Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
matlinb
Trad climber
Albuquerque
|
|
|
Nov 12, 2014 - 06:17am PT
|
I am an engineer in the semiconductor industry and I find that find my education useful to do my day to day job and to have the foundation to teach myself new concepts and ideas as my role has changed over the past 20 years in industry.
|
|
BBA
climber
|
|
|
Nov 12, 2014 - 06:33am PT
|
I thought the Common Core was like the new math (sets in the 70's) in that it will make a huge amount of money for publishers of text books. I had one daughter who went through trad math and one through new math. The trad math gave a better result (I helped them on their homework when asked). Kids need to learn operations for which not much thinking applies. After that they get into math which is descriptions of reality, insofar as it is.
|
|
Sierra Ledge Rat
Mountain climber
Old and Broken Down in Appalachia
|
|
|
Nov 12, 2014 - 07:09am PT
|
The concept of calculus is extremely important to your way of thinking, and it opens the door to exapnding how you view the processes of the universe. It is more than just "math."
People in the USA stink at math because they sit in front of a TV or computer game 10 hours a day instead of studying.
|
|
wbw
Trad climber
'cross the great divide
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 12, 2014 - 07:33am PT
|
I thought the Common Core was like the new math (sets in the 70's) in that it will make a huge amount of money for publishers of text books. I had one daughter who went through trad math and one through new math. The trad math gave a better result (I helped them on their homework when asked).
Pearson Prentice-Hall has bought up nearly every small textbook company that exists in the last few years. Some of these small companies have excellent books, but can't compete with the Pearson giant. Pearson will profit enormously from the Common Core.
Pearson pours tons of money into technology for education, that is a joke. It is very superficial (this to support the Common Core that allegedly goes deeper), and when one attends an in-service with a Pearson rep to learn how to use the technology, the Pearson rep cannot even manipulate it in the way they advertise. Pearson also bought the rights to the GED recently, which is a different but equally disturbing issue.
The Common Core at the 6th grade level is befuddling. I work with my daughter (6th grade) who is good at math, and she is generally not too confused by the quirkiness of the Common Core standards. For kids that struggle in math, it is totally confusing trying to solve a problem 4 different ways.
Also, instead of providing a broad foundation in math, it is more like an Advanced Placement course approach, in that it is targeted to solve specific types of problems. The skills are supposed to be learned in the context for which they are needed for a specific problem. Younger math students need a broad, consistent foundation in order to access the advanced math classes taught at my high school. We are already seeing kids (en masse) that show up to 9th grade math class very confused and with poor skills. This is because of the Common Core.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 12, 2014 - 07:54am PT
|
Without math there would be NO mankind ......
|
|
wbw
Trad climber
'cross the great divide
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 12, 2014 - 08:14am PT
|
Without YOSAR, there would be no climbers.
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
|
Nov 12, 2014 - 08:20am PT
|
Without climbers there would be no YOSAR.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 12, 2014 - 08:42am PT
|
Since this is a "math" thread you will have to put all these so called "quotes" into a mathematical formula to show your mathematical intelligence.
Otherwise the thread becomes useless ......
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Nov 12, 2014 - 12:57pm PT
|
Wow, John, that's quite an overstatement.
You're right, and I apologize. I made an error that I usually advise others against. I overstated an unnecessarily divisive position. I should simply have expressed my frustration when undergrads in my intoductory economics classes couldn't perform the most basic algebraic manipulations, or graduate students who allegedly passed multivariate calculus couldn't understand its need or application in calculating the least-squares estimators for parameters and statistics of fit for multiple regressions
It was in that sense that I stated that academic credentials proved meaningless. Of course they aren't. They still make their holders more likely to have knowledge and skills related to their fields of study than those without those credentials. I can see now how my exaggeration led to obfuscation of my point, so I'll try to re-state my position.
When the politicians demand standards and measurement, they express what a large segment of the voting public requests. I, too, didn't go to college, grad school, or even law school for a job. I went because of intellectual curiosity, but the public that's paying for education isn't satisfied when we say education forms its own reward. They expect -reasonably in my opinion - that graduates will be proficient in a certain minimum set of skills and subjects.
Wbw's quote about the need for a concerted effort to teach real mathematics rings true for me. I think the Common Core math standards form a part of determining what constitutes "real mathematics." Their propenents intended to set forth the minimum set of mathematical knowledge and skills in which students must demonstrate proficiency. I know enough about the people who put it together to believe that they did so for altruistic, not remunerative, reasons.
The reaction to Coomon Core, and particularly the arguments I hear from the rather unusual coalition of teachers and Tea Partiers, reminds me, too, of the gripes I heard about "new math" 51 years ago when I was a student learning it. I shudder to consider the boredom I would have faced if I had to continue learning the "old math."
I aimed (rather poorly, I see) my swipe at teacher organizing at the unions and others who don't want to be bothered teaching something new, claim that Common Core won't help, but fail to offer an alternative set of standards or method of measurement. I didn't mean to disparage the true professional organizations. Once again, my rhetoric overstated my intent. My bad.
John
|
|
wbw
Trad climber
'cross the great divide
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 12, 2014 - 01:16pm PT
|
John, read the article I posted upthread on this page. There are very smart people who advised on the Common Core, and then when it came time to sign off in agreement chose not to. Look at your own standards in CA as an alternative model that is better than the Common Core.
