Live data from Hacker News

Math education: It’s not about numbers, it’s about learning how to think

nwaonline.com

201–210 of 343 posts

Re: Math education: It’s not about numbers, it’s about learning how to think

#201
post #19

Maybe I'm wrong, but I have always believed that if you want people to be good at math, it's their first years of education which are important, not the last ones. In other worlds, push for STEM should be present in kindergartens and elementary schools. By the time people go to high school it is to late. I never had any problems with math until I went to university, so I was merely a passive observer of everyday stru…

> memorization

I clearly recall memorizing the times tables when I was young. It suddenly dawned on me that "times" wasn't just a word, it meant adding the number so many times. I no longer needed to memorize the table, I just applied the rule.

Some university engineering classes present formulae and tell the students to just apply them. This is disastrous in my not-so-humble opinion. Where the formula comes from should always be taught, so students understand the formula and the assumptions it was derived from.

Re: Math education: It’s not about numbers, it’s about learning how to think

#202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe I'm wrong, but I have always believed that if you want people to be good at math, it's their first years of education which are important, not the last ones. In other worlds, push for STEM should be present in kindergartens and elementary schools. By the time people go to high school it is to late. I indeed believe you are wrong. I started getting interested in STEM when I was 16 and now have a masters in mat…

So basically you're saying that it is a preferred solution to teach kids math poorly, let them develop insecurity and aversion towards it and then spent a lot of money to let them overcome it than just do it right in the first place? Yeah, I know that's not what you mean, but you're missing a point. The premise of the article is that US has a STEM problem. I merely suggested that they're allocating resources wrong to…

> So basically you're saying that it is a preferred solution to teach kids math poorly, let them develop insecurity and aversion towards it and then spent a lot of money to let them overcome it than just do it right in the first place? Yeah, I know that's not what you mean, but you're missing a point.

If you knew it's not what they meant then why did you start off saying that's what they meant? If you thought they were missing the point why didn't you just say that?

Re: Math education: It’s not about numbers, it’s about learning how to think

#203

I teach math at a community college. I've tried many times to teach my courses in such a way that understanding the concepts and thinking were the goals. Perhaps I'm jaded by the failures I encountered but students do not want to think. They want to see a set of problem types that need to be mimicked. In our lowest level course we teach beginning algebra. Almost everyone has an intuition that 2x + 3x should be 5x. It…

I believe that your "failures" are not necessarily linked to "math", in the sense that other teachers probably experienced the same frustration for their own taught subject.

Math is definitely "harder" in the common thinking of people, but I suspect that there is often a generic underlying issue.

A number of students (I would say a large part) go to school or college not "to learn" but rather to "pass the exam" or to "get the degree", they are not interested in the subject but in what the consequences of having a good grade in that subject are or - sometimes - only do whatever is needed to get a passing grade.

I don't blame the students, mind you it is not their fault, it is society in general that somehow has shifted the values, and culture is not anymore valued.

Re: Math education: It’s not about numbers, it’s about learning how to think

#204

My theory is that math anxiety is really anxiety about a cold assessment. In other subjects you can rationalize to yourself in various ways: the teacher doesn't like me, or I got unlucky and they only asked the history questions I didn't know. But with math, no rationalization is possible. There's no hope the teacher will go easy on you, or be happy that you got the gist of the solution. Failure in math is often (but…

Marking a math test is only objective when an answer is entirely correct. What mark do you give a student who makes a minor arithmetic error on a single step of a multi-step problem?

Re: Math education: It’s not about numbers, it’s about learning how to think

#205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tying students' progress through the curriculum to their age is silly. If you think about it for a single second, the whole thing is totally absurd. Vague pre-puberty/tween/teenager distinctions make sense, but within each grouping/building? totally unmotivated. Yearly age-to-competency distinctions continue by sheer force of tradition, and are harmful to all but the totally mythological "average" student.

But it works at-scale, which is where the focus is. Bang-for-the-taxpayer-buck. Further, socially-speaking, being with your actual peers is extremely valuable, obviously. But yes, the ideal would be a tailored-to-each-child education. Personally, having seen the power of a good Montessori education, I think it's frickin' genius and should be the template for all education (specifically the grouping of 3 yrs together…

My kids are homeschooled, and I'm in charge of teaching Math, because my wife is one of those "I suck at math" people. Her parents focused exclusively on memorization when they helped her with homework, and then she got a few bad teachers, so her mental models are completely off. She's getting better, but that's not really my point.

The math program I use with my kids is this one: http://www.defimath.ca/ecole-maison/ (in French)

It was developed by two mathematicians who actually studied in classrooms what worked on kids when teaching math. They've come up with a method where kids learn negative numbers and multiplication _before_ learning positional numeration (numbers greater than 10, with units, tens, hundreds, thousands, etc.). I've seen first-hand how these concepts just click in my daughter's mind, and how she often comes up with the new concept herself when you introduce the prerequisites in an order that makes sense to her.

Re: Math education: It’s not about numbers, it’s about learning how to think

#206
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find this sentiment somewhat surprising. Limits is incredibly easy to link to real physical things: movement, speed, acceleration. If speed is distance over time, what's the speed of a moving object at a very specific instant?

