a big fan of calculus either, but I loved linear algebra and discrete math, even though they came later.
Quote from: Iormlund on January 01, 2010, 03:54:54 PM
That reminds me of something: I once managed to make a kid realize he already understood differentiation and integration using EVE examples, like damage curves over time for a blaster Mega during a 1v1 engagement. :nerd:
It was kind of funny seeing him going from 'Fuck this math thing is hard' to 'Holy shit who knew it was so easy!'.
Exactly. Maths is a language - the key is understanding that it is actually saying something, and isn't just a set of arbitrary rules. It isn't generally taught that way, though, so people don't see the forest because they are staring at trees.
Part of the problem may lie in alternate approaches to math education that have been taken in the past decade or two. Anecdotally speaking, when I was getting my B.Ed, some of my classmates preparing to be elementary teachers told me that it was suggested to them they do not teach students multiplication tables, since that involved "rote learning" and was therefore bad. Instead, students were to be encouraged to find their own methods at coming to the truths of basic multiplication. :huh:
That's not to say such new approaches may not work well in some instances, but in retrospect I'm certainly glad I had the multiplication tables drilled into my head from rote learning. :)
Quote from: Ed Anger on January 01, 2010, 02:29:38 PM
Since we are reminiscing, taking an Algebra course after a 18 year gap is awesome.
Me: WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS SHIT?
Got a "B" :blush:
Yeah, the instructors tend to take it a little easier on the older students. When I was going back for my degree in my 30s, and the instructor found out I was the only student that hadn't had a math class since the Reagan Administration, the only question he asked was "and you need this to graduate, right?" C-. Undergraduate grade inflation FTW.
Of course, didn't help that I hit the math wall in 4th grade.
Quote from: Brazen on December 31, 2009, 12:37:01 PM
Though there's little application for trigonometry for most careers, applied maths would be a big help. Whether it's cheaper to buy 8 beers for £7 from the supermarket, or 6 beers for £5 from the corner store, to give an example I used only this morning :P
:lol: I agree. The best maths lessons I had was when we did financial stuff like compound interest and APR etc. It started with a lecture from my teacher in which he explained why, based on his own life, you should never, ever get a credit card. I didn't learn :weep:
I just looked up trigonometry. I did learn all that, but I don't think I was ever taught that that was its name :mellow:
Quote from: grumbler on January 01, 2010, 12:57:13 PM
Quote from: dps on January 01, 2010, 12:08:45 PM
Well, the talk of math understanding being something that's innate to each individual also argues that it's not something that different teachers and/or different methods of teaching won't have much impact on. It it's innate, there wasn't much else that Meri's teachers could do except go, "Oh, you just don't get it. Too bad.".
Not true. People learn in different ways. People can learn to understand maths in different ways. As an example, I used to tutor kids in algebra. Factoring trinomials was hard for them. The teacher used to teach the tabular method and all of the special rules that were shortcuts past the tabular method. I told the kids to ignore the special rules, because "Mister Table never fails." I had them do problems the "long way' until they themselves realized that there were special cases that let them take shortcuts. These were, of course, the special rules that the teacher had tried to teach them along with the table method, and which they couldn't get that way. Once they developed them on their own, though, they could use the special rules with great faculty.
It is called "discovery learning" and is very powerful, but isn't popular because it is harder to teach. Not really any more time-consuming, just harder to plan out.
If you ever want a change, I am pretty sure I can get you a job at my kids school. :)
Everybody should have a credit card. You just shouldn't use it.
Quote from: Neil on January 02, 2010, 12:07:45 PM
Everybody should have a credit card. You just shouldn't use it.
Actually that was the moral of his story. I really didn't listen :(
Quote from: Neil on January 02, 2010, 12:07:45 PM
Everybody should have a credit card. You just shouldn't use it.
That's what I do actually. I have two but I keep them just in case. I use my debit card (which does not do overdrafts) for my day-to-day purchases.