What bothers me more than the Common Core is this farce that it somehow improves math education in the US.
And the opposition is not coming only from the far right. Please read up on the issue before posting your exaggerated opinions.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Nov 12, 2014 - 01:29pm PT
|
I read the article, wbw, and agree that California's standards, and those of several other states, exceed those of Common Core. The reaction to those rather minimal Common Core standards tells us how far we have yet to go if we intend to improve math education in the US.
Incidentally, my daughter taught math under an IB curriculum to seventh and eighth graders the last two years. She's now back teaching high schoolers, though, because, as she put it, "middle school students are just too fragile." (She has a sarcastic streak that her high school students love, but her middle school [and particularly seventh grade] students weren't so sure about).
John
|
|
rgold
Trad climber
Poughkeepsie, NY
|
|
|
Nov 12, 2014 - 08:49pm PT
|
I should simply have expressed my frustration when undergrads in my introductory economics classes couldn't perform the most basic algebraic manipulations, or graduate students who allegedly passed multivariate calculus couldn't understand its need or application in calculating the least-squares estimators for parameters and statistics of fit for multiple regressions
Oh yeah, I feel your pain.
We see these kinds of problems on a daily basis. But we also see some excellent well-prepared students who learn and grow in their mathematical sophistication. I do think there is a tendency for the poorly prepared and poorly motivated students to loom larger in our consciousness as we try to figure out how to do the things we are supposed to be doing with people who are several levels removed from being ready. And it does seem unfathomable how they got this far without someone pulling the plug.
One partial answer I've seen in action: they learn things and then just totally forget them. This is an experimentally-verified artifact of cramming behavior. But it is also, I think, a byproduct of the perception, advanced here several times, that none of the stuff matters and education generally is just a big fraternity initiation rite in which people who were obliged to do unpleasant things to join now, as members, inflict analogously meaningless pain on the newcomers. So you suffer through that multivariable calculus course, viewing it as the intellectual equivalent of swallowing goldfish, and purge it from consciousness as soon as possible, secure in the faulty knowledge that you'll never need that shite again.
|
|
neebee
Social climber
calif/texas
|
|
|
Nov 13, 2014 - 04:56am PT
|
hey there say, cragman... :))
or--transposing...
i looked at it and saw it as:
correct for quite a while... then, i 'reflipped it'
after not making sense of it...
ahhh, whewwwww, i DO know this much math, was happy to figure out...
:)
|
|
BBA
climber
|
|
|
Nov 13, 2014 - 06:33am PT
|
Yesterday I read an article in the Press Democrat which said Sonoma County is undergoing a critical shortage of substitute teachers. The Common core is at the core of the uncommon problem. Subs don't want to do it or have to pay to learn how to do it, so one third or less of the normal applications have been received. Unintended consequences.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 13, 2014 - 12:12pm PT
|
One partial answer I've seen in action: they learn things and then just totally forget them
Bingo. If you don't have sufficient interest in a subject to review it in your mind within a certain period of time after class chances are it will quickly fade, unless you are truly exceptional. Doing homework many hours later will be more difficult and understanding the material will be impeded, leading to increased frustration with, and dislike of, mathematics.
I seem to recall Feynman saying something like this about physics.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2014 - 10:57am PT
|
Nice presentation by Elly. Math is like climbing in that a project that is dispatched quickly and easily is not as rewarding as one requiring time and effort.
However, there should be a balance between memorization of algorithms and problem-solving, critical thinking. A famous mathematician once said that his ability to rapidly and accurately remember and apply rules of algebra and calculus without effort was an important key to solving difficult problems in research. Without that facility one may see the light at the end of the tunnel, but be unable to reach it in a reasonable time, getting bogged down with trivia.
And then, of course, the question: is critical thinking a product of nature or nurture or both?
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2014 - 11:05am PT
|
One partial answer I've seen in action: they learn things and then just totally forget them. This is an experimentally-verified artifact of cramming behavior. But it is also, I think, a byproduct of the perception, advanced here several times, that none of the stuff matters and education generally is just a big fraternity initiation rite in which people who were obliged to do unpleasant things to join now, as members, inflict analogously meaningless pain on the newcomers. So you suffer through that multivariable calculus course, viewing it as the intellectual equivalent of swallowing goldfish, and purge it from consciousness as soon as possible, secure in the faulty knowledge that you'll never need that shite again.
True. Ironically, in my first textbook on undergraduate set theory (Halmos, Naive Set Theory) The Foreword essentially told us: Here it is. Learn it. Play with it. Forget it.
John
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2014 - 11:17am PT
|
Halmos, Naive Set Theory
You studied that as an undergraduate; it was the text in my first course as a graduate student at the U of Alabama in 1962. All entering grad students were required to take it. It was an eye-opener for me as I had never studied set theory. We were given worksheets to develop all sorts of mathematical structures based on the Peano Axioms. I still take it off my shelves from time to time and enjoy Halmos's delightful writing.
;>)
|
|
ydpl8s
Trad climber
Santa Monica, California
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2014 - 12:08pm PT
|
Then of course there was - Elementary General Topology, by Moore
That one kicked my ass and had me running back to the comfort of my Diff EQ textbooks. At least they were something I could visualize and apply.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!