Are you thinking of derivatives? I agree that those are relatively easy -- it's the rate of change for a function. Or, in geometric terms, it's the slope of the tangent line of the function's curve. Like I said, limits are used when a function "breaks", so they're naturally hard to visualize. I'll use my typical example for when I discuss teaching math by solving problems: Approximating the area under a curve using r…

I think these things have already been discussed to death some time around the year 1700, when they were called something like "mathematical analysis of infinitely small magnitudes" or some such; the difference between an "infinitely small magnitude" and zero was already clearly understood. The notion of a "limit" came only later, in an attempt to put this stuff on a firm logical foundation and was (and still is) seen more of a formality than something aiding our intuition in this area.

Re: Math education: It’s not about numbers, it’s about learning how to think

#207

I teach math at a community college. I've tried many times to teach my courses in such a way that understanding the concepts and thinking were the goals. Perhaps I'm jaded by the failures I encountered but students do not want to think. They want to see a set of problem types that need to be mimicked. In our lowest level course we teach beginning algebra. Almost everyone has an intuition that 2x + 3x should be 5x. It…

I've had the same experience - teaching math for a short time at a State University. I think the basic situation is that by the time students have reached the university level, the habit of looking for a set algorithm for completing a class is completely ingrained and moreover, the average student has little-to-no free time so they feel a panic concerning anything that will take an unpredictable amount of time.

Re: Math education: It’s not about numbers, it’s about learning how to think

#208
post #92
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never been evaluated but I don't think test anxiety fits in my case - the speed issue was only ever in math / physics. My accuracy on the questions I got to was very high, I just couldn't go fast enough to complete enough questions. Same deal on SAT type math papers too.

Where I did my undergraduate degree they squared the marks scored for each question before adding them up! Slow but accurate was an advantage.

But, most exams at that level gives enough time to make them accurate.

Re: Math education: It’s not about numbers, it’s about learning how to think

#209
post #19

Maybe I'm wrong, but I have always believed that if you want people to be good at math, it's their first years of education which are important, not the last ones. In other worlds, push for STEM should be present in kindergartens and elementary schools. By the time people go to high school it is to late. I never had any problems with math until I went to university, so I was merely a passive observer of everyday stru…

> Maybe I'm wrong, but I have always believed that if you want people to be good at math, it's their first years of education which are important, not the last ones. In other worlds, push for STEM should be present in kindergartens and elementary schools. By the time people go to high school it is to late. I indeed believe you are wrong. I started getting interested in STEM when I was 16 and now have a masters in mat…

Anecdote time: I was a late bloomer in math too. From about 6th to 10th grade, I was terrible at math. I think it was because of inapplication problems.

Yes, you get a word problem about Jack and Kwanzeeah trying to fill up a pail or something, it was nonsense to me. Why are they filling up a pail? Why are they using a bucket that is 173/9th's the size of the hose? Why do they have to not let it overflow? Why do I have to decipher this inanity, why can't they just ask me to do this stupid problem of stupid fractions? Why the cloak and dagger?

Then you get to 'real' algebra and you start to find roots of quadratic equations and other useless information. Dear Lord! When has anyone ever done this for any reason? Yes, something something eigenvalues something something computational modeling something runge-kutte. But for real though, quadratic equations are just nonsense gibberish to weed out the poor kids from the rich ones. Trig, yes, it's useful when you are building a shed that has to be totally perfect and crisp otherwise the rich white lady will not pay you. Geometry was a bit 'fun' actually, but in the same way that learning that Custer's Men took a poop at this road-side stop on the way to Little-Big Horn.

It wasn't until Chem in my 10th grade year that I actually 'got' algebra. We were doing moles to molarity calculations to get the solution to the right pH and make it all turn pink or something. It was then that I realized that all this mathy stuff was actually useful to me, that I could use it to make things easier and better for myself and my family. Like, I could 'know' what to do then. Before that it was just drill and kill and bad grades and shame. I remember staying after class and into the next one in the room, just sitting in the back doing these calculations over and over. I got kicked out for doing math! It was such a relief! I finally 'got it' when I needed it for something real to me personally.

For me, it was the issue of 'math' being this blunt-shame-thing that made no sense to use ever. But once I needed to use math, it was trivially easy. Learning math for each of us is individual, we each have our own motivations that are unique that need to be met. I know that is not easy to institutionalize, but if you want to do it, you have to find the 'correct motivation for each kid.

Re: Math education: It’s not about numbers, it’s about learning how to think

#210
post #163
post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I was trying to make two points. 1) Arithmetic (number theory) is far harder than most people realise, to the point that its considered one of the most complicated mathematical disciplines. 2) Most subject areas in math bear little to no resemblance to arithmetic, so it doesn't make sense to call all math 'Fancy Arithmetic'.

Sure, understood and I agree. I was also trying to make one point: all math is built on arithmetic operations if you dig down to first principles, so it does make some sense to call all math 'fancy arithmetic'. There is no math at all without the concept of addition sitting somewhere under it. But I'm not actually proposing that, just sharing a cheeky point of view to contrast @taneq's boss, so don't take me too seri…

> I was also trying to make one point: all math is built on arithmetic operations if you dig down to first principles,

I am a newb at this stuff, but I believe (basic) number theory actually builds on recursive structures, and then uses induction to make statements about behavior.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peano_axioms#Addition

What is interesting is how the same approach works for analogous structures like lists - because of the monoid abstraction.

Post reply on HN